GRID: Autosport

No graphics tests are complete without some input from Codemasters and the EGO engine, which means for this round of testing we point towards GRID: Autosport, the next iteration in the GRID and racing genre. As with our previous racing testing, each update to the engine aims to add in effects, reflections, detail and realism, with Codemasters making ‘authenticity’ a main focal point for this version.

GRID’s benchmark mode is very flexible, and as a result we created a test race using a shortened version of the Red Bull Ring with twelve cars doing two laps. The car is focus starts last and is quite fast, but usually finishes second or third. For low end graphics we test at 1080p medium settings, whereas mid and high end graphics get the full 1080p maximum. Both the average and minimum frame rates are recorded.

GRID: Autosport on ASUS GTX 980 Strix 4GB ($560) 

GRID: Autosport on MSI R9 290X Gaming LE 4GB ($380)

Middle-Earth: 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)

Gaming Performance: Alien Isolation, Total War Attila, & GTA V Power Consumption and i7-6950X Overclocking
Comments Locked

205 Comments

View All Comments

  • RussianSensation - Tuesday, May 31, 2016 - link

    It's a slap in the face when 6850/6900/6950X are also crap overclockers and will get owned hard in games and every day tasks by a $310 6700K. The only CPU that even remotely makes sense is the 6800K. For workstation use case, dual Xeons will smash the 6950X. Heck, it's better to build a 6900K + 6700K in the same case allowing one to be productive and game at the same time. Phanteks makes such cases now. 6950X is just a way to show your status, nothing more.
  • mapesdhs - Thursday, June 9, 2016 - link

    Something usually missing from reviews now is an oc'd 4820K, which is annoying because a 4c IB-E on X79 allows for quite a lot of oc headroom given the high rating of the socket and the beefy power delivery available on boards like the R4E, etc. I bet it would give many of the newer CPUs a serious pelting.
  • Drazick - Tuesday, May 31, 2016 - link

    Could we have Extreme Edition with Iris Pro + 128MB eDRAM?

    That would be a great addition (Even only for the 6 Cores Part).
  • Eden-K121D - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    Iris pro would be useless but i agree with the eDRAM acting as L4 Cache
  • barleyguy - Tuesday, May 31, 2016 - link

    Great review.

    One possible omission though: You mentioned that the Xeon E-2640 is a better deal as far as price/performance, but there are no Xeons on the benchmark charts. Do you plan to review the E-2640 at some time in the future?

    Thanks.
  • ShieTar - Tuesday, May 31, 2016 - link

    That might indeed be a statement which needs to be proven by tests?
    The 2640 has 10 Broadwell-Cores at a 2.8GHz All-Cores-Turbo, the 6950X should have a 10-core-Turbo of 3.2GHz, so you might argue you get 87.5% of the Performance for ~60% of the CPU cost. But the 2640 does have a slower verified memory speed, which may have a little impact. And its turbo boost settings are defined to hit a 90W TDP, and I don't think you can change that even in a workstation with plenty of cooling available. Add to that the fact that you can overclock to improve the performance of the 6950X, and that the 700$ price difference should be considered relative to the overall system cost, and you probably end up with very similar price-to-performance ratios.

    I think the stronger challenger to the 6950X price-to-performance figures is the 2687W v4, which can be had for just over 2k$, and gets you annother 2 cores at almost the same clocks. That's ~16% more performance for ~16% more CPU cost, which translates into less than 10% higher system cost.
  • samer1970 - Tuesday, May 31, 2016 - link

    Hello ,

    we all know that games dont use more than 8 threads today ...

    so to take advantage of an 8 cores or 10 cores CPU in Gaming you should Disable HT (Hyperthreading) and run the gaming test again to compare it against the 4 cores i7 6700K .

    and test it with SLI as well to reach the i7 6700k bottleneck !

    let me put it more simple ,

    The i7 6700K has 4 cores and can oc to 4.4 ghz easy . this CPU will give us 8 Virtual cores comparable to 2.2 GHZ clock for each virtual core .

    However the 8 Coresi7 6900K , With the HT Turned OFF , will give us 8 cores @ 4.4 ghz EACH !

    Thats double the speed of the 4 cores i7 ! if the game uses 8 threads .

    EVEN if we dont OC the 8 cores , it would be 3.2GHZ VS 2.2 GHZ !!!

    if you ask why Disable HT ? simple because the game will never use 16 Virtual cores !!! and the advantage is LOST .

    Please run the test again for games with HT turned off .

    and to stress the CPU more , TEST SLI as well , we want the i7 6700K to bottleneck !

    THANKS

    oh and Intel Should release i5 Broadwel-E CPU , 8 cores without HT , CHEAPER and BETTER for GAMERS
  • RussianSensation - Tuesday, May 31, 2016 - link

    Nice try but no cigar. 6700K @ 4.8ghz + HT is the optimal gaming CPU. No current game even scales linearly across 6 cores + HT. 8-10 core CPU with a slower architecture would lose badly to an i7 6700K @ 4.8Ghz + DDR4 4000.

    There is not a chance 6950X @ 4.4Ghz can keep up with 6700K OC.
    http://www.techspot.com/article/1171-ddr4-4000-mhz...

    By the time games use 8-10 cores, we'll be on PS5/XB2 generation in 2020-2021 and Icelake-E. Broadwell-E 8-10 cores will be outdated.
  • adamod - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/3039552/hardware/te...
    look at the ashes bench
  • mapesdhs - Thursday, June 9, 2016 - link

    Oh grud not here aswell! You've been banging on about this HT thing on toms for ages.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now