Gaming Tests: Strange Brigade

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 as an on-rails experience through the game. For quality, the game 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. Strange Brigade supports Vulkan and DX12, and so we test on both.

  • 720p Low, 1440p Low, 4K Low, 1080p Ultra

The automation for Strange Brigade is one of the easiest in our suite – the settings and quality can be changed by pre-prepared .ini files, and the benchmark is called via the command line. The output includes all the frame time data.

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: Red Dead Redemption 2 Conclusion
Comments Locked

279 Comments

View All Comments

  • mitox0815 - Tuesday, April 13, 2021 - link

    "Just abandon"...those clocks you dream of might have been possible on certain CPUs, but definitely noton a broader line-up. The XPs ran hot enough as it was, screwing more out of them would've made no sense. THAT they tried with the 9590...and failed miserably. Not to mention people could OC the Northwoods too, beyond 3.6 or 3.7 Ghz in fact...negating that point entirely. As was said...Northwood, especially the FSB800 ones with HT were the top dogs until the A64 came around and showed them the door. Prescott was...ambitious, to put it nicely.
  • mitox0815 - Tuesday, April 13, 2021 - link

    *not on
  • TheinsanegamerN - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link

    Netburst was built for both high clock speeds and predictable workloads, such as video editing, where it did quite well. Obviously it royally sucked for unpredictable workloads like gaming, but you could see where intel was heading with the idea.
  • Oxford Guy - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link

    'you could see where intel was heading with the idea'

    Creating the phrase 'MHz myth' in the public consciousness.
  • GeoffreyA - Friday, April 2, 2021 - link

    "MHz myth in the public consciousness"

    And it largely worked, even in the K8 era with the non-enthusiast public. Only when Core 2 Duo dropped to lower clocks was it accepted overnight that, yes, lower clocks are now all right because Intel says so.
  • Prosthetic Head - Tuesday, March 30, 2021 - link

    Your point still stands, however P4 was also a VERY low bar for to measure IPC improvements relative to.
  • Hifihedgehog - Tuesday, March 30, 2021 - link

    Well, Bulldozer was too and look what AMD did with Ryzen...
  • Oxford Guy - Saturday, April 3, 2021 - link

    AMD had a long time. 2011 is stamped onto the spreader of Piledriver and that was only a small incremental change from Bulldozer, which is even older.
  • Oxford Guy - Saturday, April 3, 2021 - link

    And, Bulldozer had worse IPC than Phenom. So, AMD had basically tech eternity to improve on the IPC of what it was offering. It made Zen 1 seem a lot more revolutionary.
  • GeoffreyA - Saturday, April 3, 2021 - link

    "It made Zen 1 seem a lot more revolutionary"

    You're right; and if one compares against Haswell or Skylake, one will see that the Intel and AMD designs are crudely the same from a bird's-eye point of view, except for AMD's split-scheduler inherited from the Athlon. I think that goes to show there's pretty much only one way to make an efficient x86 CPU (notice departures are disastrous: Netburst/Bulldozer). Having said that, I'm glad AMD went through the BD era: taught them a great deal. Also forced them to start from scratch, which took their design further than revising K10 would have done.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now