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

  • artk2219 - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    They had too many parts that weren't hitting their mobile TDP's, or they just bakes too many chips than was needed on the mobile side. Either way, why let them sit in a warehouse or toss them at a loss, when for a very smalla mount you can just throw them into your standard desktop package and make some extra sales. Reply
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    Carrizo and kaveri did not use hypertransport. They would have to re-engineer their chip to work on AM3+, and to be frank, the AM3+ market is just too small to justify the tiny margins they would get.

    That money is better spent on getting zen out of the door.
    Reply
  • neblogai - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    Why invest into upgrading bad product, when you can sell the same Bulldozer cores till Zen comes? And this Carriso Athlon is just a by-product of a mobile part and can only be sold for desktop. It all makes sense financially. By the way, new Bristol Ridge AMD 15W APUs are really nice and competitive, but laptop manufacturers are failing again- for example, HP Envy x360 comes with FX-9800P APU- again in single channel memory memory configuration, also with HDD installed and without possibility to use SSD. https://hardforum.com/threads/unboxing-1st-impress... Reply
  • TheinsanegamerN - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    AMD doesnt take the mobile market seriously. If they did, they would be partnering up with the likes of MSI or clevo to produce a good laptop line for their APUs, or at the very least make dual channel a strict requirement. Reply
  • The_Countess - Tuesday, July 19, 2016 - link

    AMD unfortunately can't demand much of anything from OEM's currently.

    and as intel still has a defacto monopoly no OEM wants to piss of intel by making a better AMD laptop.
    Reply
  • nathanddrews - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    So... will there ever be a desktop Carrizo w/IGP? Much of the hype around Carrizo was focused on its very low power video playback, including H.265 hardware encode/decode. Reply
  • stardude82 - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    Isn't that what Bristol Ridge is? But on the new AM3 socket. Reply
  • Arnulf - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    AM4. Reply
  • Pissedoffyouth - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    Why not bang 8 of these cores into a 125w TDP and make it for FM2+ or AM3+? Finally an upgrade for Piledriver on AM3 Reply
  • KAlmquist - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    If you compare the Athlon 845 with the FX-4350 (link below), the Athlon wins on some benchmarks and loses on others. The Athlon has better IPC, but the FX has a faster clock and a 3rd level cache, leaving no clear-cut winner. If we added an L3 cache to the Athlon chip, that would speed it up, but not by a lot. In other words, Excavator is a big improvement over Piledriver in terms of performance per watt, but not much in terms of absolute performance. An Excavator based FX chip (by which I mean a chip with 8 Excavator cores and 8 MB of L3 cache) would probably be a very marginal improvement over the existing FX lineup at stock frequency, and would have less overclocking potential. I can see why AMD decided not to spend the resources to develop such a chip.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1684?vs=127...
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now