Sims 4 Benchmarked

Maximizing the target audience. With the game's brightly colored visuals and low hardware demands, the creators of Sims 4 want to reach as wide a player base as possible. Was the undertaking a success? Read our benchmark article to find out.

Florian Glaser, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (translated by Ariana Brodsky), Published 09/10/2014 🇩🇪 🇵🇱

For the original German article, see here.

Graphics

While the predecessor game's graphics looked at least somewhat realistic, in their fourth title, EA gives the extremely popular Sims series a very sketch-like appearance. Similar to Diablo III, the graphics are rather reminiscent of a comic. This design choice is completely understandable, as with it the developers can easily hide weaknesses in the graphics.

In addition to the lower texture and effect quality, the number of polygons is not exactly sumptuous. In the year 2014, gamers who expect a lot of a title's graphics hope for a lot more. The size of the levels also leaves something to be desired (did someone say SimCity?) When moving to other parts of the city, the user is confronted with a loading screen. It is hardly surprising, then, that the game's hardware demands are quite modest. Of course EA is interested in reaching as many customers as possible. Considering the high performance, however, the developers could have ventured to do a little more graphics-wise.

Still, the imagery fits wonderfully with the typical Sims situational comedy. Along with the background sounds, the animations also turned out well and are extremely funny. The graphics when changing perspectives, on the other hand, did not turn out quite so well. If the player flies over houses with the camera or zooms in or out drastically, the game often produces unattractive "image errors" (objects pop up, object wallpapers make a visible switch, etc.). The image shading is especially affected by this, as you can see in our benchmark video (watch the trees).

In terms of the options menu, the range of available settings is more or less average. The "Graphics" tab has 10 items, most of which can be adjusted across a gradation with several steps. For our benchmarks, we used the comfortable presets that automatically adjust the rest of the options. Apart from that, in the graphics menu the player can change the display mode, resolution and refresh rate. Vertical synchronization (eliminates image tearing) is also present.

While at minimum details, the game is fairly ugly (blue "fog of war" when the camera is in a high position), at medium to maximum settings, the graphics certainly have their charm. The differences in performance between the "High" and "Ultra" settings are only noticeable on weaker graphics cards. Speaking of the GPU: Except at low details (here the CPU is often the limiting factor), Sims 4 is rather lays most of the burden on the graphics card. By the way, due to the built-in limit, the framerate cannot exceed 200 fps.

Benchmark

Although we made a concerted effort to find a fair and sensible benchmark sequence, but it is also impossible to generate consistent results with "The Sims 4". Due to the manually directed camera movement, unfortunately the sequence can never be 100% identical. As a result, every once in a while GPUs place in higher positions than models that are actually stronger -- at least at moderate settings. Otherwise, our benchmark should give a pretty good idea of a Sims player's everyday experience will look like. In order to achieve that, the sequence is comprised of about 50% close-ups and 50% camera movements from a distance.

As we have already indicated, "The Sims 4" does not require a high-end computer. At maximum details and 1920x1080 pixels, the game runs fluidly with just a graphics card from the upper middle class. The DDR3 version of the GeForce GTX 850M managed 48 fps. For higher settings in Full HD, a mid-range chip more towards the inexpensive end will suffice, for instance the GeForce GT 750M (~40 fps). On the other hand, entry-level GPUs on par with the Intel HD Graphics 4600 cannot handle more than 1366x768 pixels and the "Medium" setting. Almost every notebook can render the game fluidly at low details (unless the device is 500 years old).

Sims 4
1920x1080 Ultra Preset 1920x1080 High Preset 1366x768 Medium Preset 1024x768 Low Preset
GeForce GTX 780 Ti, 3770K Desktop-PC	90.4 (59^min) fps ∼47% 92.3 (71^min) fps ∼48% 102.1 (77^min) fps ∼51% 168.9 (141^min) fps ∼84%
Radeon R9 290X, 2600K, Samsung SSD 840 Pro 256GB MZ7PD256HAFV-0Z000 Sapphire Tri-X R9 290X Desktop	93 (63^min) fps ∼48%
Radeon R9 280X, 3770K Desktop-PC	79.4 (61^min) fps ∼41% 83.8 (66^min) fps ∼44% 104.8 (76^min) fps ∼52% 187.9 (161^min) fps ∼93%
GeForce GTX 760, 3770K Desktop-PC	77.8 (56^min) fps ∼40% 83.7 (62^min) fps ∼44% 97 (63^min) fps ∼48% 183 (126^min) fps ∼91%
GeForce GTX 880M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	73.5 (55^min) fps ∼38% 80.8 (63^min) fps ∼42% 99.6 (67^min) fps ∼50% 150.9 (120^min) fps ∼75%
GeForce GTX 780M, 4700MQ Schenker W503	72.8 (52^min) fps ∼38% 80.5 (59^min) fps ∼42% 94.2 (65^min) fps ∼47% 143.9 (108^min) fps ∼72%
GeForce GTX 870M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	65.8 (43^min) fps ∼34% 73.7 (58^min) fps ∼38% 96.1 (65^min) fps ∼48% 156.2 (118^min) fps ∼78%
GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 3770K Desktop-PC	63 (44^min) fps ∼33% 71.9 (54^min) fps ∼37% 94.8 (71^min) fps ∼47% 172.5 (104^min) fps ∼86%
GeForce GTX 770M, 4700MQ Schenker W503	60.6 (44^min) fps ∼31% 69.2 (51^min) fps ∼36% 92.7 (66^min) fps ∼46% 144.8 (111^min) fps ∼72%
Radeon R9 M290X, 4700MQ Schenker W504	57 (41^min) fps ∼30% 59.7 (46^min) fps ∼31% 81.6 (63^min) fps ∼41% 111.6 (90^min) fps ∼56%
GeForce GTX 860M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	54.9 (38^min) fps ∼28% 67.3 (48^min) fps ∼35% 90.9 (70^min) fps ∼45% 155.7 (111^min) fps ∼77%
GeForce GTX 765M, 4700MQ Schenker W503	49.8 (35^min) fps ∼26% 61 (46^min) fps ∼32% 83.2 (61^min) fps ∼41% 148.5 (104^min) fps ∼74%
GeForce GTX 850M, 4340M Schenker M504	47.8 (33^min) fps ∼25% 53.7 (40^min) fps ∼28% 82.7 (60^min) fps ∼41% 159.1 (124^min) fps ∼79%
GeForce GT 750M, 4702MQ Schenker M503	31 (22^min) fps ∼16% 39.9 (30^min) fps ∼21% 61.8 (44^min) fps ∼31% 121.1 (97^min) fps ∼60%
Iris Pro Graphics 5200, 4750HQ, Intel SSD 525 Series SSDMCEAC180B3 SCHENKER S413	24.3 (16^min) fps ∼13% 34.7 (26^min) fps ∼18% 68 (49^min) fps ∼34% 178 (153^min) fps ∼89%
Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), A10-7850K, Samsung SSD 470 Series MZ-5PA256/EU A10-7850K Asus A88-XM-PLUS	24.1 (8^min) fps ∼12% 29.5 (20^min) fps ∼15% 51 (34^min) fps ∼25% 126 (77^min) fps ∼63%
GeForce GT 740M, 4200M HP Envy 15-j011sg	23.3 (16^min) fps ∼12% 32.8 (23^min) fps ∼17% 65.6 (38^min) fps ∼33% 128.2 (107^min) fps ∼64%
Radeon HD 8650G, A10-5750M, Samsung SSD 470 Series MZ-5PA256/EU Pumori Test Platform (A10-5750M)	16.7 (9^min) fps ∼9% 19.3 (15^min) fps ∼10% 36 (22^min) fps ∼18% 82 (60^min) fps ∼41%
HD Graphics 4600, 4700MQ Schenker W503	12.4 (8^min) fps ∼6% 18.8 (14^min) fps ∼10% 40.3 (32^min) fps ∼20% 139.8 (125^min) fps ∼70%
GeForce GT 720M, 4200M, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-22JC3T0 MSI CX61-i572M	21.5 (0^min) fps ∼11% 26.2 (0^min) fps ∼14% 55.3 (0^min) fps ∼28% 166.3 (0^min) fps ∼83%

Test Systems

Our four test devices are courtesy of Schenker Technologies (mysn.de):

W504 (Core i7-4700MQ, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GTX 860M, GTX 870M, GTX 880M, 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)

Windows 7 (64-bit edition) is installed on each of these notebooks. A further thank you goes to Micron for the 480 GB Crucial M500.

Another test device was provided by Nvidia:

HP Envy 15-j011sg (Core i5-4200M, 12 GB DDR3, GeForce GT 740M)

GPU drivers used: Nvidia 340.52, AMD 14.7 RC3, Intel 10.18.10.3907

There are also benchmarks from other notebooks, possibly with different drivers.

Overview

Read all 2 comments / answer

Loading Comments

Comment on this article

Editor of the original article: Florian Glaser - Managing Editor Gaming Laptops - 615 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2009

I discovered my interest in computers in my childhood, growing up with MS-DOS and Windows 3.1 in the early 1990s. I was especially fascinated with computer games, even from an early age. From Monkey Island through Lands of Lore to Doom, I tried every game I could get my hands on. I have been working for Notebookcheck since 2009 with my focus mostly being on high-performance gaming laptops.

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > Archive of our own reviews > Sims 4 Benchmarked

Florian Glaser, 2014-09-10 (Update: 2021-05-18)

Legend
5	Stutters – 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.
30	Fluent – Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, this game should run at or above 25fps
40	Fluent – Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, this game should run at or above 35fps
60	Fluent – Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, this game should run at or above 58fps
	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.
?	Uncertain – 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.