Notebookcheck

Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare Notebook and Desktop Benchmarks

Florian Glaser (translated by Andreas Osthoff), 11/12/2016

In the shadow of Battlefield 1. Activision launches the latest part of the extremely successful Call of Duty series almost immediately after the launch of EA's excellent World War I shooter. In this benchmark test, we will check whether the graphics can keep up with the main rival or if we are dealing with another frame rate fiasco similar to the predecessor Black Ops 3.

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

 

 

 

 

For the original German article, see here.

Graphics

The foundation is the IW engine, which was developed by the series founder Infinity Ward and was originally based on id Tech 3. It was lifted to a next-gen level with Advanced Warfare, but despite several optimizations and extended features over the last couple of years, you can still notice the age of the engine. The textures in particular usually cannot keep up with the razor-sharp Battlefield 1.

The lovely designed figures fall behind the rivals as well, which is also the case for the animations and effects. Most of them look bombastic in Infinite Warfare, but we would rarely call them high-quality. The developers also tend to exaggerate pretty often. When your own player is hit, the vision will blur so much that you can hardly see anything on the screen and often run blindly into disaster.

Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare

However, we have to say that there is currently no action title that could challenge Battlefield 1 in the graphics department. This includes Titanfall 2Mafia 3Deus Ex Mankind Divided or Far Cry Primal, all of which were launched in 2016. Not even graphics blockbusters like Doom or Rise of the Tomb Raider, which raised the bar quite a bit, can beat Battlefield 1. Compared to a typical first-person shooter, Infinite Warfare does have its graphical highlights and looks decent up to good. We especially like that the developers worked on the loading times. While you still had to wait for multiple minutes before a mission started in the predecessor, even with a Solid State Drive, the missions now start surprisingly quick even on HDDs.

In return, the shaders have to be preloaded when you launch the game for the first time or change the hardware or the system, respectively. The process, which can take up to a couple of minutes in extreme cases, can be stopped, but the game will give you a warning that the performance might be affected. You should have patience during the installation in general. The Steam version, which is used for this article, downloads around 55 GB, and Infinite Warfare will even need around 70 GB on your hard drive (Battlefield 1 "only" used 47 GB at launch).

Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare

There are some other negative things we noticed during the tests. We are not talking about the occasional graphics bugs (e. g. with smoke), but primarily the graphics menu, which – first negative aspect – does not include any presets at all. The different tabs make it easier in theory, but the handling is very uncomfortable in practice and time-consuming – even if the game has to be restarted after you changed the texture resolution. Speaking of resolution: Which developer had the idea to apply other resolutions immediately without confirming? If a monitor supports a lot of resolutions, it can feel like hours before you find the right one – including a black screen after every change.

Infinite Warfare can really convince with the number of options. The extended video menu has more than 20 settings, starting with field of view and lighting all the way up to anti-aliasing. Besides FXAA, you will also find 1X and T2X SMAA. All modes will unfortunately result in a certain blurriness, and SMAA works best. Attention tuning fans: Downsampling is supported as well. The implemented grain filter (Filmic Strength & Movie Grain) is certainly a matter of taste. We did not really like it.

Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare

One annoying issue was Infinite Warfare's enormous VRAM requirements. If the video memory of the GPU is insufficient, some settings will just be reduced during the game without asking. This was the case for the GeForce GTX 960M 2 GB VRAM and High details. Such paternalism will be a problem for many PC users – independent of the fact whether some settings do not run smoothly anyway.

Infinite Warfare does not run completely smooth in higher settings even with 3 or 4 GB VRAM though. Demanding gamers should at least have 6 GB VRAM, but the first-person shooter will only run completely without little stutters with 8 GB VRAM. Then there is also the integrated FPS lock. While the multiplayer limits at 91 frames per second, you can reach up to 125 FPS in single-player – annoying for users of 144 Hz displays.

Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare

Despite the mentioned weaknesses and limitations, the new title leaves a much more sophisticated impression compared to the very "prudish" Black Ops 3 at launch. As for the gameplay, you will get the familiar Call of Duty recipe, which is loved by some gamers because of its simplicity and hated by others because of its casual orientation.

The new version takes place in the future and offers some spectacular battles in space. The word spectacular also – as per usual for Call of Duty – fits for the staging, which consists of adrenaline filled and perfectly scripted fights in diverse levels. Thanks to the good pacing and the nice lighting effects, the whole game is very atmospheric. There are often also generous views with nice panoramic impressions.

Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare

The powerful sound and the prominent speakers do the rest to ensure the immersion into the science-fiction world. There is also quite a lot of story for a Call of Duty game. That the initial missions are directly linked to each other without time gaps does enhance the intensity even further, just like the cool cut-scenes.

However, you should not expect a brilliant narrative. In the end and similar to the majority of first-person shooters, Infinite Warfare is a very straight-forward experience where you do not have to think a lot. The bombastic experience can only somewhat compensate for the fact that Call of Duty in its core is outdated…both in terms of technology as well as gameplay.

Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare

Benchmark

We use the beginning of the campaign mission "Operation Port Armor: Civilian Terminal" for our benchmarks sequence. The name already suggests that this mission takes place at an airport, which is besieged by enemy troops. We record the first minute with the tool Fraps. The main character jumps out of a spaceship in a buggy and then drives along the airfield while enemies are shooting until the team crashes into a window and has to continue by foot.

This sequence is not only exemplary for the effects in Call of Duty but also the expected performance spectrum. The frame rates are usually much lower on foot and indoors compared to battles and other scenes in space. Because of the heavily fluctuating FPS number, it is tricky to give definitive hardware recommendations. Our sequence represents the average gameplay and not a worst-case scenario (the performance can drop by up to 1/3), so there should still be some headroom for more intense moments. You should be on the safe side as long as the system manages more than 50 FPS in the benchmark.

Results

Even though the graphics quality is a bit disappointing when you consider all the mentioned aspects, the hardware requirements are still similar to Battlefield 1 or even higher. If you want to play Infinite Warfare completely smoothly at 3840x2160 pixels and High details, you will need at least a GeForce GTX 1070. Slightly less powerful high-end chips are sufficient for the standard resolution of gaming notebooks. 1920x1080 pixels and Ultra details are already handled by a GeForce GTX 970M (FHD + High @GTX 965M).

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

GPUs like the GeForce GTX 960M can at least handle Medium settings in Full HD. Less expensive mid-range chips like the GeForce GTX 950M or 940M are still okay for 1366x768 pixels. Entry-level GPUs like the GeForce 920M are usually not powerful enough for Infinite Warfare. Annoying: The game crashes during launch on Intel GPUs (e. g. HD Graphics 4600). By the way, the processor is usually not a limiting factor thanks to the 125 FPS limit.

Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
    3840x2160 Ultra / On AA:T2X SM     3840x2160 High / On AA:FX     1920x1080 Ultra / On AA:T2X SM     1920x1080 High / On AA:FX     1920x1080 Normal / Off     1366x768 Normal / Off     1280x720 Low / Off
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop), 4790K
MSI Gaming X GeForce GTX 1080 Desktop PC
52.6 (min: 21) fps ∼93%
83 (min: 60) fps ∼84%
116 (min: 66) fps ∼93%
124 (min: 90) fps ∼99%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop), 4790K
MSI Gaming Z GeForce GTX 1070 OC Bios Desktop PC
56.6 (min: 41) fps ∼100%
65.4 (min: 46) fps ∼66%
119 (min: 101) fps ∼95%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
Asus G752VS
58.3 (min: 43) fps ∼59%
113 (min: 95) fps ∼90%
122 (min: 111) fps ∼98%
123 (min: 113) fps ∼100%
124 (min: 117) fps ∼99%
124 (min: 117) fps ∼99%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 4790K
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC
51.6 (min: 37) fps ∼91%
59.6 (min: 42) fps ∼60%
104 (min: 64) fps ∼83%
AMD Radeon R9 Fury, 4790K
XFX Radeon R9 Fury Pro
54.8 (min: 36) fps ∼55%
92 (min: 42) fps ∼74%
100 (min: 72) fps ∼80%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, 6700K
Desktop PC
46.9 (min: 34) fps ∼47%
90.2 (min: 56) fps ∼72%
106 (min: 83) fps ∼85%
121 (min: 104) fps ∼98%
124 (min: 111) fps ∼99%
125 (min: 109) fps ∼100%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop), 6700K
Desktop PC
44.1 (min: 32) fps ∼45%
93.9 (min: 67) fps ∼75%
105 (min: 73) fps ∼84%
121 (min: 103) fps ∼98%
122 (min: 105) fps ∼98%
122 (min: 104) fps ∼98%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
MSI GT62VR
42.1 (min: 30) fps ∼43%
90.8 (min: 68) fps ∼73%
104 (min: 80) fps ∼83%
120 (min: 102) fps ∼98%
124 (min: 106) fps ∼99%
125 (min: 114) fps ∼100%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970, 4790K
MSI Gaming Z GeForce GTX 970 Desktop PC
32.6 (min: 25) fps ∼33%
87 (min: 63) fps ∼70%
92 fps ∼74%
AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop), 4790K
MSI RX 470 Gaming X 4GB
45.3 (min: 28) fps ∼46%
90 fps ∼72%
AMD Radeon R9 290X, 4790K
Sapphire Radeon R9 290X Tri-X OC
47.7 (min: 37) fps ∼48%
86 (min: 38) fps ∼69%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
32.9 (min: 23) fps ∼33%
71.2 (min: 54) fps ∼57%
82.3 (min: 63) fps ∼66%
100 (min: 77) fps ∼81%
119 (min: 93) fps ∼95%
122 (min: 99) fps ∼98%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
25.4 (min: 16) fps ∼26%
55.8 (min: 29) fps ∼45%
65.7 (min: 47) fps ∼53%
83.6 (min: 60) fps ∼68%
108 (min: 80) fps ∼86%
114 (min: 89) fps ∼91%
AMD Radeon R7 370, 4790K
MSI Gaming R7 370 2GB
58 (min: 45) fps ∼46%
90 fps ∼72%
AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop), 4790K
XFX RX-460P4DFG5 Double Dissipation 4 GB
22.3 (min: 15) fps ∼23%
50.8 (min: 29) fps ∼41%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
MSI GE72 965M Ti
46.3 (min: 30) fps ∼37%
57.2 (min: 41) fps ∼46%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 4720HQ
Schenker XMG A505
14.4 (min: 8) fps ∼15%
33.4 (min: 22) fps ∼27%
40.7 (min: 28) fps ∼33%
52.3 (min: 35) fps ∼43%
72.1 (min: 51) fps ∼58%
78.4 (min: 58) fps ∼63%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
MSI PE60 2QD
28 (min: 19) fps ∼22%
31.9 (min: 22) fps ∼26%
57.3 (min: 39) fps ∼46%
65.1 (min: 46) fps ∼52%
NVIDIA GeForce 940M, 5700HQ
MSI GP62 2QD
18.5 (min: 14) fps ∼15%
24 (min: 15) fps ∼20%
33.3 (min: 23) fps ∼27%
37.9 (min: 27) fps ∼30%
NVIDIA GeForce 920M, 2970M
MSI CX61 2QC 2970M MS-16GD
fps ∼0%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M, 4200M
MSI CX61-i572M
14.6 fps ∼12%
16.5 fps ∼13%
Intel HD Graphics 4600, 4700MQ
Schenker W504
fps ∼0%
fps ∼0%

Overview

Show Restrictions
Pos      Model                                     Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
 Call of Duty Infinite Warfare (2016)
low
1280x720
Low / Off
med.
1366x768
Normal / Off
high
1920x1080
High / On
FXAA
ultra
1920x1080
Ultra / On
T2X SMAA
4k
3840x2160
High / On
FXAA
 1NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop)
125
99
 2NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
125
125
124
124
96
 3NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 SLI (Laptop)
124
124
76.1
 5NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop)
124
116
83
 6NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
1253
1253
75.73
 9NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop)
119
65.4
 10NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
124
124
120.654
113.54
58.3
 13NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
104
59.6
 15AMD Radeon R9 Fury
100
92
54.8
 17NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
125
124
106
90.2
46.9
 23NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop)
122
122
105
93.9
44.1
 27NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
124.052
123.652
97.754
86.34
42.1
 30NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
92
87
32.6
 33AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop)
90
45.3
 38AMD Radeon R9 290X
86
47.7
 45NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M
122
119
82.3
71.2
32.9
 50NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
113.8
102
67.62
58.92
27.4
 51NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
60.5
26.1
 52NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
114
108
65.7
55.8
25.4
Pos      Model                                     Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
lowmed.highultra4k
 63NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop)
55.4
 64NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
99
89
51.1
46.2
19.1
 67AMD Radeon R7 370
90
58
 77AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop)
50.8
22.3
 81NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
57.2
46.3
 85AMD Radeon HD 8970M
80.5
74.5
51.6
46.1
 97AMD Radeon Pro 460
85.5
46.3
40.6
 99NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
78.4
72.1
40.7
33.4
14.4
 106NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (Desktop)
73.7
67
36.3
32
14.4
 111*AMD Radeon Pro 555
40.6
 112*AMD Radeon Pro 455
40.2
34.4
 123*AMD Radeon Pro 450
58.7
36
 124NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
65.1
57.3
31.9
28
 200NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
40.22
36.82
19.82
16.4
 202NVIDIA GeForce 940M
37.9
33.3
18.5
 203NVIDIA GeForce 930MX
28.2
25.6
 208AMD Radeon R7 M445
27
24
16
 220AMD Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
32.4
 225*Intel Iris Plus Graphics 650
32.4
 231Intel Iris Graphics 540
30
27.3
Pos      Model                                     Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
lowmed.highultra4k
 264*AMD Radeon R7 M460
29.1
26.1
14.7
 273AMD Radeon R7 M440
26.4
22.6
12.1
 282Intel HD Graphics 630
24.1
 290*Intel HD Graphics 620
21.7
19.7
 357*AMD Radeon R5 M430
20.7
18.1
 359AMD Radeon R5 M255
28.2
23.4
12.9
 365NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
16.5
14.6
 384Intel HD Graphics 4600
8.2
6.95
* 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 Platform I Platform II
Mainboard Asus Z170-A Asus Z97-Deluxe
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (Skylake) Intel Core i7-4790K (Haswell)
GPU 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)
Memory 2 x 8 GB DDR4-2133 2 x 4 GB DDR3-1600
Storage 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)
GPU 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
Memory 2x 4 GB DDR3-1600 2x 4 GB DDR3-1600 2x 8 GB DDR3-1600
Storage Samsung SSD 840 EVO (250 GB) Micron M600 SSD (128 GB)
HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HDD (1000 GB)
Intel SSD
OS Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Windows 10 Home 64-bit Windows 10 Home 64-bit
MSI Notebooks MSI GT62VR MSI GE72 MSI PE60 MSI GP62 MSI CX61 MSI CX61
Mainboard Intel HM170 Intel HM170 Intel HM170 Intel HM86 Intel HM86 Intel HM86
Processor Intel Core i7-6820HK (Skylake) Intel Core i7-6700HQ (Skylake) Intel Core i7-6700HQ (Skylake) Intel Core i7-5700HQ (Broadwell) Intel Celeron 2970M (Haswell) Intel Core i5-4200M (Haswell)
GPU Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 (6 GB GDDR5) 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)
Memory 4x 8 GB DDR4-2133 1x 8 GB DDR4-2133 2x 4 GB DDR4-2133 1x 8 GB DDR3-1600 1x 8 GB DDR3-1600 1x 8 GB DDR3-1600
Storage Samsung NVMe MZVPV128 SSD (128 GB) 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 Pro 64-bit 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)
GPU Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 (8 GB GDDR5) AMD Radeon R9 M280X (4 GB GDDR5)
Memory 4x 16 GB DDR4-2400 2x 4 GB DDR3-1600
Storage 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
2x Asus PB287Q ForceWare 375.70 Crimson 16.11.2 15.40.28.4501
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare Notebook and Desktop Benchmarks
Florian Glaser, 2016-11-12 (Update: 2016-11-12)
Andreas Osthoff
Andreas Osthoff - Senior Editor Business
I grew up with computers and modern consumer electronics. I am interested in the technology since I had my first computer, a Commodore C64, and started building my own PCs after that. My focus here at Notebookcheck is the business segment including mobile workstations, but I also like to test new mobile devices. It is always a great experience to review and compare new products. My free time is filled with a lot of sports, in the summer mainly on my bike.