Civilization 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

Benchmarking Performance: CPU Legacy Tests Gaming Performance: Shadow of Mordor
POST A COMMENT

545 Comments

View All Comments

  • Santoval - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

    It's possible that the first consumer Intel 8-core will be based on Ice Lake. Cannon Lake will probably largely limited to low power CPUs, and will probably top out at 4 cores. Of course if Ice Lake is delayed again Intel might scale out Cannon Lake to more cores. Cannon Lake will be just a 10nm node of the Skylake/Kaby/Coffee Lake architecture, so it will most likely provide mostly power efficiency gains. Reply
  • aliquis - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

    Latest road map show coffee lake refresh in Q4. Reply
  • mahoney87 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

    lol :D
    https://imgur.com/SmJBKkf
    They done fecked up
    Reply
  • Luckz - Monday, April 23, 2018 - link

    Rocket League is a joke game when it comes to benchmarking, optimization and so on. Reply
  • Chris113q - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

    Do you really need to be spoon-fed information? How long would it take you to find the other reviews by yourself?
    PCPER, Tweaktown, Toms Hardware, Hothardware, Computerbase all had different results (can't post link due to spam protection). Not to mention you'd have to be totally tech illiterate to believe that stock 2600 can beat 8700k by such a huge margin. Meltdown/Spectre patches don't affect gaming performance that much, so don't you put blame on that.
    The result discrepancy is embarrassing, there goes the last speck of reputation Anandtech had as a reliable source of tech news.
    Reply
  • MuhOo - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

    You sir are right. Reply
  • Aegan23 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

    You do know who Ian is, right? XD Reply
  • sor - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

    Anandtech has no responsibility to go out and ensure their results match up with anyone else’s. They run their own selection of tests with their own build and report the numbers. They provide the test setup, if you can’t spot the differences that’s your own issue. Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

    "Anandtech has no responsibility to go out and ensure their results match up with anyone else’s"

    Responsibility? No. But should we anyhow? Yes.

    Our responsibility is accuracy. If something looks weird with our data - which it does right now - then it's our job to go back, validate, and explain the results that we're seeing. If our results disagree with other sites, then that is definitely an indication that we may have a data issue.
    Reply
  • xidex2 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

    I bet none of the other sites applied spectre and meltdown patches for Intel because they dont care about such things. Intel fanboys are now crying because someone actually showed true numbers. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now