GD Machine 2014 Skyrim Benchmarks GTX 750 Ti i5 4670K

Written by Jon Sutton on Tue, Jul 29, 2014 5:45 PM
System Requirements Optimum 1080p PC Build Low vs Ultra Screenshots GPU Performance Chart CPU List That Meet System Requirements GPU List That Meet System Requirements

I have to hold my hands up and admit it, I'd only ever given The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim a brief whirl, way back at launch in November 2011, around the same time my not-so-trusty old PlayStation 3 gave up the ghost, may he rest in peace. It happened while I was playing Demon's Souls, which should give some indication of just how brutally punishing From Software's original is. 

Anyway, I'd given Skyrim a bit of a go, but the combination of muddy visuals and yawn-inducing load times put me off. Which was just as well once my PlayStation died, taking all my saves with it. Fast forward three years and I knew the time was right to see Skyrim in all its glory. Grabbing it off Steam I thought it would be a good opportunity to see how the GD Machine 2014 could cope with its huge open world. Armed with an Nvidia GeForce GTX 750 Ti, Intel i5-4670K processor, and 8GB of RAM, we put the GD Machine 2014 through some Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim benchmarks...

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Benchmarks GTX 750 Ti i5 4670K

Skyrim, it turns out, is a bit of a nightmare to benchmark. Bethesda's notoriously buggy engine isn't fitted with a Vsync off option, forcing a 60 fps cap on gameplay. There is a fix for this, although it makes the physics go haywire, causing stray carrots to drift serenely past in the air. This fix didn't even work on the GD Machine 2014, so we were lumped with a 60 frames per second limit in Skyrim. 

For the first Skyrim benchmarks everything was cranked up to maximum Ultra settings, including 8x MSAA, 16x Anisotropic Filtering, and the maximum draw distance - all at 1920 x 1080p resolution. Booting up the game, Skyrim played at an unwavering 60 fps. Great news for the GD Machine 2014's performance, terrible news for the benchmarks. We would normally provide a graph for your perusal here but your imagination will no doubt suffice for the string of 60FPS results. 

Skyrim looks great on Ultra settings it has to be said, particularly in comparison to the muddy console version. The draw distance is great and it's without doubt the definitive version of Skyrim, and that's without any of ever-growing mod support.

Skyrim Ultra Screenshots

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Loading Times

One aspect that was particularly impressive with The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim on the GD Machine 2014 was the load times, which were a fraction of those seen on console. When teleporting to a previously visited destination on PS3, the load times would take around 28-32 seconds, while the GD Machine 2014 is around 1-3. Going into a building usually takes around 1 second, meanwhile on PlayStation 3 this takes around 12 seconds. It made the playing experience so much less jarring, and demonstrates the potential of a hybrid SSD. Installed on a proper SSD it's quite conceivable to have near-instant loading times across the whole of Skyrim. 

 

The Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim is getting on a bit now, but the GD Machine 2014 provided flawless performance throughout. The added boost of the perfect performance is I can now go hands-on with the graphics mods and high resolution 4K textures, hopefully without too much of a performance hit.

If you're looking for more information and benchmarks on the GD Machine 2014 then don't forgot to check out the links below, including a raft of benchmarks for some of the latest and greatest graphical beauties to hit the PC gaming world, including Watch Dogs, Titanfall, and Wolfenstein: The New Order. 

          

Login or Register to join the debate

Rep
38
Offline
09:54 Aug-01-2014

So, this benchmark is i5 4570k + GTX 750ti. What about 750ti + i5 2500k? Any performance difference?

0
Rep
3
Offline
12:08 Jul-30-2014

Skyrim is not on Ultra untill you mod it till your pc burns ;)

2
Rep
55
Offline
09:49 Aug-01-2014

Agree!!

0
Rep
55
Offline
08:37 Jul-30-2014

Really? For testing such a powerful machine, you used Skyrim?
I think even my old laptop with Intel GMA, Intel Pentium Dual and 2 GB RAM was able to run this game at low settings....

0
Rep
1
Offline
04:32 Jul-30-2014

Sup! dudes of GD! I have screenshots of my Skyrim Game Paly :) if you want see it, here is a link to imgur :)


http://imgur.com/a/DCfM4

1
Rep
38
Offline
05:17 Jul-30-2014

Nice screenshots dude :)

0
Rep
1
Offline
06:15 Jul-30-2014

Thanks :)

2
Rep
216
Offline
admin approved badge
19:23 Jul-29-2014

Why is Skyrim capped at 60 FPS for some people and uncapped for others? Because of the monitor's refresh rate?

1
Rep
7
Offline
20:10 Jul-29-2014

Yes mate.I personaly own a monitor that has 60hz refresh rate and all games are capped at 60 fps although my rig can reach much more on some of them.Not a problem for me at all, 60 fps is perfect for gaming.

3
Rep
34
Offline
20:54 Jul-29-2014

You can turn off Vsync and run at whatever frame rate the game wants to run in most games, though if it goes over 60, you'll get screen tearing, which can be ugly in extreme cases. You don't have the option to disable Vsync in Skyrim.

1
Rep
75
Offline
admin approved badge
19:14 Jul-29-2014

Glad to see that the 750 TI still receives GD's support. The 750 Ti is only 110$ here in the netherlands. Amazing performance for what should be the sub entry level price point for gaming GPU! I just wish there could be multiple GD builds. One for the 600, 700 and 800$ price point would be amazing.

1
Rep
8
Offline
18:53 Jul-29-2014

Was reading through and read "yawn-inducing load times" was thinking what load times, it briefly flashes up a screen that says some quote or another then instantly your back in the game before your eyes can register what was said.
Then I read on, and realised that you weren't playing the game properly. I'd forgotten consoles sufferers had load times these days, hilarious.

0
Rep
75
Offline
admin approved badge
19:09 Jul-29-2014

Did you at any point own the Playstation Portable? It had insaaaaaaaane load times due to its stunning graphics for that age. Sometimes loading a world would take upto 2 minutes. Oh man the memories.

0
Rep
8
Offline
22:42 Jul-29-2014

Hehe, that sound's like a nightmare, many a system smashed against a wall, not out of anger, but boredom. The last console I had was the n64, and I don't remember that having anything too harsh loading wise (probably because of the cartridge format) but the graphics in that were pretty comparable to the PS of the time. Though don't quote me on that my child hood memories are not exactly eidetic.

0
Rep
75
Offline
admin approved badge
11:10 Jul-30-2014

Cartridges were amazing. Offering a huge amount of bandwidth for data at that time. I do not remember any loading times from those consoles either, so that must have meant something. The playstation portable read all from some sort of tiny optical disk.

0
Rep
569
Offline
admin approved badge
15:31 Jul-30-2014

Cartridges are much more expensive to produce, and don't offer the storage necessary to allow for more complex graphics and such. Hence the reason they are no longer used.

0
Rep
285
Offline
admin approved badge
18:38 Jul-29-2014

skyrim doesn't look that good on ultra does it?

0
Rep
75
Offline
admin approved badge
19:08 Jul-29-2014

Weve been spoiled with mods kaankok. Vanilla skyrim is still quite beautifull in not raw pixels, rather in world design.

0
Rep
285
Offline
admin approved badge
19:46 Jul-29-2014

i want to install skyrim, but i lost my safe file when i was level 40 :(

0
Rep
216
Offline
admin approved badge
21:24 Jul-29-2014

If you still had the game you could just do something with the save folder... now you've entirely lost it. :P

0
Rep
285
Offline
admin approved badge
15:09 Jul-30-2014

no, i installed win7 64 bit, and my entire HDD was formatted (wich is a good thing)

0
Rep
7
Offline
20:04 Jul-29-2014

I recommend the mod, Live another life
http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/9557/?

0
Rep
34
Offline
20:56 Jul-29-2014

LOL, well it's kind of an old game, still looks pretty nice for an old game though, I'm going to have to give those texture mods a try some time when I wanna do another skyrim playthrough.

0
Rep
7
Offline
20:06 Jul-29-2014

Images aren't any good on this website, its not the game. I think images have to be a certain size on Game Debate!

0
Rep
7
Offline
17:51 Jul-29-2014

No I need visual stimulation for data, even if it is just a straight horizontal line with 60fps O.o

5
Rep
58
Offline
20:11 Jul-29-2014

How is your card 0% different?

0
Rep
569
Offline
admin approved badge
20:25 Jul-29-2014

According to Game-Debate's details of your card Fir3wulf "However, this card cannot benefit from that much video memory and so it offers no performance boost. This edition performs like the 2GB one Gigabyte offers." That's why.

3
Rep
104
Offline
admin approved badge
22:56 Jul-29-2014

+1 from me bro :=)

0
Rep
569
Offline
admin approved badge
04:06 Jul-30-2014

Oh you.... lol thanks :P

1
Rep
58
Offline
17:52 Aug-10-2014

mkay :) thanks for the info

0

Can They Run... |

| 60FPS, Ultra, 1440p
Ryzen 9 3900X 12-Core 3.8GHz GeForce RTX 3070 EVGA FTW3 Ultra Gaming 8GB 32GB
| 60FPS, Low, 720p
APU A8-7410 Quad-Core Radeon R5 7410 8GB
| 60FPS, Ultra, 1080p
Core i5-11400 6-Core 2.7GHz GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 8GB
| 60FPS, Ultra, 1080p
Ryzen 5 3600 6-Core 3.6GHz GeForce GTX 1080 MSI Gaming X 8GB Edition 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 30FPS, Low, 720p
Ryzen 5 3400G 4-Core 3.7GHz Radeon RX Vega 11 6GB
| 30FPS, High, 1080p
Core i5-11400 6-Core 2.7GHz GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 8GB
0% No [1 votes]
| 60FPS, Medium,
Ryzen 5 3500U 4-Core 2.1 GHz Radeon RX Vega 8 8GB
| 30FPS, Low,
Ryzen 5 3500U 4-Core 2.1 GHz Radeon RX Vega 8 8GB
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Core i5-10400 6-Core 2.90GHz GeForce GTX 1650 16GB
0% No [1 votes]