Gaming Performance using F.E.A.R. & Rise of Legends

Our F.E.A.R. test should be fairly familiar by now, as it is the built in performance test included with the game. Computer settings were left at "Maximum" while the graphics settings were set to "High" with the resolution set to 1024x768.

Gaming Performance - F.E.A.R.

F.E.A.R. continues the trends we've established, and once again the dual core Mac Pro is a bit faster than the quad core version while the FB-DIMMs hold back performance.

Rise of Legends is a newcomer to our game benchmark suite and what an excellent addition it is. This Real Time Strategy game looks very good and plays well too. We ran with the resolution set to 1024x768 and the graphics settings set to the medium defaults. We recorded a custom playback of a 3 vs. 2 multiplayer battle and played it back at 4x speed, recording the average frame rate for 10 minutes of the battle. The 10 minutes we focused on contained a good mix of light skirmishes between opponents, base/resource management with very few characters on the screen and of course some very large scale battles. The performance variability between runs was fairly high in this test, mainly because of how disk intensive the playback can get. Differences in performance of up to 5% should be ignored.

Gaming Performance - Rise of Legends

As with most RTSes, Rise of Legends is extremely CPU bound. Rise of Legends showed a bigger performance deficit than most games, with the X6800 scoring 38% higher than the dual core Mac Pro, and the dual core Mac Pro is 11% faster than the quad core version. In an ideal world, having more cores available wouldn't impact performance of games, but clearly there are other influences at work. With RoL being mostly CPU bound, there is a very noticeable performance impact regardless of resolution.

Gaming Performance using Quake 4 & Half Life 2 Episode 1 Gaming Performance using Oblivion
Comments Locked

72 Comments

View All Comments

  • Corlissmedia - Thursday, December 9, 2010 - link

    I've been reading through a lot of these sites that discuss upgrading a 2006 Mac Pro with dual dual-core 2.66's to dual quad-core x5355's. I'm thinking of doing this upgrade also, but in researching the cpus, I've found that none of them support ECC memory, and all Mac Pros, as far as I know, have ECC memory. So how does that work?????
  • Spawn4ever - Tuesday, August 4, 2015 - link

    I realize this is a very old post but i'm hopping someone, somewhere will still be willing to help me out. I own a great MacPro 2.1 2007 with the following specs

    Model Name: Mac Pro
    Model Identifier: MacPro2,1
    Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Xeon
    Processor Speed: 3 GHz
    Number of Processors: 2
    Total Number of Cores: 8
    Memory: 32 GB RAM
    ATI Radeon HD 5780

    I need to change the motherboard in order to install OS X 10.10 or change the system all together. The processors in this system are still quite fast to just get rid of them. Two questions:

    1) Can i find motherboards today that will take these CPUs and work as a Hackintosh
    2) Would you say that an Intel i7 series be faster than these almost 8 year old Xeons?

    I primarily use this system for video editing and i'm starting to edit 4K footage which cannot be played back in real-time on this configuration.

    Hope this post doesn't get lost in digital land and i hear back from someone at Anandtech or the internet world.

    Thank you

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now