Gaming Benchmarks

As mentioned previously, this mini-review will focus on a few elements but all our data can be found in Bench, including tests with high end ($300+) graphics cards and some 4K testing.

Alien: Isolation

If first person survival mixed with horror is your sort of thing, then Alien: Isolation, based off of the Alien franchise, should be an interesting title. Developed by The Creative Assembly and released in October 2014, Alien: Isolation has won numerous awards from Game Of The Year to several top 10s/25s and Best Horror titles, ratcheting up over a million sales by February 2015. Alien: Isolation uses a custom built engine which includes dynamic sound effects and should be fully multi-core enabled.

For low end graphics, we test at 720p with Ultra settings, whereas for mid and high range graphics we bump this up to 1080p, taking the average frame rate as our marker with a scripted version of the built-in benchmark.

Alien Isolation on Integrated Graphics

Alien Isolation on ASUS R7 240 DDR3 2GB ($70)

Alien Isolation on MSI R9 285 Gaming 2GB ($240)

Total War: Attila

The Total War franchise moves on to Attila, another The Creative Assembly development, and is a stand-alone strategy title set in 395AD where the main story line lets the gamer take control of the leader of the Huns in order to conquer parts of the world. Graphically the game can render hundreds/thousands of units on screen at once, all with their individual actions and can put some of the big cards to task.

For low end graphics, we test at 720p with performance settings, recording the average frame rate. With mid and high range graphics, we test at 1080p with the quality setting. In both circumstances, unlimited video memory is enabled and the in-game scripted benchmark is used.

Total War: Attila on Integrated Graphics

Total War: Attila on ASUS R7 240 DDR3 2GB ($70)

Total War: Attila on MSI R9 285 Gaming 2GB ($240)

Grand Theft Auto V

The highly anticipated iteration of the Grand Theft Auto franchise finally hit the shelves on April 14th 2015, with both AMD and NVIDIA in tow to help optimize the title. GTA doesn’t provide graphical presets, but opens up the options to users and extends the boundaries by pushing even the hardest systems to the limit using Rockstar’s Advanced Game Engine. Whether the user is flying high in the mountains with long draw distances or dealing with assorted trash in the city, when cranked up to maximum it creates stunning visuals but hard work for both the CPU and the GPU.

For our test we have scripted a version of the in-game benchmark, relying only on the final part which combines a flight scene along with an in-city drive-by followed by a tanker explosion. For low end systems we test at 720p on the lowest settings, whereas mid and high end graphics play at 1080p with very high settings across the board. We record both the average frame rate and the percentage of frames under 60 FPS (16.6ms).

Grand Theft Auto V on Integrated Graphics

Grand Theft Auto V on ASUS R7 240 DDR3 2GB ($70)

Grand Theft Auto V on MSI R9 285 Gaming 2GB ($240)

GRID: Autosport

No graphics tests are complete without some input from Codemasters and the EGO engine, which means for this round of testing we point towards GRID: Autosport, the next iteration in the GRID and racing genre. As with our previous racing testing, each update to the engine aims to add in effects, reflections, detail and realism, with Codemasters making ‘authenticity’ a main focal point for this version.

GRID’s benchmark mode is very flexible, and as a result we created a test race using a shortened version of the Red Bull Ring with twelve cars doing two laps. The car is focus starts last and is quite fast, but usually finishes second or third. For low end graphics we test at 1080p medium settings, whereas mid and high end graphics get the full 1080p maximum. Both the average and minimum frame rates are recorded.

GRID: Autosport on Integrated Graphics

GRID: Autosport on ASUS R7 240 DDR3 2GB ($70)

GRID: Autosport on MSI R9 285 Gaming 2GB ($240)

Middle-Earth: Shadows of Mordor

The final title in our testing is another battle of system performance with the open world action-adventure title, Shadows of Mordor. Produced by Monolith using the LithTech Jupiter EX engine and numerous detail add-ons, SoM goes for detail and complexity to a large extent, despite having to be cut down from the original plans. The main story itself was written by the same writer as Red Dead Redemption, and it received Zero Punctuation’s Game of The Year in 2014.

For testing purposes, SoM gives a dynamic screen resolution setting, allowing us to render at high resolutions that are then scaled down to the monitor. As a result, we get several tests using the in-game benchmark. For low end graphics we examine at 720p with low settings, whereas mid and high end graphics get 1080p Ultra. The top graphics test is also redone at 3840x2160, also with Ultra settings, and we also test two cards at 4K where possible.

Shadows of Mordor on Integrated Graphics

Shadows of Mordor on ASUS R7 240 DDR3 2GB ($70)

Shadows of Mordor on MSI R9 285 Gaming 2GB ($240) [Minimum FPS]

Shadows of Mordor on ASUS GTX 980 Strix 4GB ($560) Shadows of Mordor on ASUS GTX 980 Strix 4GB ($560) [Minimum FPS]

I added some 4K numbers here, just to see the difference at a higher resolution. It turns out that for average frame rates at least, Shadows of Mordor is CPU agnostic. A fast CPU gets a higher rating in minimum frames however.

Office and Professional Performance (Windows and Linux) AMD A10-7700K and AMD A6-7400K Conclusion
Comments Locked

105 Comments

View All Comments

  • akamateau - Thursday, May 28, 2015 - link

    Hey silverblow who are you the comment NAZI? LOL

    Is the best you got, whining because I made three posts?

    What IDIOT except you would believe that ANYONE is a paid shill. What a marroon! What are you a Paid Shill for AnandHACK.

    I detest lying media hacks who distort or hide the facts.

    As a consumer I demand the know the facts and if I have to challenge gutless lying writers then I will. Whenever and however I damm well please.
  • silverblue - Thursday, May 28, 2015 - link

    I'd love for you to meet chizow.
  • D. Lister - Thursday, May 28, 2015 - link

    Such a collision would probably rip a hole in spacetime. :p
  • akamateau - Thursday, May 28, 2015 - link

    @Ian Cutress

    Why no DX12 benchmarks?

    You have Starwswarm.

    You have 3dMark API OVERHEAD BENCHMARK.

    Why didn't you use them?

    No GUTS? Afraid to answer? How much money did Intel pay you to ignore DX12 Benchmarks?

    You call yourself a journalist?

    These AMD releases are all intended for Windows 10 and DX12 products and you lie about their performance.

    You are pathetic.
  • akamateau - Thursday, May 28, 2015 - link

    If you upgrade to Windows 10 then your build will be pretty dam good. In fact it will be a far better gaming rig than ANY Intel i3, i5 or i7.
  • piasabird - Thursday, May 28, 2015 - link

    I have a computer at home with the i3 4330 In the chart it says it costs $138 which is probably the current retail price. However, I bought mine about 1.5 years ago for about $124.95 when it was on sale from Newegg. You can often find some good deals around X-Mass or New Years. He who waits, saves.
  • jardows2 - Thursday, May 28, 2015 - link

    For those who are hating on Ian for reviewing older products, not a product to be release tomorrow, and not using BETA or Pre-ALPHA software in review, you are ignorant at best. Here is information for anyone who might be influenced by your baseless rhetoric:

    1. NDA's. The reviewers can only publish reviews when the manufacturer allows them to
    2. Review Samples: The reviewers can only publish reviews on products they actually have in hand. A product that hasn't been released yet cant' get into their hands unless the manufacturer sends them a pre-sample. In that case, see point 1 above.
    3. Time to review. Did you not notice this was a "Mini-Review" and not an in-depth review? It takes time to do a proper review, write it up, and publish it.
    4. Bench. Anandtech writers will put their results in a database we can search and quickly find results and compare to other products. It is nonsensical for the reviewers to run every test you want, or to continue to use benchmarks that are irrelevant.
  • Edens_Remorse - Thursday, May 28, 2015 - link

    Influenced by baseless rhetoric? How about we save people from being influenced from this lousy "mini-review." From the incorrect price listings to the nonsensical approach to "reviewing" this product, everything here reeks of bias - well, that or just stupidity and incompetence. Too many helpful reviews of this product line elsewhere to accept this bullsh*t. Eteknix is a great place to look if you choose not to believe me.
  • devione - Friday, May 29, 2015 - link

    I'm sorry that in your world everyone else besides yourseld are apparently misinformed ignorant idiots that need to be told what to do and how to think.

    Thank God for the thought police like yourself. Heavens know where we'd be without such awesome heroes like yourself. You have my kudos and approval.
  • Edens_Remorse - Friday, May 29, 2015 - link

    Ironic. I provide an alternative assesment of the reviewed product based on facts from multiple sources that i have shared here for all to see. I have corrected blatent errors(price/performance) and confronted an agenda, yet i am the thought police. Hehe, ok.

    Sorry bud, this mini review doesn't do the product line justice. Misinformation sucks...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now