Notebookcheck

Evolve Benchmarked

Florian Glaser (translated by Martina Osztovits), 02/25/2015

Exciting idea. After Left 4 Dead, Turtle Rock Studios published their next multimedia experiment. This time they use the CryEngine from the shooter expert Crytek instead of Valve's Source engine. Our benchmark test will reveal how this impacts hardware requirements.

Evolve Logo

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a loyal reader of notebookcheck? Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Especially wanted:
Review Editor
 - Details here
News Editor - Details here

German-English-Translator - Details here

For the original German article, see here.

Technology

Unlike Crysis 3Evolve is based on the fourth generation instead of the third generation of the CryEngine, which, for example, shows its muscles in Ryse: Son of Rome. Compared to the previous big project of the developers, graphics improved tremendously.

Evolve
Evolve
Evolve
Evolve
Evolve
Evolve

While textures and polygon count are rather adequate in Left 4 Dead, Evolve is much more hardware-intensive. Apart from the sharpness of objects, the quality of the effects, including smoke, fire, light, or other particles (energy rays, etc.) is particularly convincing. The characters appear more detailed and more lovingly designed, too. The level of Battlefield 4 or Crysis 3 is not completely reached, but the performance is very good for a game designed for multi-player fights. Points of critique are only the level design and the color choice, which is slightly too monotonous or dull over time.

Evolve
Evolve
Evolve
Evolve
Evolve
Evolve

We appreciate that changing the graphics settings does not require restarting the game (not all settings can be changed when a game is running). Speaking about settings: The video menu has just three options. Apart from the display mode, you can only change resolution, gamma value and the overall quality (four presets). The advanced graphics menu offers more options, including five detail or quality controls, vertical synchronization, and various anti-aliasing modes. Those owning an Nvidia notebook can select the significantly better TXAA instead of SMAA, SMAA 1TX or FXAA.

Evolve
Evolve
Evolve
Evolve
Evolve
Evolve

We were not completely satisfied with Evolve in terms of technology. For example, the frame rate sometimes falls by above 50% during effect-intensive fights. Many systems generally suffered from stuttering, although their performance was sufficient on paper (especially with low and medium settings). In addition, loading and game starts should be bit faster. Hence, the developers should spend a little more time on optimization. So far, the title does not run completely smoothly.

Low Settings
Low Settings
Medium Settings
Medium Settings
High Settings
High Settings
Ultra Settings
Ultra Settings
Low Settings
Low Settings
Medium Settings
Medium Settings
High Settings
High Settings
Ultra Settings
Ultra Settings

Benchmark

We use the beginning of the monster tutorial as the benchmark sequence. After a short camera movement, "Goliath" runs, jumps and climbs through quite a linear jungle. As soon as the monster reaches a higher plateau, we stop recording with the Fraps tool and record minimum and average fps. The latter roughly corresponds to what you can expect from the game. The sequence is neither undemanding nor particularly computationally intensive. Comfortable gameplay should be possible with a benchmark result of 35+.

Results

Since the graphics quality can only be reduced to some extent (even the low preset still looks acceptable), the hardware requirements are steep. Entry-level or older mid-range GPUs like the HD Graphics 4600 or the GeForce GT 740M are generally too weak for the title. At least a GeForce GT 750M is required for low details and a resolution of 1024x768 pixels. If you want to enjoy medium settings and 1366x768 to 1600x900 pixels, you'll have to own a powerful all-round chip like the GeForce GTX 850M. 1920x1080 pixels and the (very) high preset won't run smoothly with weaker graphics cards than a GeForce GTX 780M or GTX 870M.

Unfortunately, we could not test the Radeon R9 M290X, since the driver installation was messed up and not even a system restore could resolve this problem. In the coming weeks, the results from other AMD chips will follow (most of them low-end and mid-range). All benchmarks considered, Evolve is very demanding and definitely calls for a real gaming notebook with higher settings.

Discussion
Evolve
    1920x1080 Very High Graphics Quality AA:1TX SM     1920x1080 High Graphics Quality AA:FX     1366x768 Medium Graphics Quality     1024x768 Low Graphics Quality
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, 3770K
Desktop-PC
87.1 (min: 67) fps ∼49%
97.6 (min: 70) fps ∼49%
97.8 (min: 60) fps ∼43%
104.3 (min: 65) fps ∼38%
AMD Radeon R9 290X, 4790K
Sapphire Radeon R9 290X Tri-X OC
103 (min: 32) fps ∼58%
125 fps ∼63%
AMD Radeon R9 280X, 3770K
Desktop-PC
75.1 (min: 65) fps ∼42%
85.9 (min: 68) fps ∼43%
97.1 (min: 69) fps ∼43%
106.1 (min: 66) fps ∼39%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
61.9 (min: 44) fps ∼35%
67.1 (min: 51) fps ∼34%
87.7 (min: 64) fps ∼39%
93.6 (min: 65) fps ∼34%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
51.4 (min: 41) fps ∼29%
57.5 (min: 47) fps ∼29%
86.9 (min: 60) fps ∼39%
94.9 (min: 59) fps ∼35%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
48.6 (min: 42) fps ∼27%
55.7 (min: 48) fps ∼28%
83.2 (min: 57) fps ∼37%
91.3 (min: 59) fps ∼33%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M, 4700MQ
Schenker W503
45.2 (min: 40) fps ∼25%
50.9 (min: 44) fps ∼26%
81.8 (min: 59) fps ∼36%
89.9 (min: 62) fps ∼33%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
40 (min: 35) fps ∼22%
46 (min: 40) fps ∼23%
78 (min: 57) fps ∼35%
88 (min: 62) fps ∼32%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M, 4700MQ
Schenker W503
28.8 (min: 25) fps ∼16%
32.8 (min: 28) fps ∼16%
60.4 (min: 55) fps ∼27%
74.7 (min: 63) fps ∼27%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
27.6 (min: 24) fps ∼16%
32.4 (min: 28) fps ∼16%
61.1 (min: 55) fps ∼27%
82.4 (min: 72) fps ∼30%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M, 4340M
Schenker M504
23 (min: 20) fps ∼13%
26.9 (min: 22) fps ∼14%
51.3 (min: 46) fps ∼23%
69 (min: 60) fps ∼25%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M, 4700MQ
Schenker W503
21.8 (min: 19) fps ∼12%
24.9 (min: 21) fps ∼13%
46.1 (min: 41) fps ∼20%
62.1 (min: 56) fps ∼23%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M, 4702MQ
Schenker M503
12.2 (min: 9) fps ∼7%
14.3 (min: 12) fps ∼7%
27.2 (min: 22) fps ∼12%
35.9 (min: 29) fps ∼13%
AMD Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), A10-7850K
A10-7850K Asus A88-XM-PLUS
13 (min: 11) fps ∼7%
15.7 (min: 14) fps ∼8%
27.5 (min: 22) fps ∼12%
35.7 (min: 29) fps ∼13%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200, 4750HQ
Schenker S413
12 (min: 10) fps ∼6%
21 (min: 11) fps ∼9%
28 (min: 20) fps ∼10%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M, 2637M
Acer Aspire M3-581TG
9.2 (min: 4) fps ∼5%
20.2 (min: 18) fps ∼9%
26.3 (min: 23) fps ∼10%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M, 4200M
HP Envy 15-j011sg
8.4 (min: 5) fps ∼5%
10.1 (min: 7) fps ∼5%
19.8 (min: 13) fps ∼9%
26.5 (min: 17) fps ∼10%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M, 4200M
MSI CX61-i572M
7.1 fps ∼4%
13.7 fps ∼6%
18.7 fps ∼7%
AMD Radeon HD 8650G, A10-5750M
Pumori Test Platform (A10-5750M)
18.5 (min: 15) fps ∼7%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M, 3720QM
Asus N56VM
6.3 (min: 3) fps ∼3%
12 (min: 10) fps ∼5%
16.2 (min: 14) fps ∼6%
Intel HD Graphics 4600, 4700MQ
Schenker W503
11 (min: 9) fps ∼5%
14.7 (min: 12) fps ∼5%
Intel Iris Graphics 5100, 4258U
Apple MacBook Pro Retina 13 inch 2013-10
14.4 (min: 8) fps ∼6%
19.1 (min: 15) fps ∼7%

Test Systems

Four of our test devices stem from Schenker Technologies (mysn.de):

  • W504 (Core i7-4700MQ, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GTX 860M, GTX 870M, GTX 880M, GTX 970M, GTX 980M, Radeon R9 M290X)
  • W503 (Core i7-4700MQ, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GTX 765M, GTX 770M, GTX 780M)
  • M504 (Core i5-4340M, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GTX 850M)
  • M503 (Core i7-4702MQ, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GT 750M)

Each of these notebooks has Windows 7 64-bit installed.

Nvidia provided us with further test devices:

In addition, Intel provided us with the:

  • Schenker S413 (Core i7-4750HQ, 8 GB DDR3, Iris Pro Graphics 5200)

The desktop computers house CPUs/APUs from Intel and AMD, SSDs from Micron, Intel, and Samsung, motherboards from Intel and Asus and graphics cards from Nvidia and AMD.

Used GPU driver: Nvidia 347.52, AMD 14.12, Intel 15.36.14.64.4080

Overview

Show Restrictions
Pos      Model                                     Evolve
 Evolve (2015)
low
1024x768
Low Graphics Quality
med.
1366x768
Medium Graphics Quality
high
1920x1080
High Graphics Quality
FXAA
ultra
1920x1080
Very High Graphics Quality
1TX SMAA
 6NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 SLI (Laptop)
274.8
225.7
199
177.8
 13NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
104.3
97.8
97.6
87.1
 14NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop)
222.82
190.552
114.652
101.32
 17NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI
189.3
178.3
130.7
117.2
 22NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
211.4
176.4
94.6
85.7
 27AMD Radeon R9 290X
125
103
 34NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M
123.654
114.054
76.84
68.254
 36AMD Radeon R9 280X
106.1
97.1
85.9
75.1
 38NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
159.4
117.9
65.6
57.1
 41NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
126.352
102.652
62.93
55.63
 50AMD Radeon R9 M295X
132.7
89.4
61
53.3
 55AMD Radeon R7 370
132.44
99.63
56.48
49.07
 57NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M
91.3
83.2
55.7
48.6
 58NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950
133.8
98.7
53
46.7
 62NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M
89.9
81.8
50.9
45.2
 63NVIDIA Quadro K5100M
103.2
79.1
43.4
38.1
 67NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
115.32
84.052
46.13
40.53
 68NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M
88
78
46
40
 87NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
86.24
65.65
35.57
31.27
Pos      Model                                     Evolve
lowmed.highultra
 93NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M
74.7
60.4
32.8
28.8
 94NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M
82.4
61.352
32.62
28.52
 103NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
67.452
48.73
263
23.052
 106NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
67.952
50.32
26.252
22.52
 108AMD Radeon R9 M280X
59
44.5
23.9
20.8
 111AMD Radeon HD 6870
60
52
29.2
25.7
 113NVIDIA GeForce 945M
59.9
36.8
20.9
18
 114NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M
62.1
46.1
24.9
21.8
 133NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 768MB
51
39.3
19.3
16
 136NVIDIA Quadro K3100M
54.9
42.1
23.2
20.5
 138AMD Radeon R9 M370X
62.5
40.4
21.6
18.5
 163NVIDIA GeForce 845M
27.2
20
10.3
10.1
 166AMD Radeon R9 M265X
32.3
25.6
15.5
12.8
 175NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M
35.9
27.2
14.3
12.2
 177NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
36.1
25.6
 178NVIDIA Quadro K1100M
27.2
21.3
11.4
10.4
 179NVIDIA GeForce 940M
34.84
25.24
13.73
11.93
 181AMD Radeon R9 M375
41.1
31.1
16.7
 188NVIDIA GeForce 840M
35.72
25.42
13.352
11.052
 194AMD Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
35.7
27.5
15.7
13
Pos      Model                                     Evolve
lowmed.highultra
 195Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
28
21
12
 196AMD Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
31.8
24.7
13.6
 197NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M
26.5
19.8
10.1
8.4
 198NVIDIA GeForce 930M
32.82
23.62
 200NVIDIA GeForce 830M
29.5
21.5
11.2
8.1
 218AMD Radeon R7 M260X
19.6
14.3
7.8
6.9
 228AMD Radeon R7 M270
30.72
23.12
12.82
10.952
 229AMD Radeon R7 M265
34.8
26.2
14.8
13
 233NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M
26.3
20.2
9.2
 234AMD Radeon R7 (Kaveri)
26.7
20.4
10.6
8.8
 235AMD Radeon R8 M365DX
27.4
20.1
11.1
 239AMD Radeon R7 M360
27.9
20.5
11.2
9.6
 251AMD Radeon R7 M340
26
16.2
9.8
6.1
 252NVIDIA GeForce 920M
25.43
18.83
9.83
7.23
 254Intel HD Graphics 530
15.52
11.252
6.3
5.7
 257AMD Radeon R7 M260
25.4
19.3
10.3
 260AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo)
19.3
14.1
7.8
 291Intel HD Graphics 5600
19
13.5
7.7
6.7
 317AMD Radeon HD 8650G
18.5
 322NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M
16.2
12
6.3
Pos      Model                                     Evolve
lowmed.highultra
 325AMD Radeon R5 M335
22.2
14.5
8.5
5.2
 327AMD Radeon R5 M330
20.1
15
8.3
 328AMD Radeon R5 M255
26.2
19.5
10.4
8.7
 332Intel HD Graphics 520
11.1
8
 333Intel Iris Graphics 6100
19.92
14.72
8.22
6.32
 334NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
18.7
13.7
7.1
 336AMD Radeon R5 M240
23
17.5
 345Intel HD Graphics 6000
18.7
13.5
 348Intel Iris Graphics 5100
19.1
14.4
 353Intel HD Graphics 4600
13.32
9.82
 355Intel HD Graphics 5500
13.83
10.23
6.452
6.1
 366Intel HD Graphics 5000
12.7
9.6
5.5
2.9
 399Intel HD Graphics 4400
13.8
10.1
 429Intel HD Graphics 5300
7
5.1
2.8
1.1
 438AMD Radeon HD 7480D
10.7
 439Intel HD Graphics 4000
12.2
 447AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)
12.7
9.2
 448AMD Radeon R4 (Beema)
11.1
7.5
 476AMD Radeon HD 8330
8.7
6.4
 497Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)
5.4
3.9
Pos      Model                                     Evolve
lowmed.highultra
 507Intel HD Graphics (Haswell)
7.7
5.7
 608Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
3.2
1.7
* Smaller values are better. / * Approximate position

 

Legend
5Stutters – This game is very likely to stutter and have poor frame rates. Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, average frame rates are expected to fall below 25fps
May Stutter – This graphics card has not been explicitly tested on this game. Based on interpolated information from surrounding graphics cards of similar performance levels, stutters and poor frame rates are expected.
30Fluent – Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, this game should run at or above 25fps
40Fluent – Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, this game should run at or above 35fps
May Run Fluently – This graphics card has not been explicitly tested on this game. Based on interpolated information from surrounding graphics cards of similar performance levels, fluent frame rates are expected.
123Uncertain – This graphics card experienced unexpected performance issues during testing for this game. A slower card may be able to achieve better and more consistent frame rates than this particular GPU running the same benchmark scene.
Uncertain – This graphics card has not been explicitly tested on this game and no reliable interpolation can be made based on the performances of surrounding cards of the same class or family.
The value in the fields displays the average frame rate of all values in the database. Move your cursor over the value to see individual results.
Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment this article:
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Evolve Benchmarked
Florian Glaser, 2015-02-25 (Update: 2015-02-25)