Shadow of Mordor

The final title in our testing is another battle of system performance with the open world action-adventure title, Shadow of Mordor. Produced by Monolith using the LithTech Jupiter EX engine and numerous detail add-ons, SoM goes for detail and complexity to a large extent, despite having to be cut down from the original plans. The main story itself was written by the same writer as Red Dead Redemption, and it received Zero Punctuation’s Game of The Year in 2014.

For testing purposes, SoM gives a dynamic screen resolution setting, allowing us to render at high resolutions that are then scaled down to the monitor. As a result, we get several tests using the in-game benchmark. For low-end graphics we examine at 720p with low settings, whereas mid and high-end graphics get 1080p Ultra. The top graphics test is also redone at 3840x2160, also with Ultra settings, and we also test two cards at 4K where possible.

Shadow of Mordor on ASUS GTX 980 Strix 4GB ($560)

Shadow of Mordor on ASUS GTX 980 Strix 4GB ($560)

Shadow of Mordor on MSI R9 290X Gaming LE 4GB ($380)

Shadow of Mordor on MSI R9 290X Gaming LE 4GB ($380)

Shadow of Mordor on MSI GTX 770 Lightning 2GB ($245)

Shadow of Mordor on MSI R9 285 Gaming 2GB ($240)

Shadow of Mordor on ASUS R7 240 DDR3 2GB ($70)

Shadow of Mordor on Integrated Graphics

The only real difference here between the newer Core i3-7350K and the older Core i7-2600K is with our mid-range cards (GTX 770 and R9 285), whereby the older CPU seems to have a deficit 'in general' to the other CPUs we've tested. This might be CPU instruction related, although these results aren't seen on the other cards.

Gaming: GRID Autosport Power and Overclocking
Comments Locked

186 Comments

View All Comments

  • TheinsanegamerN - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    This chip is 6 years late. Back when sandy bridge was the newest chip, a dual core i3 was a super relevant choice for gaming, a quad core was overkill.

    Today, for gaming builds, a i5 chip is almost always a better choice, unless you only play games that are single threaded. And the i3 is more power hungry then locked quad cores.

    At $130, this would be a great choice, but ATM, the i3k is overpriced for what it offers for a modern system.
  • nathanddrews - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    I'd argue that with the introduction of this i3 K-variant and the new hyperthreaded Pentium, Intel just gave a lot of people a reason to not by an i5. The message from Intel seems to be this:

    "If you need great single-threaded performance with some mild multi-threaded, get the Pentium or i3. If you need great multi-threaded performance with great single-threaded, get an i7."

    I'd say they are preemptively stacking the product deck prior to the release of AMD Ryzen - offering entry-level gamers more options without diluting their HEDT status.
  • BedfordTim - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    In many of the games an i3-6100 offers effectively the same performance and is $50 cheaper. It isn't a case of the i-3750k offering great performance, so much as the games are not CPU limited. This points towards an even more expensive graphics card and the even cheaper CPU.
  • jayfang - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Agree. Whatever about actual performance, it seems quite clear the cool factor of "unlocked" Ryzen's and joining the "overclocking community" is getting a pre-emptive strike from Intel.
  • Michael Bay - Saturday, February 4, 2017 - link

    OC never had a "cool factor".
  • eldakka - Sunday, February 5, 2017 - link

    In the late 90's into the early 00's, when people would travel for hours carting their PC to a LAN gaming event with 100's (or even thousands) of other people, having an OC'ed machine was indeed cool amongst that Geek crowd.

    /em remembers his dual celeron 300A's OC'ed to 450MHz (yes, that's Mega - not Giga - hertz).
  • drgoodie - Tuesday, February 7, 2017 - link

    I had a dual 366Mhz Celeron box OC'd to 550Mhz. It was cool back then.
  • dsraa - Tuesday, February 14, 2017 - link

    It was indeed and still is very very cool......I had been OC'ing my systems way back to the original Pentium 100, and then got a Celeron 300, OMG those were the days....If you don't think its cool, what the hell are you doing on Anandtech??!??!!!?
  • DLimmer - Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - link

    You may have missed the joke. This was a play on words; Overclocking produces more heat so it's "not cool."
  • DLimmer - Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - link

    OC is "hot, hot, hot"!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now