Notebookcheck Logo

F1 2017 Notebook and Desktop Benchmarks

World tour. F1 2017 starts into the current Formula One season with extremely wide rear tires and very flat-looking bodies. Our benchmark article will reveal whether motorsport fans will get their money's worth in terms of driving experience as well as technology.
F1 2017

For the original German review, see here.

Technology

As the engine of the F1 series had remained almost unchanged (F1 2014 vs. F1 2013 vs. F1 2012), we completely skipped the 2015 and 2016 edition. The first impression of the brand new edition is surprisingly positive. While we complained about texture quality, lighting and lack of details in the previous article, F1 2017 convinces with quite sharp object surfaces and a nice light-shadow system for a race game. Moreover, "3D grass", which we painfully missed in the past and is known from other sport games (e.g. FIFA), has been added now.

F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017

The biggest highlight is the representation of the weather. Rain in particular, looks great. Apart from many drops dripping from the sky, reflecting puddles and water effects on the camera are delighting. As a result, you felt as if you were in the thick of the things. In short: The race simulation provides a great atmosphere.

F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017

Further pros are the familiar detailed graphics menu, from which other developers can learn a thing or two. The video options consist of as many as 11 settings including resolution, image mode, image reproduction (frequency, aspect ratio, vertical synchronization, HDR, …), anisotropic filtering, and anti aliasing. Unlike the recently published Dirt 4, which also stems from Codemasters, high-end modes such as MSAA have been omitted. The integrated TAA significantly reduces flickering along slating edges, but the image sharpness falls slightly.

F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017

The advanced setup of the options menu is really detailed. It provides as many as 16 individual settings and 5 presets, which adjust the look in one go. It is rather annoying that several changes require a restart of the game. Thanks to skippable intro videos and a decent loading time, this will not take a long time however.

F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017

Talking of requirements: F1 2017 currently needs up to 32 GB of storage space. At least, the download size is only 21 GB. We hardly faced technical problems during the tests. Only changing the resolution required two tries on several systems. It is also rather annoying that the menu structure is unnecessarily nested.

Benchmark

The developers deserve praise for significantly enhancing the benchmark (in comparison to our last article). Previously, you had to do with one course and fixed weather conditions. Now, you can freely select the course and choose between bright sky and rain. Moreover, the camera mode can be changed and an fps counter and a loop function (comes in handy for evaluating performance over time and battery tests) can be enabled.

The analysis at the end of the benchmark has also been significantly improved. Instead of only reporting minimum, average and total frames, it also shows the maximum fps and the frame time, which are particularly interesting in dual GPU devices. Moreover, several basic CPU, GPU and RAM information are displayed.

F1 2017
F1 2017
F1 2017

Although the benchmark runs automatically and we selected a fixed perspective (cockpit) for the tests, the results are not as constant as of other games due to slightly varying runs (duration of the race, position). Fluctuations of +/- 5% are usual between runs. Since a decent frame rate is required due to the high speed of the high horsepower monsters, an average of at least 40 fps is required. Demanding gamer will certainly wish for at least 60 fps  or - if a compatible display is available - 120 fps.

According to our experiences, it hardly has an impact on the results whether rain is enabled or not. In a brief test with the GeForce GTX 980, the results were almost identical, with a slight advantage in favor of good weather. The video below shows our benchmark settings in detail.

Results

As with the Dirt and the Grid series, the system requirements of F1 2017 are quite low. This is not surprising, since once again, Codemaster's own EGO engine is used, which is quite undemanding in terms of hardware and referred to as Version 4.0.

While the Formula One simulation does not look too good with minimum details (spongy surfaces, imprecise shadows, no blades of grass, poor lighting, …), the game runs well enough with an entry-level GPU, although older and/or especially weak chips already reach their limits with 1280x720 pixels. A mid-range graphics card is recommended for medium settings and 1366x768 pixels (GeForce 940M or better).

Ultra Low Preset
Ultra Low Preset
Medium Preset & 4x AF
Medium Preset & 4x AF
High Preset, TAA & 8x AF
High Preset, TAA & 8x AF
Ultra High Preset, TAA & 16x AF
Ultra High Preset, TAA & 16x AF
Ultra Low Preset
Ultra Low Preset
Medium Preset & 4x AF
Medium Preset & 4x AF
High Preset, TAA & 8x AF
High Preset, TAA & 8x AF
Ultra High Preset, TAA & 16x AF
Ultra High Preset, TAA & 16x AF

Those who want to enjoy F1 2017 at 1920x1080 pixels, activated TA, and high preset, require a model in between mid-range and top-of-the-range (e.g. the GeForce GTX 960M). High-end GPUs such as the GeForce GTX 1060 are first required at maximum details. We recommend at least a GeForce GTX 1070 for owners of 4K displays who want to maximize all settings.

While the processor hardly affects performance in most games, it might become a limiting factor in F1 2017 – depending on graphics performance, pixel count, and settings (see table). We will add further benchmarks, especially of AMD and Intel GPUs, in the coming days and weeks.

F1 2017
    3840x2160 Ultra High Preset AA:T AF:16x     1920x1080 Ultra High Preset AA:T AF:16x     1920x1080 High Preset AA:T AF:8x     1920x1080 Medium Preset AF:4x     1366x768 Medium Preset AF:4x     1280x720 Ultra Low Preset
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop), 6700K
Desktop PC
61 (55min) fps ∼53%
120 (99min) fps ∼66%
148 (120min) fps ∼67%
177 (146min) fps ∼70%
181 (142min) fps ∼95%
234 (180min) fps ∼88%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop), 6700K
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070
50 (45min) fps ∼43%
104 (89min) fps ∼57%
146 (123min) fps ∼66%
173 (138min) fps ∼68%
180 (141min) fps ∼94%
231 (180min) fps ∼87%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, 6820HK
Asus G752VS
45 (41min) fps ∼39%
93 (81min) fps ∼51%
132 (110min) fps ∼60%
157 (124min) fps ∼62%
161 (126min) fps ∼84%
200 (157min) fps ∼75%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, 6700K
Desktop PC
34 (32min) fps ∼30%
75 (68min) fps ∼41%
117 (105min) fps ∼53%
143 (127min) fps ∼57%
175 (144min) fps ∼92%
230 (180min) fps ∼86%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop), 6700K
Desktop PC
33 (30min) fps ∼29%
74 (64min) fps ∼41%
115 (104min) fps ∼52%
145 (128min) fps ∼57%
178 (142min) fps ∼93%
229 (179min) fps ∼86%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile, 6820HK
MSI GT62VR
30 (26min) fps ∼26%
66 (57min) fps ∼36%
103 (88min) fps ∼47%
125 (110min) fps ∼49%
137 (112min) fps ∼72%
178 (141min) fps ∼67%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, i7-7700HQ
MSI GE72 7RE-046
16 (14min) fps ∼14%
40 (36min) fps ∼22%
66 (53min) fps ∼30%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
33 (28min) fps ∼18%
52 (46min) fps ∼24%
67 (58min) fps ∼26%
133 (105min) fps ∼50%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
MSI GE72 965M Ti
36 (33min) fps ∼20%
60 (54min) fps ∼27%
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, i7-7700HQ
MSI PL62 MX150 7700HQ
13 (6min) fps ∼11%
20 (17min) fps ∼11%
32 (29min) fps ∼14%
41 (36min) fps ∼16%
82 (55min) fps ∼31%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
MSI PE60 2QD
20 (18min) fps ∼11%
34 (31min) fps ∼15%
43 (37min) fps ∼17%
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, 6700HQ
MSI CX72 6QD
18 (16min) fps ∼8%
32 (26min) fps ∼13%
50 (43min) fps ∼19%
NVIDIA GeForce 920M, 2970M
MSI CX61 2QC 2970M MS-16GD
15 (13min) fps ∼6%
34 (19min) fps ∼13%

Overview

Show Restrictions
PosModel< PrevNext >F1 2017
 F1 2017 (2017)
low
1280x720
Ultra Low Preset
med.
1920x1080
Medium Preset
4xAF
high
1920x1080
High Preset
8xAF TAA
ultra
1920x1080
Ultra High Preset
16xAF TAA
4K
3840x2160
Ultra High Preset
16xAF TAA
NVIDIA Titan RTX
232
188
156
141
101
NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
217
149
127
104
70
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop)
234
177
114.5n2
110n3
61
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64
208.5n8
180.5n8
164n8
129n8
55.5n8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile
145n3
110n4
54.5n2
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (Desktop)
106
52
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop)
231
173
146
104
50
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
119.5n2
96.5n2
48
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile
200
157
132n5
94n5
44.5n2
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
118.5n2
80n3
36
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
230
143
117
75
34
AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop)
220
166
137
89
40
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Desktop)
204
184
160
77
46
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop)
229
145
115
74
33
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile
178
125
99n3
63.5n4
30
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop)
137
104
87
63
27
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q
94
87.5n2
58n2
26
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M
175
107
87
54
26
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH
215
105
86
53
PosModel< PrevNext >F1 2017
low med. high ultra 4K
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile
181n2
90.5n2
70n3
44n3
16
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
151
88
68
43
19
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870
80
65
39
AMD Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL
122
78
65
40
17
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile
124n3
65n3
54.5n4
34.5n4
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
60
36
AMD Radeon RX 560 (Laptop)
100
66
47
24
AMD Radeon RX 460 (Laptop)
37
27
24
20
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
102
53
40
25
AMD Radeon Pro 555
110
47
38
NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (Desktop)
112
50
39
38
13
NVIDIA GeForce MX150
80n4
39.5n4
31n4
20n3
13
AMD Radeon RX 540
73.5n2
31n2
22n2
21
AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100
60
21
21
13
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
43
34
20
AMD Radeon Pro 450
95
41
33
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11
101
45
35
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10
26
15
13
Apple M1 7-Core GPU
60
54
43
NVIDIA GeForce MX130
50
25
20
13
PosModel< PrevNext >F1 2017
low med. high ultra 4K
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
50n3
25n3
18n3
13n2
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
60n3
27n3
23n3
NVIDIA GeForce 930MX
45
21
16
13
NVIDIA GeForce 930M
39
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640
35.5n2
15n2
NVIDIA GeForce 920MX
41
18
15
13
NVIDIA GeForce 920M
34
15
AMD Radeon 520
34
15
13
Intel UHD Graphics 630
38.5n2
Intel HD Graphics 630
32.5n2
13
13
Intel HD Graphics 530
30
17
AMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)
18
14
Intel UHD Graphics 620
30.5n4
13n4
9n3
6
Intel HD Graphics 620
31
13
13
AMD Radeon R5 M255
34
14
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3
25n2
14
13
Intel HD Graphics 520
23
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
23
13
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)
18
13
10
Intel HD Graphics 4600
19
13
PosModel< PrevNext >F1 2017
low med. high ultra 4K
Intel HD Graphics 5500
23
Intel HD Graphics 615
21
Intel HD Graphics 610
20
Intel HD Graphics 4400
18
13
Intel UHD Graphics 605
13
Intel HD Graphics 505
13
AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)
15
Intel HD Graphics (Haswell)
13
(-) * Smaller values are better. / n123 Number of benchmarks for this median value / * 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
60Fluent – 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.

Test Systems

Device Graphics Card Processor RAM Operating System
Desktop-PC I MSI GeForce GTX 1080 (8 GB GDDR5X)
MSI GeForce GTX 1070 (8 GB GDDR5)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 (6 GB GDDR5)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 (4 GB GDDR5)
Intel Core i7-6700K 2 x 8 GB DDR4 Windows 10 64 Bit
Desktop-PC II Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (11 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)
Intel Core i7-4790K 2 x 4 GB DDR3 Windows 10 64 Bit
Asus G752VS Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 (8 GB GDDR5) Intel Core i7-6820HK 4 x 16 GB DDR4 Windows 10 64 Bit
MSI GT62VR Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 (6 GB GDDR5) Intel Core i7-6820HK 4 x 8 GB DDR4 Windows 10 64 Bit
MSI GE72 Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (4 GB GDDR5) Intel Core i7-7700HQ 2 x 4 GB DDR4 Windows 10 64 Bit
Asus GL753VD Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 (4 GB GDDR5) Intel Core i7-7700HQ 2 x 8 GB DDR4 Windows 10 64 Bit
MSI GL62 Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 (2 GB GDDR5) Intel Core i7-7700HQ 2 x 4 GB DDR4 Windows 10 64 Bit
MSI GE72 Nvidia GeForce GTX 965M (2 GB GDDR5) Intel Core i7-6700HQ 1 x 8 GB DDR4 Windows 10 64 Bit
MSI PE60 Nvidia GeForce GTX 950M (2 GB GDDR5) Intel Core i7-6700HQ 2 x 4 GB DDR4 Windows 10 64 Bit
MSI GP62 Nvidia GeForce 940M (2 GB DDR3) Intel Core i7-5700HQ 1 x 8 GB DDR3 Windows 10 64 Bit
MSI CX61 Nvidia GeForce 920M (2 GB DDR3) Intel Celeron 2970M 1 x 8 GB DDR3 Windows 10 64 Bit
Asus N551ZU AMD Radeon R9 M280X (4 GB GDDR5) AMD FX-7600P 2 x 4 GB DDR3 Windows 10 64 Bit
4K display Nvidia driver AMD driver
2 x Asus PB287Q, Philips 328P6VJEB ForceWare 385.41 Crimson 17.8.2
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
Florian Glaser, 2017-08-28 (Update: 2017-08-29)