Gaming Tests: Gears Tactics

Remembering the original Gears of War brings back a number of memories – some good, and some involving online gameplay. The latest iteration of the franchise was launched as I was putting this benchmark suite together, and Gears Tactics is a high-fidelity turn-based strategy game with an extensive single player mode. As with a lot of turn-based games, there is ample opportunity to crank up the visual effects, and here the developers have put a lot of effort into creating effects, a number of which seem to be CPU limited.

Gears Tactics has an in-game benchmark, roughly 2.5 minutes of AI gameplay starting from the same position but using a random seed for actions. Much like the racing games, this usually leads to some variation in the run-to-run data, so for this benchmark we are taking the geometric mean of the results. One of the biggest things that Gears Tactics can do is on the resolution scaling, supporting 8K, and so we are testing the following settings:

  • 720p Low, 4K Low, 8K Low, 1080p Ultra

For results, the game showcases a mountain of data when the benchmark is finished, such as how much the benchmark was CPU limited and where, however none of that is ever exported into a file we can use. It’s just a screenshot which we have to read manually.

If anyone from the Gears Tactics team 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 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 benchmarks, we do as many runs until 10 minutes per resolution/setting combination has passed. For this benchmark, we manually read each of the screenshots for each quality/setting/run combination. The benchmark does also give 95th percentiles and frame averages, so we can use both of these data points.

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


Gears is the one test where at our 1080p Maximum settings it shines ahead of the pack. Although at high resolution, low quality, although all five CPUs are essentially equal, it still sits behind AMD's Ryzen APU.

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

Gaming Tests: Far Cry 5 Gaming Tests: GTA 5


View All Comments

  • TheinsanegamerN - Monday, March 8, 2021 - link

    They're the same chip, the only difference is clock speeds. Dont get your hopes up, RKL is a total dud, much like Williamette was. Reply
  • Samus - Saturday, March 6, 2021 - link

    blppt - my concern is that AMD may have a superior IPC, but the real fruit comes from the manufacturing process. Intel is still (somewhat) competitive at 14nm and that in itself is quite unbelievable. Imagine where this chip would be on 7nm or 10nm, at 6GHz+ and more cores with 2-3x the cache.

    That said, this victory may be short lived because AMD is basically taking advantage of the embarrassing execution Intel has repeated, much like they did 20 years ago with the P4 (albeit that was an architecture failure, not a manufacturing process failure)
  • Thesubtlesnake - Saturday, March 6, 2021 - link

    Intel's latest 10nm process delivers *slower* clocks than its 14nm one. So, no, 6 GHz is not on the table. I imagine that when the transition to 7nm, Intel will be able to achieve moderately faster clock speeds than with 14nm. Reply
  • Otritus - Sunday, March 14, 2021 - link

    10nm SF is good enough for 5 GHz. 10nm ESF can clock higher, so Intel's latest (but unreleased) process should match 14nm. I would not expect 7nm to clock higher than 14nm because it is becoming very clear that 5Ghz+ is just a waste of power and transistors, so i would not expect 7nm architectures to be designed to clock higher. We either are getting lots of IPC or just over 5GHz. Reply
  • Slash3 - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link

    Mad lad. Reply
  • edved - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link

    Nice write-up. Thank you. Reply
  • lucasdclopes - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link

    Power efficiency is abysmal on this one. Reply
  • CiccioB - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link

    No, it is not. It lower than AMD's efficiency, but it not that bad for being based on such an old process. Reply
  • PixyMisa - Friday, March 5, 2021 - link

    So it's abysmal, but that's only to be expected? Reply
  • Spunjji - Saturday, March 6, 2021 - link

    Not bad for an old process is still abysmal by the standards of 2021. No wonder Apple dropped them like a hot rock. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now