Skip to main content

Prey Performance Review

CPU & RAM Resources, And Conclusion

Processor Usage

Whether you're using a GeForce or Radeon, a Core i5-6500 CPU lands between 81 and 95% utilization. It's not idle by any means, but there's still some headroom available. Interestingly, AMD's Radeon-based platform registers slightly lower CPU usage.

System Memory Usage

Memory utilization is similar, regardless of whether you have a GeForce or Radeon installed.

With these values, it is of course necessary to subtract the amount of RAM used by the OS and its services (around 1.9GB). We can therefore deduce that Prey is quite efficient when it comes to memory usage.

Video Memory Usage

To the contrary, this game gobbles up graphics memory, likely a result of the Very High quality preset we're using to test. This is more true on the Radeon than the GeForce, though it's important to note that AMD's card has an additional 2GB of GDDR5. Even so, the capacity used remains far from the total amount of memory available on these boards.

Conclusion

What a fantastic surprise: Prey is both graphically detailed and relatively accessible across a range of hardware configurations.

Of course, entry-level cards like the Radeon RX 460 and GeForce GTX 1050 have a hard time maintaining playable frame rates under the Very High quality preset, and you can forget resolutions above 1920x1080 with them. But High quality at 1080p is completely within the realm of possibility. Not bad for a couple of affordable little graphics cards.

If your graphics hardware is even more powerful, don't hesitate to dial in the Very High preset on a 4GB card. Otherwise, you can relax the texture quality setting, even at 1440p, and realize enjoyable performance.

We have to commend the developers at Arkane Studios for making excellent use of CryEngine technology. Prey offers great graphics without requiring a three-way SLI array of GPUs for playable frame rates.


MORE: Mass Effect Andromeda Performance Review


MORE: Ghost Recon Wildlands Performance Review


MORE: For Honor Performance Review

  • Bryan_B103
    I love the "Frame Time" chart on page 3. This provides a really nice graphical representation of what your experience would be in-game. I'm excited to see charts like that one used in future reviews.
    Reply
  • barryv88
    Why was yesterday's RX480 used and not the newer 580?
    Reply
  • c4s2k3
    19742011 said:
    Why was yesterday's RX480 used and not the newer 580?

    I suspect they are going for cards in the mainstream. I'm sure there are plenty of 480s in use out there. Not too many 580s yet since it is new.
    Reply
  • ykki
    No Ryzen benches? Are you planning to redo all the gaming benches for Ryzen once R3 hits and AGESA 1006 is in full effect?
    Reply
  • coolitic
    Dishonored 2 was bad, Toms, even ignoring the bugs.
    Reply
  • coolitic
    Why no high-end tests?
    Reply
  • elbert
    Only a half review without Ryzen.
    Reply
  • 10tacle
    19742276 said:
    Why no high-end tests?

    19742283 said:
    Only a half review without Ryzen.

    Well there's a lot of hardware missing I'd have liked to have seen as well like a GTX 1080. However in all fairness, they said they chose their hardware on what people *currently* have (according to Steam user hardware surveys), not what they may get in the future. Not many have Ryzen builds and GTX 1080s yet.

    In any event, as a 1440p GTX 970 SLI owner, I'd have liked to have seen the VRAM consumption at that resolution since there are benchmarks for it here. For me it's a little concerning that even at 1080p it uses 3.1GB. I'm trying to squeeze another year out of my GPUs holding out for Volta. But Pascal is due for a refresh later this summer/early fall (2xxx series).
    Reply
  • elbert
    19742377 said:
    19742276 said:
    Why no high-end tests?

    19742283 said:
    Only a half review without Ryzen.

    Well there's a lot of hardware missing I'd have liked to have seen as well like a GTX 1080. However in all fairness, they said they chose their hardware on what people *currently* have (according to Steam user hardware surveys), not what they may get in the future. Not many have Ryzen builds and GTX 1080s yet.

    In any event, as a 1440p GTX 970 SLI owner, I'd have liked to have seen the VRAM consumption at that resolution since there are benchmarks for it here. For me it's a little concerning that even at 1080p it uses 3.1GB. I'm trying to squeeze another year out of my GPUs holding out for Volta (expected to be nearly twice as powerful as Pascal).
    I see the argument but how big of a percentage will not buy the game thinking the Ryzen was left out because of very poor optimization? Its a bad move for a game developer to risk limiting its potental customers. I was wanting the game but I'll wait till I see Ryzen benchmarks.
    Reply
  • 10tacle
    19742461 said:
    I was wanting the game but I'll wait till I see Ryzen benchmarks.

    You can get an idea of that right now with other games and what to expect: http://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-performance-of-ryzen-7-vs-core-i7-with-geforce-gtx-1080-ti/

    My guess is based on that, it will be fine for above 1080p resolutions as the GPU is used more no matter how powerful the CPU is.
    Reply