Gaming Tests: Far Cry 5

The fifth title in Ubisoft's Far Cry series lands us right into the unwelcoming arms of an armed militant cult in Montana, one of the many middles-of-nowhere in the United States. With a charismatic and enigmatic adversary, gorgeous landscapes of the northwestern American flavor, and lots of violence, it is classic Far Cry fare. Graphically intensive in an open-world environment, the game mixes in action and exploration with a lot of configurability.

Unfortunately, the game doesn’t like us changing the resolution in the results file when using certain monitors, resorting to 1080p but keeping the quality settings. But resolution scaling does work, so we decided to fix the resolution at 1080p and use a variety of different scaling factors to give the following:

  • 720p Low, 1440p Low, 4K Low, 1440p Max.

Far Cry 5 outputs a results file here, but that the file is a HTML file, which showcases a graph of the FPS detected. At no point in the HTML file does it contain the frame times for each frame, but it does show the frames per second, as a value once per second in the graph. The graph in HTML form is a series of (x,y) co-ordinates scaled to the min/max of the graph, rather than the raw (second, FPS) data, and so using regex I carefully tease out the values of the graph, convert them into a (second, FPS) format, and take our values of averages and percentiles that way.

If anyone from Ubisoft wants to chat about building a benchmark platform that would not only help me but also every other member of the tech press build our benchmark testing platform to help our readers decide what is the best hardware to use on your games, please reach out to ian@anandtech.com. Some of the suggestions I want to give you will take less than half a day and it’s easily free advertising to use the benchmark over the next couple of years (or more).

As with the other gaming tests, we run each resolution/setting combination for a minimum of 10 minutes and take the relevant frame data for 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: F1 2019 Gaming Tests: Gears Tactics
POST A COMMENT

541 Comments

View All Comments

  • Oxford Guy - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link

    Worse.

    Bulldozer came from a money-starved little company, a company that couldn’t capitalize on having the superior design because of Intel’s monopolization.

    This chip is from the big rich company that stomped on AMD with dirty tricks.

    So, no. As stupid as Bulldozer was, this CPU seems to be quite a bit more unjustified.
    Reply
  • ThereSheGoes - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link

    Well, the results in this article are clearly not just wrong, but very wrong. https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php/artikel/hard... Reply
  • Bagheera - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link

    did you even read the article you linked? it's taking 5800X in most benchmarks just like the Anandtech review.

    if you mean the gaming benches in the other review - 3 games is a terrible sample size and it still loses to 5800x in 2 out of 3.
    Reply
  • Beaver M. - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link

    Look at the results with the new BIOS.
    This review here is obsolete.
    Reply
  • Hifihedgehog - Friday, March 12, 2021 - link

    LOL. Fanboy delusion.

    First off, let's take a quick looksie at the Cinebench R20 results:
    https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php/artikel/hard...
    When switching from BIOS version 0402 to 0603, the 11700K's single-threaded performance actually DROPS from a score of 609 to 600. And its multicore performance is still less than the 10900K and the 5800X.
    Switching gears, the games are no less unflattering:
    https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php/artikel/hard...
    The 11700K there, regardless of which of the two BIOS releases it uses, often loses to the 10900K and Ryzen 5000 series. It loses to the Ryzen 5000 series and 10900K in THREE out of the four games: The Division 2, Metro Exodus, The Shadow of the Tomb Raider.

    In short: dude, what are you smoking?
    Reply
  • Beaver M. - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link

    As expected new reviews with newer BIOS versions improve performance significantly and puts the numbers to expected levels as well.
    This was a quick shot of a review and I fear it has tainted Cutress reputation a lot, especially because he defended it that much, even on video.
    Reply
  • Oxford Guy - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link

    With what power consumption?

    Raising performance by pushing power even higher may improve things like FPS in gaming tests but it obscures the big picture.

    Want to talk about reputation? Remember the giant fridge-sized chiller Intel surreptitiously used to give a benchmark demo? Or, remember the ‘GenuineIntel’ fiasco? Or, remember the cute trick of putting a black box CPU inside the one people pay for, so that only special customers get the option of avoiding that particular spyware?

    Somehow I think the writers here are going to be very hard pressed to challenge Intel in the cheatiness department, even without mentioning Intel’s history of abusing its monopoly power via OEM deals and the like.
    Reply
  • Qasar - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link

    Oxford Guy you forgot about how intel kept saying that 10 nm is " on track " the last 3-4 years :-) Reply
  • Qasar - Wednesday, March 10, 2021 - link

    Beaver M
    " new reviews with newer BIOS versions improve performance significantly " from what i can tell from the graphs, for the most part, while performance may have improved over previous gen, it looks like it still looses to zen 3, but definitely not significantly, and still using more power then zen 3 overall, not that much of an improvement. a little upset that intel didnt get any performance crowns back, maybe, and that rocket lake still looks to be a dud ?
    Reply
  • Bagheera - Thursday, March 11, 2021 - link

    I fail to see the performance improvements in this other review. the games chosen were different (only 3 games? really?), and still lost to 5800X in 2/3.

    is it just "better" relative to last gen performance? the other review only tested a single resolution (and again, 3 whole games!)
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now