Thursday, March 15, 2018

WoT enCore vs WoT 1.0 Common Test

Last year Wargaming tested the new maps on the Sandbox server.  The WoT enCore app was made available in December 2017.  The WoT 1.0 test server was made available earlier this year.  After players tried the WoT enCore app to test their system performance, many wondered how that correlates into WoT 1.0 game performance.

In our previous article, we tested WoT enCore with FRAPS to determine how the score converts to real FPS.


For a comparison of WoT enCore and WoT 1.0 common test, we used a 1.0 test server replay on the Abbey(monastery) map.  The replay did not use the same exact path through the map that is used in the WoT enCore app.  However, some of the battle took place around the Abbey in the center of the map and there was also sme of the battle on the 1 and 2 lines of the map.  Both started from the south spawn.

In both the enCore test and WoT 1.0 replay tests Fraps was used to measure average and minimum FPS.  In WoT enCore, the FPS measurement was started at 2:40 on the clock and stopped at 0.02 on the clock.  In the WoT test server replay, a longer measurement period was used starting 15 seconds after the countdown timer reached 00:00 and stopped 3 minutes and 25 seconds later.

The FPS results and the WoT enCore score results are the average of two measurements.

A variety of graphics cards were tested along with two different CPUs.
Graphics cards used:
EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FTW3 Hybrid Gaming 11G-P4-6698-KR
EVGA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti SC Gaming 04G-P4-6253-KR
ZOTAC GeForce GTX 1050 Mini ZT-P10500A-10L
EVGA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 02G-P4-3751-KR
PowerColor Red Dragon Radeon RX 460 AXRX 460 2GBD5-DH/OC

CPUs used
Intel i7-6700K at 4.6 GHz water cooled.
Intel i3-3240 at stock speed and air cooled.


i7 vs i3:

When testing Wot enCore and WoT 1.0 common test, it appeared that both of them mainly used 4 virtual cores of the CPU.  With the i7-6700K, 4 virtual cores were used at 50-80% and the other 4 virtual cores were used at 0-20%.  Because of this, I decided to test some older hardware to see the actual difference in performance.

The difference in results can be attributed to measurement error and the slower RAM and bus speed of the computer with the i3-3240 CPU.

Both tests were run with the same GTX 1050 ti graphics card and the same Nvidia driver version, 391.01.  The system with the i3-3240 used 8GB of DDR3 1600 MHz RAM and an older SATA SSD.  The system with the i7-6700K used 32 GB of DDR4 2666 MHz RAM and an M.2 NVMe SSD.

It looks like you are still limited more by your GPU than your CPU in the newer WoT game engine.

Wot enCore vs WoT 1.0 common test:

We tested both the GTX 1050 and GTX 750 ti with WoT enCore and WoT common test 1.0 to see if there were any differences.  The Ultra preset was used for all tests.

At 1920x1080 resolution, it appears that WoT enCore and WoT 1.0 common test give similar average FPS.  WoT enCore gave a lower minimum FPS.  The period of lower FPS for WoT enCore was for a very brief time lasting less than 1 second.  Overall, it appears that WoT enCore gives accurate results of WoT 1.0 performance.

The GTX 1080 ti was also tested to see if there was a difference in performance between WoT enCore and WoT 1.0 common test.

At 4K resolution, the difference between WoT enCore and WoT 1.0 common test was small in average FPS.  WoT enCore had a lower minimum FPS.  However, the period of lower FPS in WoT enCore was for a very brief time lasting less than 1 second.

At 3440x1440 resolution, WoT enCore had a higher average FPS and a lower minimum FPS when compared to WoT 1.0 common test.  Again, the period of lower FPS for WoT enCore was for a very brief time lasting less than 1 second.

Things changed at 1920x1080 resolution.  WoT enCore had both a higher average FPS and a higher minimum FPS.  As before, the period of lower FPS for WoT 1.0 common test was for a very brief time lasting less than 1 second.  However, most players with high end hardware will not be likely playing at 1920x1080 resolution.

Additional WoT enCore testing:

At 1920x1080, both the GTX 1050 ti and GTX 1050 will give good results.  Both had an average FPS around 60 FPS.  Turning off Anti-Aliasing brought the GTX 1050 ti up to an average of 74 FPS and the GTX 1050 up to an average of 67 FPS.

The RX 460 and GTX 750 ti are playable on Ultra, but I'd suggest a lower graphics setting for better performance.  Turning off Anti-Aliasing does help the performance of both GPUs significantly.  With Anti-Aliasing turned off, both GPUs gained an average of 7 FPS in our testing.

At 1920x1080 with the Medium preset WOT 1.0 should be playable with all of the GPUs.  In fact, you probably can use a preset higher than Medium and still get very good results based on the WoT enCore results.


It appears that WoT enCore is an accurate predictor of average FPS in WoT 1.0.  Both lower end hardware and high end hardware gave similar average FPS results at the same settings and resolutions.

When we looked at WoT enCore results across a variety of lower end hardware, it appears that WoT 1.0 will be playable on a GTX 750 ti and RX 460 and any GPU with better performance than the GTX 750 ti.  If you run into frame rate issues with higher graphics settings, turning off Anti-Aliasing should give a significant boots in frame rate.

Support Us!
If you enjoyed this article or any of our articles, please support us on Patreon

No comments:

Post a Comment