The developers of Civ V have cooked up a number of interesting benchmarks, two of which we used here. The first one tests a late-game scenario where the map is richly populated and there's lots happening at once. As you can see by the setting screen below, we didn't skimp on our the image quality settings for graphics, either. Doing so wasn't necessary to tease out clear differences between the CPUs.
Civ V also runs the same test without updating the screen, so we can eliminate any overhead or bottlenecks introduced by the video card and its driver software. Removing those things from the equation reshuffles the order slightly.
In both cases, the FX-8150 slots in just ahead of the Phenom II X6 1100T and just behind an aging Intel CPU, the Core i5-760. All of the Sandy Bridge-based CPUs are faster, including the dual-core Core i3-2100.
The next test populates the screen with a large number of units and animates them all in parallel. It can also run in "no render" mode without updating the screen.
This test is clearly multithreaded—it's much faster in "no render" mode on the Athlon II X3 455 than on the Phenom II X2 565, for instance, and the 12-threaded Core i7-900-series CPUs capture the top three spots. Still, the FX-8150 and its eight cores end up near the middle of the pack. When the screen is being rendered, a number of Phenom II X6 and X4 models are slightly faster than the FX-8150.
|Run with PowerColor's Devil 13 Dual Core R9 390 graphics card||48|
|The gaping maw of Lian Li's PC-V33 is ready to swallow ATX mobos||8|
|Huawei leapfrogs Apple with pressure-sensitive Mate S phone||23|
|Tune in for our Skylake live stream tonight with David Kanter||15|
|Get the speed you need with Toshiba Q300 SSDs||9|
|ZenWatch 2 runs Android Wear Asus-style||13|
|Asus previews ROG Swift PG348Q and PG279Q G-Sync monitors||28|
|Wanted for review: AMD's Radeon R9 Nano||171|
|MSI's Z170A Gaming M5 motherboard reviewed||7|