Gaming Tests: Civilization 6

Originally penned by Sid Meier and his team, the Civilization 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 underflow. Truth be told I never actually played the first version, but I have played every edition from the second to the sixth, including the fourth as voiced by the late Leonard Nimoy, and 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.

For this benchmark, we are using the following settings:

  • 480p Low, 1440p Low, 4K Low, 1080p Max

For automation, Firaxis supports the in-game automated benchmark from the command line, and output a results file with frame times. We do as many runs within 10 minutes per resolution/setting combination, and then take averages and percentiles.

AnandTech Low Resolution
Low Quality
Medium Resolution
Low Quality
High Resolution
Low Quality
Medium Resolution
Max Quality
Average FPS
95th Percentile

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

 

Gaming Tests: Chernobylite Gaming Tests: Deus Ex Mankind Divided
POST A COMMENT

338 Comments

View All Comments

  • just4U - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link

    There were some issues early on as the review came out (obviously got hammered..) good now tho.. Reply
  • MDD1963 - Saturday, November 7, 2020 - link

    The pages were indeed VERY slow to load the hour or two after they were posted....; overloaded, perhaps. Reply
  • NA1NSXR - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link

    What are you talking about, have you seen the prices? We got a big leap but we also got a value-destroying price hike. 5800X is in line with 10900K throughout the suite, but is newer and no cheaper! Reply
  • catavalon21 - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link

    Agree. The 10850 hands the 5800x it's backside in a great many contests, at about the same price point, yeah. Reply
  • just4U - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link

    It's just launch prices (..shrug) I'd pay the premium for the 5900x and the 5950x but the 3800? Hmm no.. I'd either opt in for the 3900x or a Intel 10core part first at that price. Needs to be priced $10 cheaper than the 10900 (non K) which brings it closer to the 8core 10700K price. Reply
  • just4U - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link

    err (should read 5800x) not 3800. Reply
  • yankeeDDL - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link

    The 10850 peaks at 140W *more* than the 5800x. It's, literally, half as efficient as the 5800x. Running the 10850 will on a daily basis will cost you easily much more than the CPU's cost itself over its lifetime. Reply
  • LithiumFirefly - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link

    Especially if you live in a climate that's warm part of the year paying more for AC cuz that Intel chip is hot AF Reply
  • dagobah123 - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link

    This is so much more important than people realize. I think they should include a cost of ownership when discussing these prices like they do with cars. Reply
  • lmcd - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link

    it wasn't important when AMD was behind so why is it important now? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now