Gaming: F1 2018

Aside from keeping up-to-date on the Formula One world, F1 2017 added HDR support, which F1 2018 has maintained; otherwise, we should see any newer versions of Codemasters' EGO engine find its way into F1. Graphically demanding in its own right, F1 2018 keeps a useful racing-type graphics workload in our benchmarks.

Aside from keeping up-to-date on the Formula One world, F1 2017 added HDR support, which F1 2018 has maintained. We use the in-game benchmark, set to run on the Montreal track in the wet, driving as Lewis Hamilton from last place on the grid. Data is taken over a one-lap race.

AnandTech CPU Gaming 2019 Game List
Game Genre Release Date API IGP Low Med High
F1 2018 Racing Aug
2018
DX11 720p
Low
1080p
Med
4K
High
4K
Ultra

All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.

F1 2018 IGP Low Medium High
Average FPS
95th Percentile

Our final (ed: and most British) benchmark is another game that’s not GPU-bound right out of the box, so it gives the CPUs something to do. At 1080p Medium we see the 9900K and 9700K take the top spots, though along with the 8700K it’s all noise, as evidenced by the fact that the 9700K edges out the 9900K. Dropping down to 720p forces the CPUs farther apart, at which point the 9900K takes the top spot, with the 9700K following. The net result here is that the 9900K is about 13% ahead of the 8700K.

Past that however, once we get to any kind of 4K settings (entirely reasonable for this game), the game becomes much more strongly GPU-bound. So these CPU performance differences are mostly on the theoretical side of matters.

Gaming: Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX12) Gaming: Integrated Graphics
Comments Locked

274 Comments

View All Comments

  • muziqaz - Monday, October 22, 2018 - link

    I love the price of $488 stamped all over each of the test results, while over here in UK I see price of £599 and newegg quotes $580. Even your linked amazon has it at $580. And conclusion is awesome with: "At $488 SEP, plus a bit more for 'on-shelf price'..." Since when is extra 100 bucks a bit more? :D
  • compudaze - Monday, October 22, 2018 - link

    What was the actual vcore for your overclocks?
  • HardwareDufus - Monday, October 22, 2018 - link

    I7-9700k.... an I7 that isn't hyperthreaded.... let's totally muddy the waters now Intel.... Guess they had to save some feature for the I9's $100+ surcharge...… Good grief.
  • bogda - Tuesday, October 23, 2018 - link

    How pointless is reviewers comment: "... World of Tanks gives the 9900K some room to stretch its legs..."?
    Difference between two chips in discussion is between 712fps and 681fps! Not even Neo from Matrix could note the difference.

    How pointless is discussing top of the line CPU gaming performance in 720p in any game??

    How pointless is marketing 8C/16T CPU for gamers???
  • sseyler - Tuesday, October 23, 2018 - link

    Not sure whether this has been pointed out yet, but the Threadripper prices need to be updated. For example, the 1920X is now well under $500 as advertised even on AMD's website and the 1900X goes for $350 on Newegg.
  • dlum - Tuesday, October 23, 2018 - link

    For me, listing the long-obsolete prices for AMD processors (still initial, long-outdated MSRP for 1920x $799 - whereas a simple amazon search confirms it's now for just over half of that ($431)) is clearly disrespectful and shamefull practice for a reviewer.

    It's very sad such dishonest practices found their way to Anandtech and they are so prominent here.

    Probably that's also why no one answers nor fixes those clearly misleading figures.

    (Maybe that's the cost of being able to read such anyway valuable reviews for free :)
  • sseyler - Thursday, October 25, 2018 - link

    Well, to be fair, I'm sure the editors didn't dig this deeply through the comments. They're busy people.

    Also, I think I heard something mentioned before about their graphs having some semi-automatic mechanism for listing prices and the like. I don't remember exactly, but it probably has something to do with pulling MSRP data and it's difficult to change given the way the templated graphs are generated from the benchmarks.

    I imagine it was done something like this for consistency across the site as well as not biasing prices according to specific vendors. Given the first reason, I don't know why it'd be difficult for individual editors to customize/tweak certain aspects, but maybe that needs to be revised to be more flexible. As for the second reason, there are clearly reasonable solutions, like finding the *current* MSRP (rather than the release MSRP), or selecting the lowest/median/average price among a pool of selected retailers.

    Anyway, it doesn't make much sense to me to characterize this as an instance of dishonesty, but rather a technical detail that's important enough to invest the time in it's improvement.
  • sseyler - Thursday, October 25, 2018 - link

    its*
  • zodiacfml - Wednesday, October 24, 2018 - link

    Meh. Intel owner could simply delidd and approach these kinds of performance.
    Resolution above 1080p, AMDs parts have better value.
  • zodiacfml - Wednesday, October 24, 2018 - link

    Made the comment without reading the review. The difference is a lot smaller than I expected where the only useful difference is in Ashes where AMD usually dominates due to sheer core count.
    I'd be fine with that 6 core CPU from AMD.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now