Ryse: Son of Rome Benchmarked

Graphics vs. gameplay. While Ryse: Son of Rome turned out to be rather one-dimensional in terms of its gameplay, graphically the title is a real head-turner. Does your notebook also have to come from another planet to run this game? Our review reveals the answer.

Florian Glaser, ✓ Tanja Hinum (translated by Ariana Brodsky), Published 10/19/2014 🇩🇪 🇵🇱

For the original German article, see here.

Graphics

After creating the stunning visuals that sweep through Crysis 3, Crytek went the extra mile once again for their PC version of Ryse: Son of Rome. Whether the topic of discussion is texture sharpness, polygon count or the quality of effects, the third-person title is definitely one of the most impressive PC games of all time. With all its exemplary graphics-related features, we would even call it a new gold standard. Even though the levels are programmed rather narrowly and linearly, the scenery often feels spacious.

As well as the pretty and attractively illuminated panoramas, the characters' rich physical detail is also very appealing. Yes, here and there the animations could be a little more believable (in the action genre, Battlefield 4 takes the lead); but it would hardly be possible to find fault with the facial expressions and finishing moves. In general, whether in the well-executed video sequences or in the game scenes, the incredibly realistic nature of the faces is captivating. A veritable torrent of effects (smoke, explosions, falling objects, etc.) intensifies the atmosphere of the battles.

Speaking of battles: Just in terms of gameplay, Ryse failed to sweep us off our feet. Like in the olden days, back when hack-and-slash was popular, the player simply slaughters hordes of dim-witted clones to reach the next mission. Ryse almost never offers any variety. True, depending on the level of difficulty, the combat can certainly be challenging, but in the long run it just is not exciting. The stylistic choreography fails to help much here. The same goes for the unlockable upgrades. Overall, the game feels very repetitive, and except in the Roman settings, somewhat discouraging. It is not without reason that Ryse has been mockingly referred to as a "graphics demo" in the past.

Regardless of that shortcoming, Crytek did a good job converting the game for PC. Overlooking the relatively high load times (HDD) and the not quite perfect controls, there remains little room for criticism. The only thing we do not quite comprehend is the fact that (currently) the texture resolution nearly fills up the video memory - think Watch Dogs, Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor and Wolfenstein: The New Order. While Ryse chooses to use 1024 MB for low details, medium texture settings already hit 1536 MB. High settings here require 2.0 GB VRAM, and the game can only function at maximum details with 3.0 GB.

At least in theory, this is true. Using a cheat, it is possible to set the game to a manual texture quality. Those who wish to make their own decision can open the system.cfg with the editor (Steam\SteamApps\common\Ryse Son of Rome) and add the line sys_spec_TextureResolution = X. The X represents the texture quality level (1 for "Low", 2 for "Medium", 3 for "High" and 4 for "Very High"). The changes were correctly applied in our tests.

Fortunately, Crytek lets the user make his or her own decisions everywhere else. Via the "Graphics Quality" menu item, advanced graphics options can be altered in one go. Since the game is already activated on "Low", temporal anti-aliasing, we modified the presets a little (we deactivated AA for every setting except "Ultra"). Ryse also offers SSAA anti-aliasing, but this option demands an awful lot from the graphics card and brings most notebooks to their knees.

Graphics-lovers will be excited about the upscaling option. VSync and frame lock are also on board. Surprisingly, many settings hardly have an effect on the visuals or the performance. It almost makes no difference whether the player runs Ryse in high or very high texture quality. The difference is similarly negligible when it comes to temporal anti-aliasing. It does smooth the edges perceptibly, but it also makes the image a little more spongy.

Because Ryse was optimized for the Xbox One hardware, currently AMD cards do somewhat better. For example: The Radeon R9 M290X, which normally lies about 25% under the GeForce GTX 880M, sprints 5% ahead of its competitor on the ultra-setting (39.2 vs. 37.4 fps). According to Nvidia, a driver update is soon to be released that should improve their cards' performance. In general, owners of weaker notebooks will not be able to enjoy the Roman epic. Since the CryEngine (version 4) hardly offers any genuinely low settings, the game requires a certain level of performance power that not all GPUs possess.

Benchmark

For our benchmarks, we used the forests-and-meadows scenario in the fourth mission ("The King"). With its thick vegetation, this section demands a fair amount of power from the hardware. The recording with the Fraps tool starts almost as soon as the mission begins and ends after about 50 seconds, right before the first confrontation with an opponent. Because more graphics-intensive scenes do exist and the gameplay is rather quick for a third-person title, a given GPU will need to render at least 35-40 fps in the benchmark to run the game fluidly. As the table below shows, we recorded not only the average fps, but also the minimum fps.

If your results are considerably worse than ours, that might have to do with the graphics switching. At least when Ryse was first released, the Nvidia driver 344.11 could not recognize the game and we had to manually select "High Performance Processor" in the 3D settings.

▶ load Youtube video

Results

We have mentioned several times the game demands a lot of performance from the GPU. Inexpensive all-round GPUs on the level of the GeForce GT 740M are just as slow as the graphics chips in Intel CPUs (HD Graphics 3000/4000/4600). Even mid-range cards falter at low settings and a resolution of 1024x768. The GeForce GT 750M only managed a just barely playable 34 fps.

For normal details and 1366x768 pixels, you will need an upper mid-range graphics chip (GTX 850M @ 40 fps) or something from the lower high-end sector (GTX 765M @ 38 fps). 1920x1080 pixels and "High" setting demands a deluxe model like the GeForce GTX 780M to run fluidly. For maximum settings with activated anti-aliasing, we recommend at least a Radeon R9 M290X or a GeForce GTX 880M.

Ryse: Son of Rome
1920x1080 Very High Texture Res. + High Graphics Quality (Motion Blur & Temporal AA On, Rest Off/Disabled) AF:8x 1920x1080 High Texture Res. + High Graphics Quality (Rest Off/Disabled) AF:8x 1366x768 Medium Texture Res. + Normal Graphics Quality (Rest Off/Disabled) AF:4x 1024x768 Low Texture Res. + Low Graphics Quality (Rest Off/Disabled) AF:2x
Radeon R9 290X, 2600K, Samsung SSD 840 Pro 256GB MZ7PD256HAFV-0Z000 Sapphire Tri-X R9 290X Desktop	77.4 (39^min) fps ∼74% 83 (46^min) fps ∼72% 101 (52^min) fps ∼56% 124 (62^min) fps ∼52%
GeForce GTX 780 Ti, 3770K Desktop-PC	63.9 (37^min) fps ∼61% 67.9 (43^min) fps ∼59% 84.9 (51^min) fps ∼47% 89.4 (58^min) fps ∼37%
Radeon R9 280X, 3770K Desktop-PC	59.4 (37^min) fps ∼57% 63.2 (37^min) fps ∼54% 83.9 (47^min) fps ∼47% 87.6 (50^min) fps ∼37%
Radeon R9 M290X, 4700MQ Schenker W504	39.2 (29^min) fps ∼38% 43.3 (30^min) fps ∼37% 76.1 (45^min) fps ∼42% 83.4 (50^min) fps ∼35%
GeForce GTX 880M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	37.4 (29^min) fps ∼36% 40.1 (31^min) fps ∼35% 75.1 (47^min) fps ∼42% 86.1 (53^min) fps ∼36%
GeForce GTX 760, 3770K Desktop-PC	35.2 (24^min) fps ∼34% 37.4 (25^min) fps ∼32% 71.3 (41^min) fps ∼40% 85.9 (56^min) fps ∼36%
GeForce GTX 780M, 4700MQ Schenker W503	33.4 (25^min) fps ∼32% 36.1 (26^min) fps ∼31% 68.8 (43^min) fps ∼38% 85 (55^min) fps ∼36%
GeForce GTX 870M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	30.1 (23^min) fps ∼29% 32.4 (25^min) fps ∼28% 64.9 (44^min) fps ∼36% 84.8 (50^min) fps ∼35%
GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 3770K Desktop-PC	23.8 (19^min) fps ∼23% 25.7 (21^min) fps ∼22% 53.5 (37^min) fps ∼30% 77.4 (51^min) fps ∼32%
GeForce GTX 770M, 4700MQ Schenker W503	21.7 (17^min) fps ∼21% 23.2 (17^min) fps ∼20% 48.4 (35^min) fps ∼27% 70.4 (48^min) fps ∼29%
GeForce GTX 860M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	21.4 (16^min) fps ∼21% 22.6 (17^min) fps ∼19% 50.7 (36^min) fps ∼28% 75.3 (49^min) fps ∼32%
GeForce GTX 850M, 4340M Schenker M504	17.3 (13^min) fps ∼17% 18.8 (14^min) fps ∼16% 40.2 (29^min) fps ∼22% 58.9 (35^min) fps ∼25%
GeForce GTX 765M, 4700MQ Schenker W503	16.5 (12^min) fps ∼16% 17.8 (13^min) fps ∼15% 37.9 (29^min) fps ∼21% 55.8 (41^min) fps ∼23%
Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), A10-7850K, Samsung SSD 470 Series MZ-5PA256/EU A10-7850K Asus A88-XM-PLUS	11.3 (7^min) fps ∼10% 24.3 (16^min) fps ∼14% 37.7 (24^min) fps ∼16%
GeForce GT 750M, 4702MQ Schenker M503	9.6 (6^min) fps ∼9% 10.4 (7^min) fps ∼9% 22.4 (15^min) fps ∼12% 34.1 (24^min) fps ∼14%
GeForce GT 640M, 2637M, Lite-On LMT-256M3M Acer Aspire M3-581TG	6.4 (1^min) fps ∼6% 6.7 (3^min) fps ∼6% 17 (10^min) fps ∼9% 24.5 (15^min) fps ∼10%
GeForce GT 740M, 4200M HP Envy 15-j011sg	6.8 (3^min) fps ∼7% 7.1 (4^min) fps ∼6% 15.5 (10^min) fps ∼9% 24.1 (16^min) fps ∼10%
GeForce GT 720M, 4200M, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-22JC3T0 MSI CX61-i572M	5.1 (0^min) fps ∼4% 11.1 (0^min) fps ∼6% 17.3 (0^min) fps ∼7%
GeForce GT 630M, 3720QM, Seagate Momentus 7200.5 ST9750420AS Asus N56VM	4.6 (2^min) fps ∼4% 9.6 (4^min) fps ∼5% 14.1 (7^min) fps ∼6%
Iris Pro Graphics 5200, 4750HQ, Intel SSD 525 Series SSDMCEAC180B3 SCHENKER S413	15.2 (10^min) fps ∼8% 21.9 (17^min) fps ∼9%
HD Graphics 4600, 4700MQ Schenker W503	4.2 (2^min) fps ∼4% 4.4 (2^min) fps ∼4% 9.2 (6^min) fps ∼5% 13.4 (9^min) fps ∼6%
Radeon HD 8650G, A10-5750M, Samsung SSD 470 Series MZ-5PA256/EU Pumori Test Platform (A10-5750M)	20 (14^min) fps ∼8%
HD Graphics 4000, 3720QM Asus N56VM	11.4 (1^min) fps ∼5%

Test Systems

Four of our 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) is installed on each of these notebooks. A further thank you goes to Micron for the 480 GB Crucial M500.

Another test device is courtesy of Nvidia:

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

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

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

Overview

Read all 4 comments / answer

Loading Comments

Comment on this article

Editor of the original article: Florian Glaser - Managing Editor Gaming Laptops - 623 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 > Ryse: Son of Rome Benchmarked

Florian Glaser, 2014-10-19 (Update: 2024-08-15)

Pos	Model	< Prev Next > Ryse: Son of Rome (2014)
Pos	Model	low 1024x768 Low Texture Res. + Low Graphics Quality (Rest Off/Disabled) 2xAF	med. 1366x768 Medium Texture Res. + Normal Graphics Quality (Rest Off/Disabled) 4xAF	high 1920x1080 High Texture Res. + High Graphics Quality (Rest Off/Disabled) 8xAF	ultra 1920x1080 Very High Texture Res. + High Graphics Quality (Motion Blur & Temporal AA On, Rest Off/Disabled) 8xAF
138	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile			88.7	88.1
164	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M SLI	63.4	63.3	87.1ⁿ²	82.75ⁿ²
167	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980	86.6	84.5	72.45ⁿ²	68.85ⁿ²
182	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI	63.6	62.9	65.15ⁿ²	64.55ⁿ²
194	NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Max-Q	121	111	88	82
199	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti	89.4	84.9	67.9	63.9
212	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970	64	63.7	62.7	61.4
236	AMD Radeon R9 290X	130ⁿ²	111.5ⁿ²	88ⁿ²	81.2ⁿ²
238	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M SLI			61.2	58.8
243	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M	63.1	62.5ⁿ²	60.95ⁿ⁶	58.4ⁿ⁶
245	NVIDIA Quadro M5000M	135	116	65	65
251	AMD Radeon R9 280X	87.6	83.9	63.2	59.4
253	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960	67.1	64.9	54	49.2
261	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M	74.95ⁿ²	63.8ⁿ³	48.8ⁿ⁷	46.1ⁿ⁷
274	AMD Radeon R9 M295X	100.7	69.2	41.7	37.8
276	NVIDIA Quadro M3000M	94	87	69	45
279	AMD FirePro W7170M	101	93	43	15
283	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M	86.1	75.1	40.1	37.4
295	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760	85.9	71.3	37.4	35.2
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >Ryse: Son of Rome
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra
296	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M	85	68.8	36.1	33.4
297	NVIDIA Quadro K5100M	80.8	64.7	33.7	31.7
302	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M	73.85ⁿ²	65.95ⁿ²	35.15ⁿ²	32.5ⁿ²
306	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M	84.8	64.9	32.4	30.1
307	AMD Radeon R9 M290X	83.4	76.1	43.3	39.2
327	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M	62.5	61.15ⁿ²	29.4ⁿ⁵	27.4ⁿ⁵
328	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti	77.4	53.5	25.7	23.8
351	NVIDIA Quadro K4100M	76	55	28	25
352	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M	70.4	48.4	23.2	21.7
357	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M	75.3	50.7ⁿ³	23ⁿ³	22.7ⁿ²
365	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M	52.2	46.6ⁿ²	22.1ⁿ²	20.6ⁿ²
372	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M	58.6ⁿ³	40.2ⁿ³	19.2ⁿ³	17.6ⁿ³
373	NVIDIA Quadro M1000M	76	52	23	21
382	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M	55.8	37.9	17.8	16.5
409	NVIDIA Quadro K3100M	53.1	38.8	19.1	17.6
436	AMD FirePro M5100	44	25	17	10
441	NVIDIA Quadro K2100M	32	23	11
454	AMD Radeon R9 M265X	35.8	23.2	16	14.1
464	NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M	34.1	22.4	10.4	9.6
467	NVIDIA GeForce 940MX	24.5	18.7	8.9	8.4
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >Ryse: Son of Rome
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra
469	NVIDIA Quadro K1100M	27.6	20.2	9.3	8.4
471	NVIDIA GeForce 940M	36.05ⁿ²	23.65ⁿ²	11.7	10.9
500	NVIDIA Quadro K620M	35	23	10
502	NVIDIA GeForce 840M	31	19.3	9.4	8.9
507	AMD Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)	37.7	24.3	11.3
508	Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200	21.9	15.2
517	NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M	24.1	15.5	7.1	6.8
519	NVIDIA GeForce 930M	32.8	21.9
526	NVIDIA GeForce 830M	30.3	20.6	9.2	6.7
561	AMD Radeon R7 M270	32.6	20.9	9.9	9.3
562	AMD Radeon R7 M265	28.3	19.8	9.9
567	NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M	24.5	17	6.7	6.4
569	AMD Radeon R7 (Kaveri)	28	18.6	9	8.1
574	AMD Radeon R7 M360	26	16.4	7.8	4.9
576	NVIDIA GeForce 920M	25	17	7.7	4.9
587	AMD Radeon R7 M260	26	16.4	7.7
643	Intel HD Graphics 5600	21.8	14	6.7	6.3
649	AMD Radeon HD 8670M	23.9	14.5
650	AMD Radeon R6 M255DX	14.1	8.3	4.2
669	AMD Radeon HD 8650G	20
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >Ryse: Son of Rome
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra
674	NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M	14.1	9.6	4.6
678	AMD Radeon R5 M330	22.4	13.9
680	AMD Radeon R5 M255	28.4	17.3	8.2
684	NVIDIA GeForce 820M	18.3	11.9	5.8
686	Intel Iris Graphics 6100	24.4	14.9	7.3	6.9
688	NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M	17.3	11.1	5.1
690	AMD Radeon R5 M240	24	14.8	6.8
692	AMD Radeon R5 M230	20.2	12.5	5.6
702	Intel HD Graphics 6000	19	12
705	Intel Iris Graphics 5100	18.05ⁿ²	12.45ⁿ²	5.85ⁿ²
709	Intel HD Graphics 4600	12.95ⁿ²	8.7ⁿ²	4.4	4.2
711	Intel HD Graphics 5500	11.4ⁿ³	7.5ⁿ³	4.1ⁿ²	3.55ⁿ²
745	AMD Radeon R5 (Kaveri)	11	7.2
752	Intel HD Graphics 5000	14.7	9.2
789	Intel HD Graphics 4400	13.95ⁿ²	8.95ⁿ²
824	Intel HD Graphics 5300	7.1	4.6
833	Intel HD Graphics 4000	11.4
839	AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)	12.7	7.7
840	AMD Radeon R4 (Beema)	13.4	8.5
842	AMD Radeon R3 (Mullins/Beema)	11.4	7.1
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >Ryse: Son of Rome
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra
845	Intel HD Graphics 4200	6.2	4.2
878	AMD Radeon HD 8330	8.9	6.4
915	Intel HD Graphics (Haswell)	9	5.8
1027	Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)	3.7	2.5

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.