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. Both the average and minimum frame rates are recorded.

For this test we used the following settings with our graphics cards:

GRID: Autosport Settings
  Resolution Quality
Low GPU Integrated Graphics 1920x1080 Medium
ASUS R7 240 1GB DDR3
Medium GPU MSI GTX 770 Lightning 2GB 1920x1080 Maximum
MSI R9 285 Gaming 2G
High GPU ASUS GTX 980 Strix 4GB 1920x1080 Maximum
MSI R9 290X Gaming 4G

GRID: Autosport on ASUS R7 240 DDR3 2GB ($70)

GRID: Autosport on MSI R9 285 Gaming 2GB ($240)

GRID: Autosport on MSI GTX 770 Lightning 2GB ($245)

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

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

It would seem that GRID is a repeat of Grand Theft Auto: for AMD cards that are mid-to-high end, the Athlon X4 845 performs at the top of the class, whereas for the NVIDIA cards, performance would suggest to chose the Pentium CPU.

GRID: Autosport on ASUS R7 240 DDR3 2GB ($70) [Minimum FPS]

GRID: Autosport on MSI R9 285 Gaming 2GB ($240) [Minimum FPS]

GRID: Autosport on MSI GTX 770 Lightning 2GB ($245) [Minimum FPS]

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

GRID: Autosport on ASUS GTX 980 Strix 4GB ($560) [Minimum FPS]

The minimum frame rate results also get the same result: AMD + AMD or Intel + NVIDIA.

Gaming Comparison: Grand Theft Auto Gaming Comparison: Shadow of Mordor
POST A COMMENT

131 Comments

View All Comments

  • Meteor2 - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    Thanks. It's a little more complex than i3/5/7-nxxx, where n increments by one each generation... Reply
  • TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    cariizo cores use the excavator design. excavator is core design, carrizo is the product line. Reply
  • Mokona512 - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    Please do this test with the Phenom II series in order to understand the generational IPC changes, and also providing a better point of reference for the Zen CPUs. The Zen claims are based on IPC changes from a CPU series where there was a drop in IPC. Reply
  • Ian Cutress - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    I recently redid a Phenom X6 in Bench, though that's absolute chip perf and not exactly what you're looking for, but it's there :) Reply
  • Elizabeth king - Sunday, July 17, 2016 - link

    Love spell came out tremendously, I highly recommending robinson.buckler @ yahoo . com for whatever problems you are experiencing in your relationship. He is the real deal. his love spell is absolutely wonderful. Reply
  • lwatcdr - Sunday, July 17, 2016 - link

    I find AMDs low cost offerings really interesting but this just doesn't work for me. The Carrizo on the desktop just seems too limiting. I wish that AMD would update the AM1 line. It is so inexpensive and can support a good number of PCIe lots. For things like a NAS, media pc, or even a Chrome box/low end pc they seem like a really good choice except that they have not been updated in years. Reply
  • silverblue - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    Puma+ is kind of like what Atom did with their earlier Atoms, a more efficient version of Jaguar. I'm surprised that they didn't just lock the turbo and produce these in Jaguar's place, unless it's not cost-effective to do so.

    The cat cores are dead now, which is a shame as we never got to see how a dual channel memory interface would improve their performance.
    Reply
  • Eris_Floralia - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    Another great review. I've translated all articles about Bulldozer architecture into Chinese in order to let people know why it didn't success. I believe that an eight-core Steamroller or Excavator would be competitive, but that never comes out. Reply
  • TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    it wont be competitive, excavator is still far behind intel is performance and in TDP, and cant overclock at all. And it is still 28nm and cache limited.

    AMD really needs to kill the bulldozer line. It is AMD's netburst.
    Reply
  • Eris_Floralia - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    well, with some adjustments, steamroller can still reach high frequency. with additional L3 and larger L2, the problem with excavator may get solved. I mean that latest bulldozer architecture can do better than present piledriver, but the improvement obiviously doesnt worth a try. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now