F1 2014 Benchmarked

Technical stagnation. You snooze, you lose: This saying goes perfectly with the Formula 1 simulation from Codemasters. Even in 2014, users crazy for motor sports have to accept second-rate graphics. Learn here what this means for performance.

Florian Glaser (translated by Martina Osztovits), Published 10/24/2014 🇩🇪

For the original German article, see here.

Technology

Instead of raising technology to the level of Dirt or GRID, the developer uses the graphics of the predecessor. You'll look for optical changes and improved performance in vain. The latter is not necessary since F1 does not have high hardware requirements, anyway. A simple update of the database (current season) for just under 50 Euros (~$63) will displease some buyers. However, we already know this approach from other sport games (e.g. FIFA).

While the cars still look nice, the environment of the route is highly disappointing in F1 2014. Despite spectators, it looks very dull and lifeless. Some parts look like a ghost town. Is there high-end "3D grass"? No. Is there busy bustle beside the pit lane? No. But, the sound is quite convincing and you can get kind of a Formula One feel. However, the atmosphere of the race simulation is not fantastic. While F1 2014 looks quite nice at a first glance, squishy textures, a low number of polygons and low detail level are striking at a closer look. Lighting and other effects are also no longer "up-to-date."

Alike previously, Codemasters scores points with a comprehensive graphics menu with five presets, several anti-aliasing modes and 10 details options. Warning: Although the settings are changed on-the-fly, a restart is required for these to take effect. This problem has already been known for several years.

Speaking about problems: The Radeon HD 8970M aka R9 M290X could not run the 2014 version. While the .exe file was executed according to the task manager, it did not bring a picture (we assume that this is caused by the Enduro graphics switch). In addition, it is incomprehensible for PC purists that the tutorials only display controller buttons, but no keyboard commands. At least, F1 2014 only requires just 5 GB of hard drive space. Other games from 2014 (The Evil Within, Shadow of Mordor, etc.) need above 30 GB or even 40 GB.

Benchmark

Users can run the integrated benchmark from the options menu. It is completely identical with the one from the 2013 version and so displays very similar results. Small performance differences of some percent between runs are caused by the varying sequence. Since it is a rather fast game, which requires fast reflexes, we recommend a frame rate of at least 40 fps.

Results

As already mentioned above, the results are very similar to the predecessor's. Even low-end GPUs with a performance like the HD Graphics 4600 do not have problems with 1366x768 pixels and normal details. A cheap multimedia notebook is sufficient for the high preset and 1920x1080 pixels. For example, the GeForce GT 740M achieved just under 50 fps in the benchmark. Ultra settings and 4x MSAA require slightly more performance, but the GeForce GT 750M is (almost) sufficient. Fortunately, only owners of very weak or extremely old notebooks have to live with low graphics settings.

Speaking of low details: The processor is the main limiting factor (becomes apparent in the GPU comparison) with low settings. We can only hope that Codemasters will widely improve the technology with the next generation in 2015.

F1 2014
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:4x MS 1920x1080 High Preset 1366x768 Medium Preset 1024x768 Ultra Low Preset
GeForce GTX 780 Ti, 3770K Desktop-PC	118 (89^min) fps ∼98% 127 (94^min) fps ∼95% 131 (100^min) fps ∼98% 133 (128^min) fps ∼99%
GeForce GTX 760, 3770K Desktop-PC	111 (85^min) fps ∼93% 128 (95^min) fps ∼96% 131 (101^min) fps ∼98% 132 (127^min) fps ∼98%
Radeon R9 280X, 3770K Desktop-PC	105 (76^min) fps ∼88% 123 (82^min) fps ∼92% 127 (91^min) fps ∼95% 132 (125^min) fps ∼98%
GeForce GTX 880M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	102 (74^min) fps ∼85% 120 (84^min) fps ∼90% 127 (93^min) fps ∼95% 132 (128^min) fps ∼98%
GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 3770K Desktop-PC	98 (81^min) fps ∼82% 125 (91^min) fps ∼94% 130 (103^min) fps ∼98% 133 (128^min) fps ∼99%
GeForce GTX 870M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	98 (75^min) fps ∼82% 121 (85^min) fps ∼91% 124 (88^min) fps ∼93% 132 (129^min) fps ∼98%
GeForce GTX 780M, 4700MQ Schenker W503	96 (69^min) fps ∼80% 119 (90^min) fps ∼89% 121 (87^min) fps ∼91% 132 (129^min) fps ∼98%
GeForce GTX 770M, 4700MQ Schenker W503	86 (71^min) fps ∼72% 119 (84^min) fps ∼89% 122 (88^min) fps ∼92% 132 (127^min) fps ∼98%
GeForce GTX 860M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	83 (69^min) fps ∼69% 118 (84^min) fps ∼89% 126 (91^min) fps ∼95% 133 (127^min) fps ∼99%
GeForce GTX 850M, 4340M Schenker M504	71 (58^min) fps ∼59% 96 (71^min) fps ∼72% 114 (82^min) fps ∼86% 132 (121^min) fps ∼98%
GeForce GTX 765M, 4700MQ Schenker W503	67 (55^min) fps ∼56% 111 (82^min) fps ∼83% 126 (90^min) fps ∼95% 132 (128^min) fps ∼98%
GeForce GT 750M, 4702MQ Schenker M503	39 (32^min) fps ∼33% 67 (56^min) fps ∼50% 104 (73^min) fps ∼78% 130 (112^min) fps ∼96%
GeForce GT 740M, 4200M HP Envy 15-j011sg	28 (22^min) fps ∼23% 47 (36^min) fps ∼35% 81 (63^min) fps ∼61% 115 (99^min) fps ∼85%
Iris Pro Graphics 5200, 4750HQ, Intel SSD 525 Series SSDMCEAC180B3 Schenker S413	23 (20^min) fps ∼19% 43 (27^min) fps ∼32% 55 (35^min) fps ∼41% 80 (54^min) fps ∼59%
GeForce GT 720M, 4200M, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-22JC3T0 MSI CX61-i572M	20 (0^min) fps ∼17% 38 (0^min) fps ∼29% 66 (0^min) fps ∼50% 55 (0^min) fps ∼41%
GeForce GT 630M, 3720QM, Seagate Momentus 7200.5 ST9750420AS Asus N56VM	15 (13^min) fps ∼13% 30 (24^min) fps ∼23% 54 (40^min) fps ∼41% 83 (71^min) fps ∼61%
HD Graphics 4600, 4700MQ Schenker W503	13 (12^min) fps ∼11% 28 (24^min) fps ∼21% 54 (36^min) fps ∼41% 81 (56^min) fps ∼60%
Radeon HD 8650G, A10-5750M, Samsung SSD 470 Series MZ-5PA256/EU Pumori Test Platform (A10-5750M)	18 (14^min) fps ∼15% 29 (21^min) fps ∼22% 40 (28^min) fps ∼30% 62 (42^min) fps ∼46%
HD Graphics 4000, 3720QM Asus N56VM	12 (12^min) fps ∼10% 18 (12^min) fps ∼14% 33 (16^min) fps ∼25% 55 (26^min) fps ∼41%

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, 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)

All these notebooks used Windows 7 64-bit. Many thanks 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)

Used GPU drivers: Nvidia 344.11, AMD 14.9, Intel 10.18.10.3907

In addition, we used benchmarks from other notebooks possibly with different drivers.

Overview

Loading Comments

Comment on this article

Editor of the original article: Florian Glaser - Managing Editor Gaming Laptops - 564 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!

.170

> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Archive of our own reviews > F1 2014 Benchmarked

Florian Glaser, 2014-10-24 (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.