FIFA 17 Notebook and Desktop Benchmarks

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.

Florian Glaser, ✓ Sven Kloevekorn (translated by Vinay Pradhan), Published 10/14/2016 🇩🇪

For the original German article, see here.

Engine

What do FIFA 17, Mirror's Edge Catalyst, Star Wars Battlefront, Need for Speed, Dragon 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.

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.

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.

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.

▶ load Youtube video

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 920M, 940M) 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.

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.

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 (168^min) fps ∼57% 377 (347^min) fps ∼87%
AMD Radeon R9 Fury, 4790K XFX Radeon R9 Fury Pro	172 (136^min) fps ∼46%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, 6820HK Asus G752VS	163 (143^min) fps ∼44% 302 (269^min) fps ∼70% 309 (279^min) fps ∼66% 323 (301^min) fps ∼90% 360 (328^min) fps ∼78% 370 (331^min) fps ∼71%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop), 6700K Desktop PC	127 (106^min) fps ∼34% 304 (281^min) fps ∼71% 314 (291^min) fps ∼67% 360 (319^min) fps ∼100% 397 (371^min) fps ∼86% 438 (397^min) fps ∼84%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, 6700K Desktop PC	124 (116^min) fps ∼33% 296 (249^min) fps ∼69% 308 (273^min) fps ∼65% 356 (320^min) fps ∼99% 401 (355^min) fps ∼86% 429 (383^min) fps ∼82%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	73.2 (59^min) fps ∼20% 165 (148^min) fps ∼38% 165 (153^min) fps ∼35% 165 (153^min) fps ∼46% 176 (164^min) fps ∼38% 184 (168^min) fps ∼35%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	62.7 (53^min) fps ∼17% 153 (131^min) fps ∼35% 160 (143^min) fps ∼34% 172 (159^min) fps ∼48% 190 (178^min) fps ∼41% 194 (180^min) fps ∼37%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	54.5 (39^min) fps ∼15% 141 (108^min) fps ∼33% 146 (123^min) fps ∼31% 165 (146^min) fps ∼46% 208 (193^min) fps ∼45% 244 (229^min) fps ∼47%
AMD Radeon R7 370, 4790K MSI Gaming R7 370 2GB	63.9 (54^min) fps ∼17% 147 (108^min) fps ∼34%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ MSI GE72 965M Ti	50.1 (40^min) fps ∼13% 138 (114^min) fps ∼32%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	51.4 (43^min) fps ∼14% 119 (103^min) fps ∼28% 128 (107^min) fps ∼27% 152 (124^min) fps ∼42% 197 (182^min) fps ∼42% 223 (207^min) fps ∼43%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 4720HQ Schenker XMG A505	41.9 (33^min) fps ∼11% 115 (96^min) fps ∼27% 123 (108^min) fps ∼26% 134 (114^min) fps ∼37% 190 (168^min) fps ∼41% 215 (185^min) fps ∼41%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	37.2 (35^min) fps ∼10% 91.4 (77^min) fps ∼21% 95.2 (81^min) fps ∼20% 117 (96^min) fps ∼33% 155 (127^min) fps ∼33% 205 (187^min) fps ∼39%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ MSI PE60 2QD	35 (28^min) fps ∼9% 95 (77^min) fps ∼22%
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, 6700HQ MSI CX72 6QD	42.3 (32^min) fps ∼10% 44.3 (33^min) fps ∼9% 89 fps ∼19% 129 fps ∼25%
NVIDIA GeForce 940M, 5700HQ MSI GP62 2QD	13.4 (10^min) fps ∼4% 42.1 (33^min) fps ∼10% 42.9 (33^min) fps ∼9%
AMD Radeon R9 M280X, FX-7600P Asus N551ZU-CN007H	0 fps ∼0%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M, 4200M MSI CX61-i572M	23 fps ∼5% 42 fps ∼9% 53 fps ∼10%
Intel HD Graphics 4600, 4700MQ Schenker W504	42.2 (36^min) fps ∼9% 59.1 (46^min) fps ∼11%

Overview

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

Loading Comments

Comment on this article

Editor of the original article: Florian Glaser - Managing Editor Gaming Laptops - 635 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 > FIFA 17 Notebook and Desktop Benchmarks

Florian Glaser, 2016-10-14 (Update: 2024-08-15)

Pos	Model	< Prev Next > FIFA 17 (2016)
Pos	Model	low 1280x720 Low Preset	med. 1366x768 Medium Preset	high 1920x1080 High Preset	ultra 1920x1080 Ultra Preset 4xMSAA	4K 3840x2160 High Preset
32	NVIDIA Titan RTX	420	411	390	386	355
76	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop)					279
77	NVIDIA Titan X Pascal	373	393.5	378.9	367.7	309.9
80	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 SLI (Laptop)			293	286	174
95	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop)				377	216ⁿ²
117	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile			335ⁿ³	330ⁿ³	214ⁿ³
136	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop)				355	183
139	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q				300	178
141	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile	370	360	309ⁿ³	302ⁿ³	163
162	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti				345	158
164	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q			215	212	144
170	AMD Radeon R9 Fury					172
172	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980	429	401	308	296	124
182	AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop)	432	430	377.3	367.5	162.9
183	AMD Radeon RX 580 (Desktop)	332.3	327.6	306.8	305.4	154.4
188	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop)	438	397	314	304	127
192	AMD Radeon RX 480 (Desktop)	429	431	334	323	135
193	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile	232.7ⁿ³	216.2ⁿ³	210.55ⁿ⁴	205.45ⁿ⁴	50.7
202	AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop)	266	261	230	225	112
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >FIFA 17
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra	4K
218	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970				273	107
219	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q		330	250	248	95.2
227	AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop)				295	135
249	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M	184	176	165	165	73.2
262	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile	160	155	126.5ⁿ²	124.2ⁿ²	66.1
263	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)				187	72
268	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M	194	190	160	153	62.7
284	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop)				157	61
285	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile	204.15ⁿ²	191.35ⁿ²	145.1ⁿ²	138.5ⁿ²
288	AMD Radeon R7 370				147	63.9
290	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M	244	208	146	141	54.5
306	AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop)				169	63.4
309	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M				138	50.1
313	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M	223	197	128	119	51.4
315	AMD Radeon HD 8970M	292.4	234.9	161.3	155.2
330	AMD Radeon Pro 460	316.6		151.9	146.4
334	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M	181.3ⁿ²	161.35ⁿ²	103ⁿ²	98.25ⁿ²	41.9
346	AMD Radeon Pro 555				99
347	AMD Radeon Pro 455				107
348	NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (Desktop)	251ⁿ²	188.15ⁿ²	102.9ⁿ²	97.45ⁿ²	34.75ⁿ²
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >FIFA 17
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra	4K
352	NVIDIA GeForce MX150				88
365	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M	205	155	95.2	91.4	37.2
373	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M				95	35
476	NVIDIA GeForce 940MX	112.5ⁿ⁴	85.35ⁿ⁴	44.35ⁿ⁴	42.3ⁿ⁴
481	NVIDIA GeForce 940M			42.9	42.1	13.4
498	AMD Radeon R7 M445	61.8	59.7	34.6	29.4
530	NVIDIA GeForce 930M	103	75	40
541	Intel Iris Graphics 540	61	72
582*	AMD Radeon R7 M460	83.8	70.3	36.1	34.1
585	AMD Radeon R7 M360	90.7	71.7	37.1	34.3
592	AMD Radeon R7 M440	61.8	59.7	34.6	29.7
611	Intel HD Graphics 630	72	56.6	30.1	28.5
614	Intel HD Graphics 530	65	54.8
618	Intel UHD Graphics 620	55.3	43.8	22.4
619	Intel HD Graphics 620	59.6ⁿ²	50	26.4
620	AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo)	26.8	25.5
654	Intel HD Graphics 5600	68	50.4	28.1
690	AMD Radeon R5 M430	67.3	50.1
691	AMD Radeon R5 M255	93.5	68.1	35.5	33.8
696	Intel HD Graphics 520	61.55ⁿ²	50
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >FIFA 17
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra	4K
699	NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M	53	42	23
720	Intel HD Graphics 4600	57.05ⁿ²	42.6ⁿ²	22
755	Intel HD Graphics 615	36.8	29.6
800	Intel HD Graphics 4400	33.9	22.3	12.8

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.