Sleeping Dogs

While not necessarily a game on everybody’s lips, Sleeping Dogs is a strenuous game with a pretty hardcore benchmark that scales well with additional GPU power. The team over at Adrenaline.com.br are supreme for making an easy to use benchmark GUI, allowing a numpty like me to charge ahead with a set of four 1440p runs with maximum graphical settings.

One 7970

Sleeping Dogs - One 7970, 1440p, Max Settings

Sleeping Dogs seems to tax the CPU so little that the only CPU that falls behind by the smallest of margins is an E6400 (and the G465 which would not run the benchmark). Intel visually takes all the top spots, but AMD is all in the mix with less than 0.5 FPS splitting an X2-555 BE and an i7-3770K.

Two 7970s

Sleeping Dogs - Two 7970s, 1440p, Max Settings

A split starts to develop between Intel and AMD again, although you would be hard pressed to choose between the CPUs as everything above an i3-3225 scores 50-56 FPS. The X2-555 BE unfortunately drops off, suggesting that Sleeping Dogs is a fan of the cores and this little CPU is a lacking.

Three 7970s

Sleeping Dogs - Three 7970, 1440p, Max Settings

At three GPUs the gap is there, with the best Intel processors over 10% ahead of the best AMD. Neither PCIe lane allocation or memory seems to be playing a part, just a case of threads then single thread performance.

Four 7970s

Sleeping Dogs - Four 7970, 1440p, Max Settings

Despite our Beast machine having double the threads, an i7-3960X in PCIe 3.0 mode takes top spot.

It is worth noting the scaling in Sleeping Dogs. The i7-3960X moved from 28.2 -> 56.23 -> 80.85 -> 101.15 FPS, achieving +71% increase of a single card moving from 3 to 4. This speaks of a well written game more than anything.

One 580

Sleeping Dogs- One 580, 1440p, Max Settings

There is almost nothing to separate every CPU when using a single GTX 580.

Two 580s

Sleeping Dogs - Two 580s, 1440p, Max Settings

Same thing with two GTX 580s – even an X2-555 BE is within 1 FPS (3%) of an i7-3960X.

Sleeping Dogs Conclusion

Due to the successful scaling and GPU limited nature of Sleeping Dogs, almost any CPU you throw at it will get the same result. When you move into three GPUs or more territory, it seems that having the single thread CPU speed of an Intel processor gets a few more FPS at the end of the day.

GPU Benchmarks: Civilization V Final Results, Conclusions and Recommendations
Comments Locked

242 Comments

View All Comments

  • jhoff80 - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link

    I know they're more difficult to get a hold of, but I'd be curious how some of the lower power stuff, like the i7-3770T or the i5-3570T would do. Even a i5-3550S would be pretty interesting, I think.

    I mean, I know there's a lot of gamers that just want as powerful (or conversely, as cheap) a CPU as possible, but it would be interesting to see if Intel's more 'efficient' (for lack of a better word) chips do nearly as well.
  • TheInternal - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link

    I would be curious to see how "low-power" parts do as well, though that would be a secondary desire behind seeing these tests done on multiple monitor configurations.
  • The0ne - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link

    Odd. The i5-3570K is a very popular CPU and it doesn't get attention or recommendation? Does that mean that previous tests by numerous websites indicating and directing thousands of consumers to build with this CPU somehow became irrelevant? I could have sworn that the rule of thumb was you go with an i5-3570K instead of an I7 if you're not into heavy audio/video work but yet here it doesn't appear to be the case. Very interesting.
  • IanCutress - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link

    I didn't have one to hand and couldn't get one in. We don't work in an office at AT, we're spread across the world. The nearest I had to it was the 2500K, which is an IPC decrease. i5-3570K (and the Haswell equivalent) should be in the next update :)

    Ian
  • mapesdhs - Monday, May 20, 2013 - link


    It's an IPC decrease, but it oc's far better than the 3570K due to the cap material issue;
    end result is the 2500K will be faster overall. I still think the 2500K is a better buy, assuming
    one can get them. Unless of course one is willing to replace the cap material with something
    better, then the 3570K will be an easy winner.

    Ian.
  • sherlockwing - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link

    Could you investigate more into how AMD failed in Civilization V? could it be that RTS game are harder to multihread optimize thus favoring Intel CPUs?
  • frozen ox - Thursday, May 9, 2013 - link

    Civ V is more dependent on the CPU than the GPU, and in this case that's where AMD's shortcomings in single-threaded performance show. It will be very interesting to see what happens in these scenarios whem AMD starts releasing HSA capable APUs. When coupled with a discrete GPU, will they be able to manage both the integrated and discrete components to an advantage in games like Civ 5 and other CPU demanding strategy games?
  • xinthius - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link

    I'm alright, thanks. You will find that I stated admirably. Compare the price difference between each SKU.
  • kyuu - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link

    (No) Thanks for your input, but that's not what I was asking.
  • beepboy - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link

    Great job Ian! I'm really interested to see 680s in the picture please!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now