Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

League Of Legends: Low Details, 1920x1080

League Of Legends Performance, Benchmarked
By

Although we're calling these settings "Low Details" for the purpose of comparison, they're actually maxed out in the game, aside from the Shadows preset, which is set to High instead of Very High. As you can see on the previous page, the difference is difficult to see, though it does make a difference to the frame rates. We run this benchmark at 1920x1080.

Keep in mind that all of the following tests are performed on a Core i5-3550-based platform, except for the mobile benchmarks. The Core i5-3210M includes on-die HD Graphics 4000, while the A10-4600M APU features Radeon HD 7660G graphics.

The HD Graphics 4000 engine and Radeon HD 7660G remain above 35 FPS at all times. The discrete Radeon HD 6450 barely falls below 40 FPS. That's a really smooth result for entry-level graphics hardware, particularly considering the detail settings are almost as high as they go.

Nvidia's GeForce 210 struggles. Fortunately, there's plenty of room to pull back on the detail settings. Slide back a bit, and the GeForce 210 has little trouble generating playable performance.

Charting frame rates over time shows how closely the Radeon HD 6450, Radeon HD 7660G, and HD Graphics 4000 perform.

We didn't observe any debilitating stuttering, though the Radeon HD 6450 does exceed 15 ms in our subsequent frame latency variance chart. Much of that has to do with its frame rates being too slow.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 73 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 10 Hide
    Martell1977 , May 19, 2013 10:14 PM
    No surprises here, LoL is a very resource light game. I can run it on all medium settings on my old Pentium 4 3.2ghz with a AGP Radeon 3850 @ 1440x900 resolution with more than playable frame rates. The only issue is initial stutter at at the very start of a match that and long loading times. (however, I only use that machine when I have 3 or more players at my house)

    LoL may not be the prettiest game out there, but it is a lot of fun.
Other Comments
  • 2 Hide
    Zero_ , May 19, 2013 9:24 PM
    Looks like everyone is jobless these days...

    Also, no love for Heroes of Newerth?
  • 10 Hide
    Martell1977 , May 19, 2013 10:14 PM
    No surprises here, LoL is a very resource light game. I can run it on all medium settings on my old Pentium 4 3.2ghz with a AGP Radeon 3850 @ 1440x900 resolution with more than playable frame rates. The only issue is initial stutter at at the very start of a match that and long loading times. (however, I only use that machine when I have 3 or more players at my house)

    LoL may not be the prettiest game out there, but it is a lot of fun.
  • -1 Hide
    amuffin , May 19, 2013 10:36 PM
    Ezreal 2 good.
  • 1 Hide
    Novuake , May 19, 2013 10:38 PM
    Interesting side note : When I was trying this on my HD4000 instead of my HD7950, when the drops under 50FPS become a HUGE hindrance in teamfights, to the point of extreme frustration.

    This is one of those games when the smallest stutter can grind your bones to dust.

    So you REALLY want a near-constant 60FPS for this one.

    Anypony disagree???
  • -5 Hide
    JJ1217 , May 19, 2013 10:55 PM
    Yeah.. no one cares. Everyone knows you can basically run it on any rig.
  • 0 Hide
    griptwister , May 19, 2013 11:03 PM
    I ran it on Ultra settings at 1080P with a Phenom II x4 840 and a GTS 450 512mb with a stable 60FPS. lol, it's not that hard to run at all.
  • 2 Hide
    aggroboy , May 19, 2013 11:09 PM
    When working in out-of-town projects, the few games my ultralight can play are indies, emulators and LoL.
  • 3 Hide
    rdc85 , May 19, 2013 11:14 PM
    "...though the GeForce 210 does exceed 15 ms in our subsequent frame latency variance chart..."

    U got the chart wrong? is the 210 and 6450 swiched ?

    [EDITOR: Yes, we got it mixed up. Thanks for the note, fixed! - Don]
  • 2 Hide
    anxiousinfusion , May 19, 2013 11:17 PM
    JJ1217Yeah.. no one cares. Everyone knows you can basically run it on any rig.


    It would have been more interesting to see it tested on the oldest possible computers.
  • 0 Hide
    jdwii , May 19, 2013 11:23 PM
    Why wait this long to review this game? At least half the people at my college play this game,
  • 2 Hide
    Steelwing , May 19, 2013 11:29 PM
    They should have also run benchmarks on the new Howling Abyss map. It seems to be much more detailed, and some people have reported FPS problems with it.
  • 2 Hide
    Memnarchon , May 20, 2013 12:52 AM
    Thanks. As I see we can go as low as possible in order to create a pc that is able to play LOL.
  • 2 Hide
    richboyliang , May 20, 2013 1:10 AM
    i don't have any of the graphics cards used...my intel hd 3000 gets about 45 fps except when karthus ults (7 fps)
  • 2 Hide
    tomate2 , May 20, 2013 1:37 AM
    LoL has a lot of players and im sure many of them would benefit from this article :) 
  • 4 Hide
    SuperVeloce , May 20, 2013 2:31 AM
    well thanks, my brother cannot say "i need a new computer for Lol" anymore. xD
  • 1 Hide
    kettu , May 20, 2013 3:49 AM
    Page 4 title says 'low details' but the graph says 'highest detail'.

    I suppose this time CPU latency numbers don't matter that much since it's such a light load. But I still want to take this opportunity to ask for them in the future articles when there is a heavier load and differences between FPS scores.

    By the way, interesting how the iGPUs perform against faster Radeon cards in latency measurements. Would you add the desktop chips for the next review alongside the mobile?
  • 0 Hide
    Memnarchon , May 20, 2013 5:27 AM
    Just one question. Since the GT 630 seems to be an excellent choice with such low frame rates at high settings @ 1080p, what kind of memory had your sample? Was DDR3 or GDDR5? I just foud the answer that is GDDR5, which is 40% more expensive here (DDR3 = 50 euro, GDDR5 = 70 euro). :/ 
  • -4 Hide
    Grandmastersexsay , May 20, 2013 6:00 AM
    This is the most popular game in the world right now? I don't get it.

    Shame on all of you for supporting the pay to win model. You are going to ruin gaming, and your bank accounts.

  • 0 Hide
    chugot9218 , May 20, 2013 6:06 AM
    For the record, credit usually goes to DOTA for being the first MOBA, but it was more or less based on Aeon of Strife which was a custom map for the first Starcraft.
  • 1 Hide
    lewo , May 20, 2013 6:56 AM
    can you also make a benchmark for HON (Heroes of Newerth) ?
Display more comments