The AMD 2nd Gen Ryzen Deep Dive: The 2700X, 2700, 2600X, and 2600 Tested
by Ian Cutress on April 19, 2018 9:00 AM ESTCivilization 6
First up in our CPU gaming tests is Civilization 6. Originally penned by Sid Meier and his team, the Civ series of turn-based strategy games are a cult classic, and many an excuse for an all-nighter trying to get Gandhi to declare war on you due to an integer overflow. Truth be told I never actually played the first version, but every edition from the second to the sixth, including the fourth as voiced by the late Leonard Nimoy, it a game that is easy to pick up, but hard to master.
Benchmarking Civilization has always been somewhat of an oxymoron – for a turn based strategy game, the frame rate is not necessarily the important thing here and even in the right mood, something as low as 5 frames per second can be enough. With Civilization 6 however, Firaxis went hardcore on visual fidelity, trying to pull you into the game. As a result, Civilization can taxing on graphics and CPUs as we crank up the details, especially in DirectX 12.
Perhaps a more poignant benchmark would be during the late game, when in the older versions of Civilization it could take 20 minutes to cycle around the AI players before the human regained control. The new version of Civilization has an integrated ‘AI Benchmark’, although it is not currently part of our benchmark portfolio yet, due to technical reasons which we are trying to solve. Instead, we run the graphics test, which provides an example of a mid-game setup at our settings.
At both 1920x1080 and 4K resolutions, we run the same settings. Civilization 6 has sliders for MSAA, Performance Impact and Memory Impact. The latter two refer to detail and texture size respectively, and are rated between 0 (lowest) to 5 (extreme). We run our Civ6 benchmark in position four for performance (ultra) and 0 on memory, with MSAA set to 2x.
For reviews where we include 8K and 16K benchmarks (Civ6 allows us to benchmark extreme resolutions on any monitor) on our GTX 1080, we run the 8K tests similar to the 4K tests, but the 16K tests are set to the lowest option for Performance.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
MSI GTX 1080 Gaming 8G Performance
1080p
4K
8K
16K
545 Comments
View All Comments
mapesdhs - Saturday, April 21, 2018 - link
Not being abel to edit typos sucks. :)realistz - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
Anandtech is the only site that shows 8700k trailing 2700k in gaming. Hell even the 8400 is slightly faster overall than the 2700k everywhere else. This is what we called an outlier.Lolimaster - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
All of the intel CL chipa autoOC beyond TDP + many reviews didn't apply the latest spectre/meltdown patches or didn't rerun tests cause of "rea$ons".0ldman79 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
How about the multi-core enhancement?That's going to throw off the scores a bit too, and a lot of reviewers leave it on. I don't remember if Anandtech does or doesn't. I think their stance is "out of the box".
mapesdhs - Saturday, April 21, 2018 - link
Which on some mbds means it'll be on, though the BIOS settings for this can be confusing. GN has covered this a lot in recent months.Total Meltdowner - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
FirstSinguy888 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
Security patch did not cripple Intel's gaming performance. The question is, how did Anandtech gets such kickass Ryzen results?https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/8dfbtq/spect...
fallaha56 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
Yes it didThe Spectre2 patch is causing anything up to 20% perf drops
https://np.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/7obo...
Lolimaster - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
Those cache latencies were really holding the true Ryzen performance :DLolimaster - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
2600X is really the champ.