Alien: Isolation Benchmarked, Performance Review

[Steve]

Classified as a survival horror/stealth game instead of an action shooter, Alien: Isolation differs significantly from last year's Alien: Colonial Marines in that there is just one Alien who can't be killed, requiring you to employ stealth tactics. Although the game features some weapons, they will only be effective against the human occupants and android "Working Joes".

Apparently the Alien AI has been programmed not to follow a predetermined path but rather hunt the player using sight, sound and smell, which should make for plenty of pants-wetting moments. The game sounds like a blast if you're comfortable with soiling yourself but we're more interested in Alien: Isolation's performance when running at max quality and varying resolutions.

Read the complete review.

 

[veLa]

I'm not surprised that it's not the next Crysis, but I'm still getting it because everything I've seen looks awesome thus far.

 

[GhostRyder]

I think the graphics of the game are pretty sweet when cranked up right now and it shows that the visuals were something heavily focused on.

Honestly I am a little shocked at CPU performance because it seems that I guess because of the close quarters that sums up most of the game that a powerful CPU was just unnecessary. Great for people with something like a Pentium Anniversary or Athlon 860K because they can push the game to its limits with the right GPU.

Cool review @Steve!

 

[Guest]

This game isn't very graphically demanding. I had to poke my GTX Titans to let them know it was running.

 

[Nero7]

Intel HD 4600/4800/4000 test might be interesting too. Not everyone who's interested into this game has a gaming pc.

 

[Steve]

Intel HD 4600/4800/4000 test might be interesting too. Not everyone who's interested into this game has a gaming pc.

The Intel HD 4600 renders an average of 7fps at 1680x1050 using these quality settings. Not sure how low you would have to go for playable performance, I am assuming as low as the game will allow which will no doubt destroy the experience and therefore the game.

Hopefully for those who are interested in this game but don't have a gaming PC have either an Xbox or PlayStation, poor soles indeed.

 

[Jad Chaar]

Very interesting to see the 980 topping the charts constantly. I cannot wait to see what AMD will put out to compete. Once again though, it is fascinating to see how much OCing AMD CPUs can make a difference.

Great review Steve.

 

[gamoniac]

Thanks for covering so many cards. I am glad my 1.5 years old mid-range is still capable of running it.

 

[Guest]

The Intel HD 4600 renders an average of 7fps at 1680x1050 using these quality settings. Not sure how low you would have to go for playable performance, I am assuming as low as the game will allow which will no doubt destroy the experience and therefore the game.

Hopefully for those who are interested in this game but don't have a gaming PC have either an Xbox or PlayStation, poor soles indeed.

I have a intel i7 4710 with hd 4600 graphics. I get a very playable 30 frames per second at 720p with almost all settings turned up. given the laptop has a 17 inch screen 720p is just fine visually.

 

[nashathedog]

Since when was 1920 x 1200 classed as 1080p?

 

[Tadziun]

Awesome my GTX 770 just a bit Slower than GTX 780 ) but I unhappy that R9 280X is faster :/ but a bit

 

[Steve]

Since when was 1920 x 1200 classed as 1080p?

Didn’t mean to class 1080p as 1920x1200 but rather suggest that the frame rate performance at each resolution is comparable. There is 10% difference in pixels which isn’t a lot, the performance difference is going to be less than that.

Some readers in the past have had a hard time grasping the difference between 1920x1200 and 1920x1080. In short if your graphics card was tested and provided playable performance at 1920x1200 then you can expect it to provide playable performance at 1080p.

 

[bolski]

Okay. Old review but can someone explain how I'm able to play this game pretty smoothly on my AMD Phenom X3 720 BE (with 4th core unlocked and not OC'd) with my nVidia 520 GTX. Albeit I can't run in high, but medium seems to be just fine. Same with Mad Max. Really weird. Other sites have stated there was no way they would even run on my rig and yet, they do. All these years I could have been playing them. But, Alien has been a disappointment. Mad Max I'm actually enjoying.

 

[neeyik]

Is your graphics card a GeForce FX 5200 or a GT 520, as there isn't a GTX 5200? I'm guessing it's the latter, as it's better than the min required for the game (albeit not by much). Running at 1080p with medium settings, I could see it achieving around 30 fps and given that this would have been the target frame rate for the console versions, this would explain why it runs okay.

 

[bolski]

Is your graphics card a GeForce FX 5200 or a GT 520, as there isn't a GTX 5200? I'm guessing it's the latter, as it's better than the min required for the game (albeit not by much). Running at 1080p with medium settings, I could see it achieving around 30 fps and given that this would have been the target frame rate for the console versions, this would explain why it runs okay.

Sorry about that. It's either the 520 or 550. It's been 10 years since I purchased it and I can't remember exactly what type it was without opening up the system properties and I'm not at my main pc right now.

 

[neeyik]

In terms of add-in graphics cards, there was only the GT 520 and the GT 530 - the latter was quite a bit better than the 520, so you may well have that version (which would go a long way to explaining why Alien Isolation is running okay for you).

 

[bolski]

In terms of add-in graphics cards, there was only the GT 520 and the GT 530 - the latter was quite a bit better than the 520, so you may well have that version (which would go a long way to explaining why Alien Isolation is running okay for you).

Finally found the old sales receipt on my NewEgg account. lol. It's a Gigabyte GTX 560 OC.

 

[neeyik]

Well done on keeping a 10 year old receipt!

That GTX 560 is far, far better than a GT 520/530, and around 20% faster than a GTX 460 - you can see that this got around 35 fps on average in 1050 resolution test, with maximum detail settings. This is why it's running okay for you on medium.