Gaming: Strange Brigade (DX12, Vulkan)

Strange Brigade is based in 1903’s Egypt and follows a story which is very similar to that of the Mummy film franchise. This particular third-person shooter is developed by Rebellion Developments which is more widely known for games such as the Sniper Elite and Alien vs Predator series. The game follows the hunt for Seteki the Witch Queen who has arose once again and the only ‘troop’ who can ultimately stop her. Gameplay is cooperative centric with a wide variety of different levels and many puzzles which need solving by the British colonial Secret Service agents sent to put an end to her reign of barbaric and brutality.

The game supports both the DirectX 12 and Vulkan APIs and houses its own built-in benchmark which offers various options up for customization including textures, anti-aliasing, reflections, draw distance and even allows users to enable or disable motion blur, ambient occlusion and tessellation among others. AMD has boasted previously that Strange Brigade is part of its Vulkan API implementation offering scalability for AMD multi-graphics card configurations.

AnandTech CPU Gaming 2019 Game List
Game Genre Release Date API IGP Low Med High
Strange Brigade* FPS Aug
2018
DX12
Vulkan
720p
Low
1080p
Medium
1440p
High
4K
Ultra
*Strange Brigade is run in DX12 and Vulkan modes

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

Strange Brigade IGP Low Medium High
Average FPS
95th Percentile

.

Strange Brigade IGP Low Medium High
Average FPS
95th Percentile
Gaming: Ashes Classic (DX12) Gaming: Grand Theft Auto V
POST A COMMENT

136 Comments

View All Comments

  • tamalero - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    Aaah yes.. the presenter "forgot" to say it was heavily overclocked.. Reply
  • arh2o - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    Hey Ian, nice review. But you guys really need to stop testing games with an ancient GTX 1080 from 1H 2016...it's almost 3 years old now. You're clearly GPU bottle-necked on a bunch of these games you've benchmarked. At least use a RTX 2080, but if you're really insistent on keeping the GTX 1080, bench at 720p with it instead of your IGP. For example:

    Final Fantasy XV: All your CPUs have FPS between 1-4 frames of difference. Easy to spot GPU bottleneck here.

    Shadow of War Low: Ditto, all CPUs bench within the 96-100 FPS range. Also, what's the point of even including the medium and high numbers? It's decimal point differences on the FPS, not even a whole number difference. Clearly GPU bottle-necked here even at 1080p unfortunately.
    Reply
  • eddman - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    Xeons don't even have an IGP. That IGP in the tables is simply the name they chose for that settings, which includes 720 resolution, since it represents a probable use case for an IGP.

    Anyway, you are right about the card. They should've used a faster one, although IMO game benchmarks are pointless for such CPUs.
    Reply
  • BushLin - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    I'm glad they're using the same card for years so it can be directly compared to previous benchmarks and we can see how performance scales with cores vs clock speed. Reply
  • Mitch89 - Friday, February 1, 2019 - link

    That’s a poor rationale, you wouldn’t pair a top-end CPU with an outdated GPU if you were building a system that needs both CPU and GPU performance. Reply
  • SH3200 - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    For all the jokes its getting doesn't the 7290F actually run at a higher TDP using the same socket? Intel couldn't have just have taken the coolers from the Xeon DAP WSes and used those instead? Reply
  • evernessince - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    How is 3K priced right? You can purchased a 2990WX for half that price and 98% of the performance. $1,500 is a lot of extra money in your wallet. Reply
  • GreenReaper - Thursday, January 31, 2019 - link

    Maybe they thought since it was called the 2990WX it cost $2990... Reply
  • tygrus - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    1) A few cases showed the 18core Intel CPU beat their 28core. I assume the benchmark and/or OS is contributing to a reduced performance for the 28 core Intel and the 32 core AMD (TR 2950 beats TR 2990 a few times).

    2) Do you really want to use 60% more power for <25% increase of performance?

    3) This chip is a bit like the 1.13GHz race in terms of such a small release & high cost it should be ignored by most of us as a marketing stunt.
    Reply
  • GreenReaper - Thursday, January 31, 2019 - link

    Fewer cores may be able to boost faster and have less contention for shared resources such as memory bandwidth. This CPU tends to only win by any significant margin when it whenuse all of its cores. Heck, you have the 2700X up there in many cases. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now