*We are currently in the middle of revisiting our CPU gaming benchmarks, but the new suite was not ready in time for this review. We plan to add in some new games (Borderland 3, Gears Tactics) and also upgrade our gaming GPU to a RTX 2080 Ti.

Gaming: Final Fantasy XV

Upon arriving to PC earlier this, Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition was given a graphical overhaul as it was ported over from console, fruits of their successful partnership with NVIDIA, with hardly any hint of the troubles during Final Fantasy XV's original production and development.

In preparation for the launch, Square Enix opted to release a standalone benchmark that they have since updated. Using the Final Fantasy XV standalone benchmark gives us a lengthy standardized sequence to record, although it should be noted that its heavy use of NVIDIA technology means that the Maximum setting has problems - it renders items off screen. To get around this, we use the standard preset which does not have these issues.

Square Enix has patched the benchmark with custom graphics settings and bugfixes to be much more accurate in profiling in-game performance and graphical options. For our testing, we run the standard benchmark with a FRAPs overlay, taking a 6 minute recording of the test.

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

AnandTech IGP Low Medium High
Average FPS
95th Percentile

 

Gaming: World of Tanks enCore Gaming: Ashes Classic (DX12)
Comments Locked

249 Comments

View All Comments

  • Spunjji - Monday, May 11, 2020 - link

    What a worthless comment. Sure, they included high-end Intel CPUs in the gaming sections - but the review isn't *about* high-end CPUs, it's about what you get for the money with these specific AMD CPUs. Comparing AMD's budget gaming CPU to the best available to see how little you lose is a valid comparison to make.
  • jjjag - Tuesday, May 12, 2020 - link

    Anandtech can no longer write a simple factual article anymore about any processor. Even this article, which is supposed to be a simple article about a new low-cost processor, uses the word "Bonanza" in the title, mysteriously It also takes multiple jabs at Intel in the body, even though it servers no purpose to the actual content. Every Anand article is now an opinion piece instead of responsible reporting.
  • Spunjji - Tuesday, May 12, 2020 - link

    "I hate content with flavour. I want lists of graphs with no words."

    Good for you. Off you go to userbenchmark, for worthless, context-free information that's appropriately biased towards your preferred team.
  • rdgoodri - Friday, May 15, 2020 - link

    Its pretty positive for AMD, don't catch your angle here.
  • Meteor2 - Tuesday, August 4, 2020 - link

    This article absolutely rips into Intel, and rightly so.

    Your comment is bizarre.
  • PeterCollier - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link

    And what's the point of these new benchmarks? I prefer PCMark and Userbench. Basically no one is using their new CPU to simulate the neurons of a sea slug, for example. Utterly irrelevant to real-life usage.
  • Mansoor - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link

    The purpose of a benchmark is to produce repeatable and reliable numbers. Just "doing real-life stuff" is not repeatable and will generate different numbers for everyone. If you have a specific use case in mind, you can observe relevant or related benchmarks.
  • PeterCollier - Friday, May 8, 2020 - link

    None of my use cases mesh with any of the lousily selected benchmarks in this review.
  • Korguz - Friday, May 8, 2020 - link

    then why are you here reading this article ?
  • PeterCollier - Saturday, May 9, 2020 - link

    I read articles from all sources, including the silicon-equivalent of Faux News. I find it a good practice to read from sources that you disagree with, or worse, purposely mislead you, because it's important not to create an echo chamber for one's self.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now