Gaming Benchmarks

F1 2013

First up is F1 2013 by Codemasters. I am a big Formula 1 fan in my spare time, and nothing makes me happier than carving up the field in a Caterham, waving to the Red Bulls as I drive by (because I play on easy and take shortcuts). F1 2013 uses the EGO Engine, and like other Codemasters games ends up being very playable on old hardware quite easily. In order to beef up the benchmark a bit, we devised the following scenario for the benchmark mode: one lap of Spa-Francorchamps in the heavy wet, the benchmark follows Jenson Button in the McLaren who starts on the grid in 22nd place, with the field made up of 11 Williams cars, 5 Marussia and 5 Caterham in that order. This puts emphasis on the CPU to handle the AI in the wet, and allows for a good amount of overtaking during the automated benchmark. We test at 1920x1080 on Ultra graphical settings.

F1 2013: 1080p Max, 2x GTX 770


Bioshock Infinite

Bioshock Infinite was Zero Punctuation’s Game of the Year for 2013, uses the Unreal Engine 3, and is designed to scale with both cores and graphical prowess. We test the benchmark using the Adrenaline benchmark tool and the Xtreme (1920x1080, Maximum) performance setting, noting down the average frame rates and the minimum frame rates.

Bioshock Infinite: 1080p Max, 2x GTX 770


Tomb Raider

The next benchmark in our test is Tomb Raider. Tomb Raider is an AMD optimized game, lauded for its use of TressFX creating dynamic hair to increase the immersion in game. Tomb Raider uses a modified version of the Crystal Engine, and enjoys raw horsepower. We test the benchmark using the Adrenaline benchmark tool and the Xtreme (1920x1080, Maximum) performance setting, noting down the average frame rates and the minimum frame rates.

Tomb Raider: 1080p Max, 2x GTX 770


Sleeping Dogs

Sleeping Dogs is a benchmarking wet dream – a highly complex benchmark that can bring the toughest setup and high resolutions down into single figures. Having an extreme SSAO setting can do that, but at the right settings Sleeping Dogs is highly playable and enjoyable. We run the basic benchmark program laid out in the Adrenaline benchmark tool, and the Xtreme (1920x1080, Maximum) performance setting, noting down the average frame rates and the minimum frame rates.

Sleeping Dogs: 1080p Max, 2x GTX 770


Battlefield 4

The EA/DICE series that has taken countless hours of my life away is back for another iteration, using the Frostbite 3 engine. AMD is also piling its resources into BF4 with the new Mantle API for developers, designed to cut the time required for the CPU to dispatch commands to the graphical sub-system. For our test we use the in-game benchmarking tools and record the frame time for the first ~70 seconds of the Tashgar single player mission, which is an on-rails generation of and rendering of objects and textures. We test at 1920x1080 at Ultra settings.

Battlefield 4: 1080p Max, 2x GTX 770


CPU Benchmarks ASUS TUF Z97 Mark S Conclusion
Comments Locked

45 Comments

View All Comments

  • Pontius Dilate - Monday, November 10, 2014 - link

    I really would have liked to see pictures of the board with the armor removed. The white PCB sounds like it could be interesting by itself.
  • xthetenth - Monday, November 10, 2014 - link

    Yeah, I'd be really interested in how it looks with just the white board, especially since it seems the thermal armor is removable. I think that'd look extra cool in a white case.
  • futurepastnow - Monday, November 10, 2014 - link

    Cheap, stupid looking plastic and cheap, stupid looking fans, neither of which serve any purpose. Looks like a winner.
  • JaredNihilist - Monday, November 10, 2014 - link

    Have the Z77 Sabertooth. Board fans still working fine and don't notice any extra noise from them. Albeit, I don't notice any benefit from them either, heat-wise - I'm sure they've stopped their fair share of dust.

    I didn't mind paying the extra for appearance though, I liked that it hid the rest of the board. I found the build the same as others, armour didn't impede anything. Once I upgrade though, shall definitely be removing the armour to customise its look - too scared to do it at the moment as my mainstay PC.
  • mexell - Monday, November 10, 2014 - link

    What a colossal waste of money. However, to each his (or her) own, I suppose.
  • nekoken - Monday, November 10, 2014 - link

    I'm pretty dubious about the thermal armor, and its efficacy. I have the Sabertooth 55i and Sabertooth 990FX motherboards and have been quite happy with them. They work quite well in a wide temperature range without that plastic wrap.

    I'm more than dubious about a modern motherboard that has two different on motherboard fans. I don't ever plan on owning another system that needs an active cooling solution for the stuff built into the motherboard (other than SoC systems.)
  • xthetenth - Monday, November 10, 2014 - link

    Is there any word on whether they'll release one without the thermal armor?
  • Miqunator - Tuesday, November 11, 2014 - link

    There is the Z97 mark 2 board that doesn't have the armor, haven't bothered to compare the other features so not sure if you lose something else too.
  • xthetenth - Tuesday, November 11, 2014 - link

    I'm hoping they'll do something like the mark 2 with the S coloring, because a white PCB looks super cool and they're promising it'll actually stay white. IIRC the 2 only misses out on an ethernet port and a significant fraction of the cost.
  • CrazyElf - Monday, November 10, 2014 - link

    The back might be worth something. It it will serve as a function similar to those GPU backplates, preventing warping from heavy CPU coolers and perhaps triple slot GPUs as well. Gimmicky, but potentially useful in that regard.

    As far as the front side, it's mostly pointless and maybe harmful (ex: the components may be cooler with the cover off). Dust I suppose, but if you have a DataVac, then this is pointless too. The only protection it might offer is if your screwdriver slips. It also will make removing GPUs a bit of a pain.

    The rest of the board I think is underwhelming for the price. At $300, I expect very high end VRMs and a PLX chip.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now