Launching the #CPUOverload Project: Testing Every x86 Desktop Processor since 2010
by Dr. Ian Cutress on July 20, 2020 1:30 PM ESTGaming Tests: Red Dead Redemption 2
It’s great to have another Rockstar benchmark in the mix, and the launch of Red Dead Redemption 2 (RDR2) on the PC gives us a chance to do that. Building on the success of the original RDR, the second incarnation came to Steam in December 2019 having been released on consoles first. The PC version takes the open-world cowboy genre into the start of the modern age, with a wide array of impressive graphics and features that are eerily close to reality.
For RDR2, Rockstar kept the same benchmark philosophy as with Grand Theft Auto V, with the benchmark consisting of several cut scenes with different weather and lighting effects, with a final scene focusing on an on-rails environment, only this time with mugging a shop leading to a shootout on horseback before riding over a bridge into the great unknown. Luckily most of the command line options from GTA V are present here, and the game also supports resolution scaling. We have the following tests:
- 384p Minimum
- 1440p Minimum
- 8K Minimum
- 1080p Max
For that 8K setting, I originally thought I had the settings file at 4K and 1.0x scaling, but it was actually set at 2.0x giving that 8K. For the sake of it, I decided to keep the 8K settings.
For automation, despite RDR2 taking a lot of inspiration from GTA V in its command line options and benchmark, the only feature it didn’t take was the actual flag that runs the benchmark. As a result, we have to use key presses on loading into the game in order to run the benchmark and get the data. It’s also worth noting that the benchmark results file is only dumped after the game has quit, which can cause issues in scripting when dealing with pauses (slow CPUs take a long time to load the test). The settings file accepts our pre-prepared versions along with the command line for ignoring new hardware, and the output files when you get them have all the frame times as required.
| AnandTech | IGP | Low | Medium | High |
| Average FPS |  |
 |
 |
 |
| 95th Percentile |  |
 |
 |
 |
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
110 Comments
View All Comments
vasily - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
You might want to check out Phoronix Test Suite and openbenchmarking.org.https://www.phoronix-test-suite.com/
https://openbenchmarking.org/
colinisation - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
would love to see the following processors added5775C (overclocked to 4Ghz) - just purely to see what impact the eDRAM has on workloads
4770K
7600K
Phenom II X4
Highest Bulldozer core
VIA's highest performance x86 core
faizoff - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
What a gargantuan project this is going to be. And I cannot wait, oddly enough I've been using the bench tool the past few weeks to get a sense of how much difference an upgrade for me would make.I am probably one of the many (or few) people that have still held on to their i5 2500k and this is one of the places I can select that CPU and compare the benchmarks with newer releases.
This project looks to be an amazing read once all done and will be especially looking forward to those segments "how well does x CPU run today?"
Alim345 - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
Are you going to make benchmark scripts available? They should be useful for individual comparisons, since many users might have overclocked CPUs which were more common in 2010-2015.brantron - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
Just to fill out the starting set:7700K needs a common AMD counterpart, i.e. Ryzen 2600
Sandy or Ivy Bridge i7
Haswell i7
That would also make for a good article, as it should be possible to overclock any of those to ~4.5 GHz for a more apples to apples comparison.
StormyParis - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
Thank you for that. My main question is not "what should I buy" because that's always very well covered, and on a fixed budget there's never much choice anyway, but "should I upgrade *now* which is only worth it when last time's amount of money gets you at least 2x performance. I'ive got a 7yo Core i5... I'll look into it !eastcoast_pete - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
Ian, thanks for this!One aspect I've wondered about for a while is whether you could include performance/Watt in your tests and comparisons going forward? I know that's usually done for server CPUs, but I also find it of interest for desktop and laptop CPUs.
thebigteam - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
I think I have the below list of Intel CPUs available if needed, likely with working mobos too. Would be very happy to clean out the closet and get these to you guys :) Likely some 2009/2010 Athlons as wellE8400
i3 530
i3 540
i5 760
i5 2500
i5 4670K
inighthawki - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
Thank you so much for changing your gaming benchmark methodology. I tend to play my games at 1440p on lowest settings for maximum framerates, which is far more often than not CPU bound. It was always so annoying seeing the benchmarks be GPU bound when I'm trying to see how much a new CPU helps.Smell This - Monday, July 20, 2020 - link
Chicken(lol)
With AM3, AM2+ and AM2 processors, AM3+ processors broke backwards-compatibility.
A mobo like the MSI 790FX K9A2 Platinum transitioned nearly 250 processors from S754-939, to AM2-AM3, beginning with the single-core Athlon 64 3000+ 'Orleans' up to the PhII x6 DDR3 Thubans.
These were the progeny of the K8 or 'Hammer' projects. A Real Man would never leave them behind ...
https://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-MSI/K9A2_Platinum_%...