Benchmarked - Civilization: Beyond Earthby Jarred Walton on October 23, 2014 8:00 AM EST
Civilization: Beyond Earth Testing Notes
Along with discussions of the performance, there are also a few bugs and other quirks in many games that could use fixing. In the case of Civilization: Beyond Earth, my testing has uncovered a few issues. First and foremost, the problem with the MSI GS60 running at higher than 1080p definitely needs a fix (most likely from NVIDIA's or Intel's drivers, though possibly it's something specific to the laptop that MSI would need to fix, or perhaps it's something with the game itself).
Another issue I encountered (which might be hardware specific) is that the game always drops to a 24Hz refresh rate on my Acer XB280HK LCD; the monitor supports 3840x2160 at 60Hz, and if I change the refresh rate after the game has started everything is fine. When I exit and restart, unfortunately, the game is back to 24Hz even though the settings claim it's at 59Hz.
Of course I'd also love to see the support for Mantle SFR "just work" without requiring any manual tweaking of configuration files. Fixing Mantle support for users with more than two GPUs is a known issue, though it only likely affects a handful of users. Another known issue is that if Windows is set to anything other than 100% scaling, the game basically breaks right now – your mouse cursor doesn't map properly to the screen coordinates so you can't click on buttons or units. And let me just say that a 28" display running at 3840x2160 does not result in particularly legible text (in Windows) for my tired old eyes at 100% scaling.
While I'm here talking about fixes, it would also be great if Firaxis improved the usefulness of the benchmark results. Right now, all it generates is a CSV file with one long line of comma separated values containing the frame rendering times (in milliseconds). That's certainly better than nothing, but I had to create a macro to convert the row into a column, calculate the total time and number of frames (and thereby the average FPS), as well as determining the instantaneous frame times. In some ways it's easier to just use FRAPS to log the performance during the benchmark, but of course FRAPS only works with Direct3D and OpenGL and not Mantle.
Being able to launch the benchmark from a command prompt without Steam complaining about the extra command line parameters (see above dialog) and being able to launch the Mantle version of the game from the command prompt would also be appreciated. The latter is a Firaxis issue, while Steam now appears to complain about any command line parameters on the games I've tested. Basically, if you're going to include a built-in benchmark, generating data in a more useful format and providing tools to automate testing multiple settings helps the people that will actually use the benchmark (i.e. hardware reviewers like me).
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
Parrdacc - Thursday, October 23, 2014 - linkWell, have a Happy Birthday!!
przemo_li - Thursday, October 23, 2014 - linkI think that You make good point about $$ on CPU vs $$ on GPU... for now.
Cause if Mantle can let us spent $$$ less on CPU then, why not?
(That ofc. would require more widespread support in games.... Or DX12 Or OpenGL AZDO)
nevertell - Thursday, October 23, 2014 - linkNot necessarily. Civilization V was a cpu limited game for the most part.
LemmingOverlord - Friday, October 24, 2014 - linkindeed, Civ V was a great CPU benchmark (akin to Supreme Commander), and the performance scaled quite well with added cores...
SuperVeloce - Friday, October 24, 2014 - linkCiv V scaled well with up to 4 cores if my memory serves me right. Not much more with 6+ cores.
just4U - Friday, October 24, 2014 - linkI was playing civ5 this past week while waiting for the new game... and you know... even on my 4790K it bogs down on big maps.
jaredjeya - Friday, October 24, 2014 - linkEspecially as turn time and not FPS becomes the limiting factor late into the game. Anything above 20fps is decent, but if turns take a minute then it's intolerable.
doronnac - Thursday, October 23, 2014 - linkMin. FPS should be tested as it's more important than average when almost all cards demonstrate more than playable performance even at 4K.
Mikemk - Thursday, October 23, 2014 - link"the built-in benchmark basically represents something of a worst-case scenario for performance"
JarredWalton - Thursday, October 23, 2014 - linkI have logs including minimum FPS, but time constraints kept me from spending too much effort analyzing them. What I can say is that when the game zooms all the way out during the benchmark sequence, that's when the minimum occurs and it's usually around 2/3 of the average FPS. GPUs with less VRAM may also be hit harder though. Let me see if I can add some charts for minimums, now that I've managed to get some sleep. :-)