Notebookcheck

FIFA 17 Notebook and Desktop Benchmarks

Florian Glaser (translated by Vinay Pradhan), 10/14/2016

Engine Switch. Every year, football fans get to choose between the two giants, Pro Evolution Soccer and FIFA. The latter has just been released in its 17th iteration with gleaming graphics. We ran FIFA 17 on multiple notebook and desktop GPUs to check how well the game runs.

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
Russian Translator
 - Details here

For the original German article, see here.

Engine

What do FIFA 17, Mirror's Edge CatalystStar Wars BattlefrontNeed for SpeedDragon Age Inquisition and Battlefield 4 all have in common? They are all produced by EA studios and are based on the Frostbite 3 engine, made by DICE. Like its Frostbite brethren, the new FIFA game has good graphics, but the overall result is not as spectacular as fans may have wished for.

At the normal viewing distance, there are no noticeable changes to the graphics between FIFA 16 and the current edition. The predecessor used the Ignite engine, which fans should know from FIFA 14. In close-ups (Cutscenes, etc.), it is very clear that the game has been tuned up. The lighting, shadows and reflections have been improved to provide more detailed in-game models. Frostbite 3 has even increased the level of detail in the audience/crowd.

FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17

The atmosphere of FIFA games is always good, thanks to original teams, fan chants and cool video shorts. The game feels like a live football broadcast. The professional commentators add to the authenticity, but, after a while, they start repeating themselves. After a short trial, we were impressed with the game. The animations and KI have improved since the predecessor.

However, FIFA 17 seems quite pale/"milky" from a distance (the next installment should have a more realistic color tone). Up close, the colors are much crisper and add to the virtual experience. When the camera zooms in during replay scenes, the frame rate is limited to 30 fps on most systems (half the frames of the screen). This limitation cannot be removed by deactivating the 60 fps frame lock in the settings.

FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17

Many games using the Frostbite 3 engine offer extensive options in the graphics menu. FIFA 17 is an exception to the rule as it provides only a handful of settings. The user can adjust the resolution, the picture mode, the frame locks, overall quality and anti-aliasing. EA only offers MSAA, which is known to be demanding on the hardware. However, during our test, the game ran fluidly despite 2x and 4x MSAA. In fact, the fps drop was so small with MSAA active, that we suspect this feature is not fully working. On the low preset, the blades of grass disappear. Higher presets simulate the grass but do not differ in much else. FIFA 17 looks good from medium upwards.

We did not love the mouse and keyboard interface, as every now and then, the game shows gamepad buttons and the standard controls are suboptimal. In short: you should use a controller.

FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17
FIFA 17

Let us take another look at the graphics settings. The developer only allows access to this menu while outside of the game, to prevent crashes or other bugs. We observed such issues only on Intel GPUs (missing faces, freezes, frame drops, ...). Unfortunately, FIFA 17 only started on certain PCs after multiple attempts. This may be due to a defective version of .NET Framework (also the case with the predecessor).

The game has gotten a lot bigger. FIFA 16 needed 13 GB, but the 17 edition takes up to 30 GB. Overall, the game does a fine job.

Benchmark

The benchmark for our previous FIFA tests was a kick-off game between FC Bayern München and Borussia Dortmund in the "Allianz Arena". The game settings are kept the same for each iteration of FIFA: 6-minute first half, beginner level difficulty, summer, 2 PM in the afternoon and clear weather (everything else is set to normal or default).

As can be seen in the video, we just passed the ball around and tried to stay away from actions, which would trigger a replay (goals, fouls, etc.). However, despite these settings, the game performance fluctuated with every run. As such, these results are not entirely accurate. For example, you could experience lower frame rates on high settings than on ultra settings.

In general, the game can run at 60 frames per second. As soon as we reach the 7-minute mark, we stop the recording with the Fraps tool. To be safe from stutters and have enough performance reserves, we recommend at least 50 to 60 fps in the benchmark.

Results

Weaker notebook can run FIFA 17, as despite the new engine, the requirement has stayed more or less the same. As before, processor GPUs, such as, the HD Graphics 4600, are capable of running the game at 1280x720 pixels and low details. Dedicated AMD or Nvidia GPUs from the low to medium spectrum (GeForce 920M940M) can run the game at 1366x768 pixels and medium preset.

The game is a lot more demanding on the processor. As in the predecessor, if the CPU is not strong enough, the game will suffer, despite having enough frames. FIFA 17 seems to prefer a quad-core CPU. Our GeForce 920M sample with Pentium CPU did not start at first and a Kaby Lake dual-core i5-7200U with integrated HD Graphics 620 could provide 55 fps, but only in slow motion, which means the game remains unplayable. Furthermore, the latest Intel graphics drivers (even beta) still cause graphics errors in the menus and the slow motion scenes. 

A mix of FHD and high to maximum settings, including anti-aliasing, requires a stronger multimedia card, like the Radeon R9 M280X. Real gaming GPUs are only needed for 4K settings. For 3840x2160 pixels and the high preset, the user will need a GeForce GTX 965M or a GeForce GTX 870M/880M to run smoothly.

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

Unlike most other games, the processor determines how well FIFA will run. Our desktop PC with a GeForce GTX 1060 and a Core i7-6700K ran the game fluidly with every setting. It performed much better than our Asus notebook, the G752VS with a GeForce GTX 1070 and a Core i7-6820HK. The GPUs become the bottleneck for entry- and middle-class platforms.

Due to the restrictive activation system of Origin, we need a lot of time to test this game on all our systems. In the next few weeks, we should be able to add more graphics cards to the comparison table.

Discussion
FIFA 17
    3840x2160 High Preset     1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:4xMS     1920x1080 High Preset     1920x1080 Medium Preset     1366x768 Medium Preset     1280x720 Low Preset
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop), 4790K
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition
213 (min: 168) fps ∼69%
377 (min: 347) fps ∼100%
AMD Radeon R9 Fury, 4790K
XFX Radeon R9 Fury Pro
172 (min: 136) fps ∼56%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
Asus G752VS
163 (min: 143) fps ∼53%
302 (min: 269) fps ∼80%
309 (min: 279) fps ∼82%
323 (min: 301) fps ∼90%
360 (min: 328) fps ∼84%
370 (min: 331) fps ∼84%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop), 6700K
Desktop PC
127 (min: 106) fps ∼41%
304 (min: 281) fps ∼81%
314 (min: 291) fps ∼83%
360 (min: 319) fps ∼100%
397 (min: 371) fps ∼92%
438 (min: 397) fps ∼100%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, 6700K
Desktop PC
124 (min: 116) fps ∼40%
296 (min: 249) fps ∼79%
308 (min: 273) fps ∼81%
356 (min: 320) fps ∼99%
401 (min: 355) fps ∼93%
429 (min: 383) fps ∼98%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
73.2 (min: 59) fps ∼24%
165 (min: 148) fps ∼44%
165 (min: 153) fps ∼44%
165 (min: 153) fps ∼46%
176 (min: 164) fps ∼41%
184 (min: 168) fps ∼42%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
62.7 (min: 53) fps ∼20%
153 (min: 131) fps ∼41%
160 (min: 143) fps ∼42%
172 (min: 159) fps ∼48%
190 (min: 178) fps ∼44%
194 (min: 180) fps ∼44%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
54.5 (min: 39) fps ∼18%
141 (min: 108) fps ∼37%
146 (min: 123) fps ∼39%
165 (min: 146) fps ∼46%
208 (min: 193) fps ∼48%
244 (min: 229) fps ∼56%
AMD Radeon R7 370, 4790K
MSI Gaming R7 370 2GB
63.9 (min: 54) fps ∼21%
147 (min: 108) fps ∼39%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
MSI GE72 965M Ti
50.1 (min: 40) fps ∼16%
138 (min: 114) fps ∼37%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
51.4 (min: 43) fps ∼17%
119 (min: 103) fps ∼32%
128 (min: 107) fps ∼34%
152 (min: 124) fps ∼42%
197 (min: 182) fps ∼46%
223 (min: 207) fps ∼51%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 4720HQ
Schenker XMG A505
41.9 (min: 33) fps ∼14%
115 (min: 96) fps ∼31%
123 (min: 108) fps ∼32%
134 (min: 114) fps ∼37%
190 (min: 168) fps ∼44%
215 (min: 185) fps ∼49%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
37.2 (min: 35) fps ∼12%
91.4 (min: 77) fps ∼24%
95.2 (min: 81) fps ∼25%
117 (min: 96) fps ∼33%
155 (min: 127) fps ∼36%
205 (min: 187) fps ∼47%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
MSI PE60 2QD
35 (min: 28) fps ∼11%
95 (min: 77) fps ∼25%
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, 6700HQ
MSI CX72 6QD
42.3 (min: 32) fps ∼11%
44.3 (min: 33) fps ∼12%
89 fps ∼21%
129 fps ∼29%
NVIDIA GeForce 940M, 5700HQ
MSI GP62 2QD
13.4 (min: 10) fps ∼4%
42.1 (min: 33) fps ∼11%
42.9 (min: 33) fps ∼11%
AMD Radeon R9 M280X, FX-7600P
Asus N551ZU-CN007H
0 fps ∼0%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M, 4200M
MSI CX61-i572M
23 fps ∼6%
42 fps ∼10%
53 fps ∼12%
Intel HD Graphics 4600, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
42.2 (min: 36) fps ∼10%
59.1 (min: 46) fps ∼13%

Overview

Show Restrictions
Pos      Model                                     FIFA 17
 FIFA 17 (2016)
low
1280x720
Low Preset
med.
1366x768
Medium Preset
high
1920x1080
High Preset
ultra
1920x1080
Ultra Preset
4xMSAA
4k
3840x2160
High Preset
 1NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
373
393.5
378.9
367.7
309.9
 3NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 SLI (Laptop)
293
286
174
 4NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop)
377
2162
 5NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
378
360
208
 7NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop)
355
183
 8NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
370
360
254.52
2492
163
 10NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
345
158
 12AMD Radeon R9 Fury
172
 14NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
429
401
308
296
124
 20NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop)
438
397
314
304
127
 21*NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
232.73
216.23
198.63
197.93
50.7
 23AMD Radeon RX 480
429
431
334
323
135
 25NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
273
107
 26AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop)
295
135
 37NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M
184
176
165
165
73.2
 42NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
187
72
 43*NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
160
155
126.52
124.22
66.1
 44NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
194
190
160
153
62.7
 58AMD Radeon R7 370
147
63.9
Pos      Model                                     FIFA 17
lowmed.highultra4k
 60NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M
244
208
146
141
54.5
 68AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop)
169
63.4
 70*NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop)
157
61
 71*NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
224
199
144
131
 72NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
138
50.1
 73NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M
223
197
128
119
51.4
 75AMD Radeon HD 8970M
292.4
234.9
161.3
155.2
 90NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
181.32
161.352
1032
98.252
41.9
 95*AMD Radeon Pro 455
107
 97NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M
205
155
95.2
91.4
37.2
 106NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
95
35
 180NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
112.54
85.354
44.354
42.34
 182NVIDIA GeForce 940M
42.9
42.1
13.4
 207Intel Iris Graphics 540
61
72
 241*AMD Radeon R7 M460
83.8
70.3
36.1
34.1
 244AMD Radeon R7 M360
90.7
71.7
37.1
34.3
 259Intel HD Graphics 630
72
56.6
30.1
28.5
 261Intel HD Graphics 530
65
54.8
 267*Intel HD Graphics 620
59.62
50
26.4
 268AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo)
26.8
25.5
Pos      Model                                     FIFA 17
lowmed.highultra4k
 299Intel HD Graphics 5600
68
50.4
28.1
 334*AMD Radeon R5 M430
67.3
50.1
 336AMD Radeon R5 M255
93.5
68.1
35.5
33.8
 340Intel HD Graphics 520
61.552
50
 342NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
53
42
23
 361Intel HD Graphics 4600
57.052
42.62
22
 365*Intel HD Graphics 615
36.8
29.6
 407Intel HD Graphics 4400
33.9
22.3
12.8
* 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.

Test Systems

Desktop-PCs Custom Nvidia Custom AMD
Mainboard Asus Z170-A Asus Z97-Deluxe
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (Skylake) Intel Core i7-4790K (Haswell)
Graphics Card Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 (6 GB GDDR5)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 (4 GB GDDR5)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 (8 GB GDDR5X)
Asus GeForce GTX 980 Ti (6 GB GDDR5)
XFX Radeon R9 Fury (4 GB HBM)
Sapphire Radeon R9 290X (4 GB GDDR5)
Sapphire Radeon R9 280X (3 GB GDDR5)
MSI Radeon R7 370 (2 GB GDDR5)
RAM 2 x 8 GB DDR4-2133 2 x 4 GB DDR3-1600
Storage Device Crucial MX100 SSD (256 GB)
Crucial M500 SSD (480 GB)
OCZ Trion 100 SSD (480 GB)
OCZ Trion 150 SSD (960 GB)
Intel SSD 530 (240 GB)
OCZ Trion 100 SSD (480 GB)
OS Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Schenker Notebooks Schenker W504 Schenker XMG A505 Schenker S413
Mainboard Intel HM87 Intel HM87 Intel HM87
Processor Intel Core i7-4700MQ (Haswell) Intel Core i7-4720HQ (Haswell) Intel Core i7-4750HQ (Haswell)
Graphics Card Nvidia GeForce GTX 980M (8 GB GDDR5)
GTX 970M (6 GB GDDR5)
GTX 880M (8 GB GDDR5)
GTX 870M (6 GB GDDR5)
GTX 860M Kepler (4 GB GDDR5)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 960M (2 GB GDDR5) Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
RAM 2x 4 GB DDR3-1600 2x 4 GB DDR3-1600 2x 8 GB DDR3-1600
Storage Device Samsung SSD 840 EVO (250 GB) Micron M600 SSD (128 GB)
HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HDD (1.000 GB)
Intel SSD
OS Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit Windows 10 Home 64 Bit Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
MSI Notebooks MSI GE72 MSI PE60 MSI GP62 MSI CX61 MSI CX61
Mainboard Intel HM170 Intel HM170 Intel HM86 Intel HM86 Intel HM86
Processor Intel Core i7-6700HQ (Skylake) Intel Core i7-6700HQ (Skylake) Intel Core i7-5700HQ (Broadwell) Intel Celeron 2970M (Haswell) Intel Core i5-4200M (Haswell)
Graphics Card Nvidia GeForce GTX 965M 2016 (2 GB GDDR5) Nvidia GeForce GTX 950M (2 GB GDDR5) Nvidia GeForce 940M (2 GB DDR3) Nvidia GeForce 920M (2 GB DDR3) Nvidia GeForce GT 720M (2 GB DDR3)
RAM 1 x 8 GB DDR4-2133 2 x 4 GB DDR4-2133 1 x 8 GB DDR3-1600 1 x 8 GB DDR3-1600 1 x 8 GB DDR3-1600
Storage Device Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU SSD (128 GB)
WDC WD10JPVX HDD (1.000 GB)
OCZ Trion 100 SSD (480 GB)
Toshiba MQ01ABF050 HDD (500 GB) WDC Scorpio Blue HDD (1.000 GB)
OS Windows 10 Home 64 Bit Windows 10 Windows 10 Windows 10 Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit
Asus Notebooks Asus G752VS Asus N551ZU
Mainboard Intel CM236 AMD K15.1
Processor Intel Core i7-6820HK (Skylake) AMD FX-7600P (Kaveri)
Graphics Card Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 (8 GB GDDR5) AMD Radeon R9 M280X (4 GB GDDR5)
RAM 4 x 16 GB DDR4-2400 2 x 4 GB DDR3-1600
Storage Device Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7 SSD (512 GB) Samsung SSD 830 (256 GB)
OS Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit Windows 10 64 Bit
4K Monitor Nvidia Driver AMD Driver Intel Driver
2 x Asus PB287Q ForceWare 372.90 Crimson 16.9.2 15.40.28.4501
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment this article:
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > FIFA 17 Notebook and Desktop Benchmarks
Florian Glaser, 2016-10-14 (Update: 2016-10-18)