AMD 760k and WoW

[I/O]

How can you not know this is true. It's been the case since conroe, that's 2006.

 

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1261?vs=700

Why do you try and compare an FX 4300 to a Core i5 4690K LOL that;s BS.

[Majestic]

Why do you try and compare an FX 4300 to a Core i5 4690K LOL that;s BS.

 

He said prove the per-core difference. Last time i recalled, the fx4300 was still a quadcore.

The differences between the two in those graphs is representative of the framerate you get with both during heavy situations (for WoW atleast)

[I/O]

He said prove the per-core difference. Last time i recalled, the fx4300 was still a quadcore.

The differences between the two in those graphs is representative of the framerate you get with both during heavy situations (for WoW atleast)

Still not an apple to apple comparison when comparing the best gaming CPU on the market to the lowest FX offering from AMD.

[Majestic]

Still not an apple to apple comparison when comparing the best gaming CPU on the market to the lowest FX offering from AMD.

 

That is why I wrote "for WoW atleast". Because that game almost linearly scales with IPC.

Why is basic referencing so hard and i have to explain even the most minute correlations.

 

Here you go;

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1261?vs=1289

 

Overclocked 8core. Every possible benefit AMD can have, so i don't get called on "fanboyism" (because fuck being objective amirite).

Still nowhere near Intel's per-core peformance in the single threaded benchmarks.

 

Great, now we've established a fact that has been known for 8 years now. Glad we had this talk.

[I/O]

That is why I wrote "for WoW atleast". Because that game almost linearly scales with IPC.

Why is basic referencing so hard and i have to explain even the most minute correlations.

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1261?vs=1289

 

[Majestic]

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1261?vs=1289

 

What point are you trying to make here. Honestly, that link only proves me right.

I even linked it myself lol. People on tech forums these days..

 

To put this into an analogy;

You people are now basically arguing that John Kerry has been president over the last 6 years. And are somehow butthurt someone calls you out on it. Do you realise how ridiculous you're sounding right now?

[I/O]

@Majestic

There's no need to compare a low end FX chip to a high end Unlocked Intel chip. I am not arguing that WoW is not a game that favors Intel.

[harrynowl]

Just get an i3 4150.

 

/Thread

[Majestic]

@Majestic

There's no need to compare a low end FX chip to a high end Unlocked Intel chip. I am not arguing that WoW is not a game that favors Intel.

 

There is nothing wrong with it, under the correct context. I'm not judging it on multithreading performance, or saying a cheap product should outperform an expensive one.

It's just easier to see the difference in IPC this way.

[deathjester]

Let me make this easy for you people. WoW in a cpu bound situation like all MMO's, gets cpu bound on one core at full load. When that happens? FPS will look like this with the G3258 knocked down a little bit since the game CAN use more than 2 cores but it doesn't help all that much. Where will that happen? 25 man raids, cities with a ton of players in them, Ashran (new open world BG), world bosses with lots of players around. Where will that not happen? Arena, smaller BG's (and even the larger BG's should be fine on AMD), and 10 man raids should also be fine.

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlC81MjwelBgdEZNV3l6aHl1eUNwSUR4Rml0MXMzN1E&usp=sharing#gid=1

 

Now as far as GPU? Nvidia/AMD makes no difference. Power of the GPU makes the difference. 

 

The higher that number (single core peformance)? The better FPS you will get in a CPU bound scenario. If you could care less about 25 man raids, world bosses, Ashran and are just an Arena/BG player and 5 man dungeon player? AMD/Intel? Not gonna mean much. You could play arena in this game with a 2008 e8400. I know, because I did it for years and got better FPS than people with I7-920's because my single core was higher. You could also play WoW on like a freakin GTX 260 at lower graphics settings. It is a cpu bound game, not a GPU bound game.

 

After about 3 cores, cores means nothing, unless you are streaming the game or recording gameplay. 

[i_build_nanosuits]

just bump the cpu to 860k and it will be fine

[Faceman]

Let me tell you about Basil.

I was at Tigerdirect one day picking up some fan filters. I couldn't help but overhear a guy my age(Basil) talking with a floor salesman.

Basil had bought a "top of the line" prebuilt from Tigerdirect and wasn't getting good performance in his games, particularly WoW. You know the kind of prebuilt I'm talking about. $1,200 For 16GB of RAM! and 6TB of storage! The real components were an FX8350, on a 4+1 VRM motherboard no less, an H80i, and a price appropriate R9 270X. You know, builds that throw in a free t-shirt because they feel slightly bad about ripping off the customer like this.

Basil was talking with the salesman asking why am I getting bad performance in WoW? I bought a brand new computer just to raid and I was getting better performance on my old laptop he says. Salesman goes, "Maybe the graphics card isn't strong enough, have you tried turning your settings down?" Basil says "yes, it helps some, but still not as good as my laptop. I just paid a thousand dollars for a brand new computer and I can't even play the game I want to play." Salesman says "You probably need a stronger graphics card."

Now this is the part where I come in and tell the salesman and Basil that it's not a GPU problem, it's a CPU problem and chances are that GPU on his laptop is weaker than a 270X. I say for that game, he needs an Intel processor. The salesman and Basil both turn to me and say: "Intel? But AMD outscored Intel in cpubenchmark.net" Without a screen to hide my face when I see someone say that kind of comment I see from time to time on these very forums, I'm sure a look of dismay washed over me. I had to explain to both of them why this is a bad measurement of performance, walk over to the in store computer and bring up some WoW benchmarks and youtube videos. The problem is really clear if you just know how to look.

After talking with Basil for a little bit we strike up a friendship, he is going to the rival college in my town, but we both have the same major. Later that day we decide to meet up. I'm to go to his place, and help him pick out a new computer. It's already clear that he is returning this one and I'll help him build from scratch.

He showed me a quick dungeon run in WoW. I like MMOs, but not WoW so I wanted to see the end game a little. He was right, it runs terribly. Constantly hitching and going in slow mo.

I'm happy to report that Basil now has an i5 with GTX780Ti. He plays any game he wants without issue particularly WOW.

[I/O]

You could play arena in this game with a 2008 e8400. I know, because I did it for years and got better FPS than people with I7-920's because my single core was higher. You could also play WoW on like a freakin GTX 260 at lower graphics settings. It is a cpu bound game, not a GPU bound game.

Back in the day this is true but now in days not at all. WoW actually takes some power to run after all the many graphical updates they have made to it over the years.

[Hieb]

Hey everyone, I'm helping my friend build a budget pc for gaming. He sticks with 1080p gaming and is a blizzard fan. Most of his gaming would be done on WoW. I'm not a huge AMD person and was wondering how well this build would hold up in wow (high or ultra settings?) I'm trying to stick as close to 600 as I can, A little higher wouldnt be to much. If you have any other recommendations, they'd be much appreciated.

 

cpu - amd 760k

gpu - asus directcu II r9 280

ram - 8gb 1600

hdd - seagate barracuda 1tb 7200

ssd - kingston v300 120gb

World of Warcraft only barely uses more than 1 thread. Generally it loads up your first core to 100% (even if you have an i5-4690K @ 5GHz) and then other cores at like 10-20%. If you're on a tight budget and he plays mostly WoW, you'll want a Pentium G3258. It will perform leaps and bounds better than the Athlon. Especially with the R9 280 the 760K will be crap for WoW. It might be alright for Battlefield but I'd definitely recommend the Pentium in this case.

[I/O]

World of Warcraft only barely uses more than 1 thread. Generally it loads up your first core to 100% (even if you have an i5-4690K @ 5GHz) and then other cores at like 10-20%. If you're on a tight budget and he plays mostly WoW, you'll want a Pentium G3258. It will perform leaps and bounds better than the Athlon. Especially with the R9 280 the 760K will be crap for WoW. It might be alright for Battlefield but I'd definitely recommend the Pentium in this case.

Pentium is terrible. The frame rate of time is busted and it;s all hype. The laws of the market have spoken otherwise there would be no point to pony up for a proper core i3.

[thebennyboy]

Let me tell you about Basil.

I was at Tigerdirect one day picking up some fan filters. I couldn't help but overhear a guy my age(Basil) talking with a floor salesman.

Basil had bought a "top of the line" prebuilt from Tigerdirect and wasn't getting good performance in his games, particularly WoW. You know the kind of prebuilt I'm talking about. $1,200 For 16GB of RAM! and 6TB of storage! The real components were an FX8350, on a 4+1 VRM motherboard no less, an H80i, and a price appropriate R9 270X. You know, builds that throw in a free t-shirt because they feel slightly bad about ripping off the customer like this.

Basil was talking with the salesman asking why am I getting bad performance in WoW? I bought a brand new computer just to raid and I was getting better performance on my old laptop he says. Salesman goes, "Maybe the graphics card isn't strong enough, have you tried turning your settings down?" Basil says "yes, it helps some, but still not as good as my laptop. I just paid a thousand dollars for a brand new computer and I can't even play the game I want to play." Salesman says "You probably need a stronger graphics card."

Now this is the part where I come in and tell the salesman and Basil that it's not a GPU problem, it's a CPU problem and chances are that GPU on his laptop is weaker than a 270X. I say for that game, he needs an Intel processor. The salesman and Basil both turn to me and say: "Intel? But AMD outscored Intel in cpubenchmark.net" Without a screen to hide my face when I see someone say that kind of comment I see from time to time on these very forums, I'm sure a look of dismay washed over me. I had to explain to both of them why this is a bad measurement of performance, walk over to the in store computer and bring up some WoW benchmarks and youtube videos. The problem is really clear if you just know how to look.

After talking with Basil for a little bit we strike up a friendship, he is going to the rival college in my town, but we both have the same major. Later that day we decide to meet up. I'm to go to his place, and help him pick out a new computer. It's already clear that he is returning this one and I'll help him build from scratch.

He showed me a quick dungeon run in WoW. I like MMOs, but not WoW so I wanted to see the end game a little. He was right, it runs terribly. Constantly hitching and going in slow mo.

I'm happy to report that Basil now has an i5 with GTX780Ti. He plays any game he wants without issue particularly WOW.

 

Biggest wall of bollocks i've seen in a long time. You fail to mention how POOR the game engine for WoW is, plus the fact that even if you tell it to use 8 cores in the config it'll still only use around 2. You should look at Far Cry 4, but then again the shit optimisation is probably AMD's fault.  :rolleyes:

[I/O]

Biggest wall of bollocks i've seen in a long time. You fail to mention how POOR the game engine for WoW is, plus the fact that even if you tell it to use 8 cores in the config it'll still only use around 2. You should look at Far Cry 4, but then again the shit optimisation is probably AMD's fault.  :rolleyes:

WoW was not always a poor engine. One of the biggest reasons it became so popular is because it played so well even on low end hardware which made it accessible to the masses . Since after Cataclysm the game some how needs allot more hardware to run smooth but then again the graphical enhancements were quite major.  

[Faceman]

Biggest wall of bollocks i've seen in a long time. You fail to mention how POOR the game engine for WoW is, plus the fact that even if you tell it to use 8 cores in the config it'll still only use around 2. You should look at Far Cry 4, but then again the shit optimisation is probably AMD's fault.  :rolleyes:

You basically say what I'm saying.  The game engine is poorly optimized, so it needs strong cores to power it. 

[I/O]

You basically say what I'm saying.  The game engine is poorly optimized, so it needs strong cores to power it. 

It's not poorly optimized it's just old and needs and overhaul. That said I have not seen an MMO that does run real nice yet.

[thebennyboy]

It's not poorly optimized it's just old and needs and overhaul. That said I have not seen an MMO that does run real nice yet.

 

It's an old, outdated engine which with new CPU's has become poorly optimised. Blizzard haven't bothered to optimise it to take advantage of any CPU that has more than 2 cores. For as long as people continue to pay the fees and play it, it won't get fixed. Same applies to Ubisoft, once they realize people won't buy their poorly optimised games they'll actually bother to optimise it. I understand it's a bit more difficult to optimise an old engine like the one WoW uses, however that doesn't mean they shouldn't bother.

[thebennyboy]

You basically say what I'm saying.  The game engine is poorly optimized, so it needs strong cores to power it. 

 

Ye, i apologise for the outburst. I do agree that the engine needs to be updated. Take a look at my post above this one.

[I/O]

It's an old, outdated engine which with new CPU's has become poorly optimised. Blizzard haven't bothered to make it work properly with any CPU that has more than 2 cores.

It;s a really old engine 15YO which came out when Single cores were the thing. It's not an optimization issue it an outdated issue. That said it still looks great for a 2005 game but it really looks nothing like when it first came out LOL.

[Hieb]

Pentium is terrible. The frame rate of time is busted and it;s all hype. The laws of the market have spoken otherwise there would be no point to pony up for a proper core i3.

 

Wrong.

World of Warcraft will play like shit on an Athlon compared to even a Pentium G3220, let alone a G3258 overclocked.

 

That said, the Pentium can also play games like BF4 just fine.

 

And for WoW it's no competition:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pentium-g3258-overclocking-performance,3849-10.html

 

 

Of course an i3 is better than a Pentium, but if he's looking at an Athlon then I'm guessnig the i3 is out of his price range... Pentium G3258 is $70, Athlon is $80, i3 is $120. Pentium will beat the Athlon in most games... it might fall behind in Crysis 3 and Watch Dogs since they weren't written to be very friendly with dual cores. But he said his friend plays mostly World of Warcraft, and the Pentium is solid for it.

[I/O]

Wrong.

World of Warcraft will play like shit on an Athlon compared to even a Pentium G3220, let alone a G3258 overclocked.

Still has what to do with frame rate over time ? Pentium sucks that's why it's only $70 bucks and has shitty performance.

[Hieb]

Still has what to do with frame rate over time ? Pentium sucks that's why it's only $70 bucks and has shitty performance.

 

Not in World of Warcraft, which is what the OP is talking about. The Pentium performs far better than the Athlon in frame rate over time.