Gaming: Grand Theft Auto V

The highly anticipated iteration of the Grand Theft Auto franchise hit the shelves on April 14th 2015, with both AMD and NVIDIA in tow to help optimize the title. GTA doesn’t provide graphical presets, but opens up the options to users and extends the boundaries by pushing even the hardest systems to the limit using Rockstar’s Advanced Game Engine under DirectX 11. Whether the user is flying high in the mountains with long draw distances or dealing with assorted trash in the city, when cranked up to maximum it creates stunning visuals but hard work for both the CPU and the GPU.

For our test we have scripted a version of the in-game benchmark. The in-game benchmark consists of five scenarios: four short panning shots with varying lighting and weather effects, and a fifth action sequence that lasts around 90 seconds. We use only the final part of the benchmark, which combines a flight scene in a jet followed by an inner city drive-by through several intersections followed by ramming a tanker that explodes, causing other cars to explode as well. This is a mix of distance rendering followed by a detailed near-rendering action sequence, and the title thankfully spits out frame time data.

AnandTech CPU Gaming 2019 Game List
Game Genre Release Date API IGP Low Med High
Grand Theft Auto V Open World Apr
DX11 720p
Very High

There are no presets for the graphics options on GTA, allowing the user to adjust options such as population density and distance scaling on sliders, but others such as texture/shadow/shader/water quality from Low to Very High. Other options include MSAA, soft shadows, post effects, shadow resolution and extended draw distance options. There is a handy option at the top which shows how much video memory the options are expected to consume, with obvious repercussions if a user requests more video memory than is present on the card (although there’s no obvious indication if you have a low end GPU with lots of GPU memory, like an R7 240 4GB).

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

GTA V IGP Low Medium High
Average FPS
95th Percentile


Gaming: Strange Brigade (DX12, Vulkan) Gaming: Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX12)


View All Comments

  • eva02langley - Thursday, January 31, 2019 - link

    Forget to mention Omnium Gatherum - The Burning Cold Reply
  • PeachNCream - Thursday, January 31, 2019 - link

    "On the power side of the equation, again the W-3175X comes in like a wrecking ball, and this baby is on fire."

    It's more like a Miley Cyrus licking a sledgehammer thing to me.
  • sgeocla - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    Computex 2018: Intel 28 core 5 Ghz out by end of year.
    February 2019: Intel 28 core 4.5 Ghz, costs 70% more than competing product.
    Intel is early on promises and late on delivery as always.
  • BigMamaInHouse - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    The CPU is 3000$ + 1500$ MB+ ECC + eXtreme case/PSU/AIO.
    Thanks Ian Cutress for the honest review!
    (unlike "JustBuyIt that gave this fail product(Total System) 4.5/5 rating vs 2990WX 3.5/5 because its expensive!")
  • Morawka - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    oh wow, i didn't realize the Dominus Extreme was so expensive. Reply
  • tamalero - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    We're getting a ton of "sponsored" BS articles lately that are cynical. Reply
  • eva02langley - Thursday, January 31, 2019 - link

    WCCFtech gave the MSI 2080 TI lightning 1600$ GPU a 10/10 for value... Reply
  • FMinus - Friday, February 1, 2019 - link

    RX 570 is 10/10 along with maybe the GTX 1060, everything else is going down the value ladder pretty fast from that point on. For any consumer/gaming oriented GPU that passes the $500 mark I'd give it -1/10 value score. Reply
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    The on stage demo was using a chilled water setup, that they managed to push that system higher than Ian could with room temperature water is only to be expected. Reply
  • jardows2 - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link

    This seems like a really good processor for a productivity station. I think, especially at the expected price, it would sell really well. That has me puzzled then as to why Intel would have such a limited run. The supposed figures is barely enough to send to review sites around the world, let alone have a profitable product line. If they produced 10X the amount of these, they'd probably sell them all. Why is Intel leaving easy money on the table? Something doesn't seem right about this picture. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now