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
POST A COMMENT

105 Comments

View All Comments

  • ToTTenTranz - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    No.
    Vulkan is a fork of Mantle. Every single advantage of Mantle will be transposed for Vulkan.
    DX12 is an API made largely to follow the steps of Mantle (lower CPU overhead).

    Testing Mantle is the best way to predict how DX12 and Vulkan games will behave with slower CPUs.

    The only thing that doesn't make sense is how Anandtech seems to be so "afraid" of showing how Bulldozer-derived CPUs work with Mantle.
    Reply
  • DigitalFreak - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    I'd rather see them spend time on more useful reviews of other products than on something few people care about. There are other sites where you can find that stuff. Reply
  • ToTTenTranz - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    More useful than knowing if a $100 AMD CPU might be just as future-proof for DX12 games as a $300 Intel CPU?

    It seems to me that some companies could be VERY afraid of how useful for the consumer that might be, and how that would bring down the value (and margins) of pricier CPUs.

    Not to mention the usefulness for TDP-constrained and lower-clocked mobile CPUs/APUs.
    Reply
  • sonicmerlin - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    Wouldn't almost everyone with an AMD CPU benefit from Mantle? And wouldn't Mantle performance reviews give a very accurate approximation of how their CPUs will perform under DX 12? Reply
  • eRacer1 - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    Yep, need to get the word out not to bother buying AMD's Zen because even today's modest AMD APUs will be far more than enough to handle the multitudes of AAA Vulkan PC games launching throughout the next few years. Reply
  • Edens_Remorse - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    That is completely untrue. Several new and upcoming games(BF Hardline, Star Citizen, Dragon Age Inquisition) utilize Mantle. Reply
  • Edens_Remorse - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    Really suspicious that this "review" comes out a day before the new apu/athlon release. Intel's reign on gaming superiority is over as soon as devs stop being lazy(even with dx11 btw). Check out the new Witcher 3 fps comparisons (especially minimums) over at WCCFtech. Reply
  • der - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    SO MINI ITS NICE! Reply
  • Crunchy005 - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    I'm assuming the benchmarks were done at stock speeds. The 7700k seems to overclock nicely I would love to see OCed benchmarks. Reply
  • Teknobug - Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - link

    I like the A8 7600, nice balance between performance and power efficiency but the i3 4130T beats it in some ways. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now