Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Thread for Hardware Questions for Beta Phase 3Follow

#1 Jun 13 2013 at 11:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
Just getting this going in preparation for questions/comments/concerns about how hardware runs the beta versus the benchmark.
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#2 Jun 13 2013 at 11:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
Existing beta participants can use this to discuss their own experiences thus far.
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#3 Jun 13 2013 at 11:26 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
Thanks for the thread, good idea. I can get the game to run. My major issue with it is the vast difference in quality going from max to even one notch below. Granted I pay much more attention to the minute detail of the world (remember the long grass debate) than most so I can't stress enough that this is my opinion as I see it. Graphically speaking (not world-wise as far as diversity) I felt like 1.0 was sharper and had higher texture resolutions than 2.0 yet 1.0 ran better on my system. I'm hoping beta 3 runs better as they've had time to fine tune things a bit more. So, until I get in tonight at 4am I will halt my opinion.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#4 Jun 13 2013 at 11:26 AM Rating: Good
***
3,178 posts
In general, ARR has a higher benchmark than 1.0 did?

Do I even need to check my hardware again?

Quote:
Processor - Intel Core i7 860(2.8GHz) 64 bit Quad-Core

Memory - 4GB (2GB x 2) DDR3 1600

Hard Drive - 500GB SATAII

Optical Drive 1 - 24X DL DVD+/-RW Drive

Graphics - NVIDIA GeForce GTS250 1GB


Need to upgrade RAM or Video card? I bought the PC with these components on the low end since they are easily upgraded.
#5 Jun 13 2013 at 11:30 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
If you have unexpected low performance, don't immediately blame your video card.

AMD processors are performing lower than their equivalent Intel processors, and there is a good chance that it's either 1. your processor or 2. the motherboard to which the processor is attached that is actually your bottleneck.

With everything maxed out I'm not able to break 4,000 on the benchmark. I have a Radeon HD 7770 and by all rights my scores ought to be a thousand points higher. They are being held back by a Phenom II X4 processor, which was only mid range when it was new and is now nearly three years old. My motherboard only has an AM3 socket, not an FX socket or AM3+, so my upgrade options are quite limited. If I want to get a higher score, I'm going to need to gut and rebuild myself around a better processor, simple as that.

Moral of the story: A brand new video card will improve your performance, but unless you've got a whole brand new EVERYTHING along with it, you probably won't run the game comfortably at maximum everything.

Now, with all that said, I just adjusted the in-game resolution to be a notch lower (instead of 1080p I've been running at 1440x900 or somesuch) and dialed down a few of the HQ settings to be medium. And it runs pretty smoothly that way.

Edited, Jun 13th 2013 1:32pm by Catwho
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#6 Jun 13 2013 at 11:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
I would also recommend considering waiting until the game is actually launched and see what your performance with the official game. It may not be as bad and another benefit is if you want to upgrade there may be new hardware out that will do better.
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#7 Jun 13 2013 at 11:33 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
818 posts
Catwho wrote:
If you have unexpected low scores, don't immediately blame your video card.

AMD processors are performing lower than their equivalent Intel processors, and there is a good chance that it's either 1. your processor or 2. the motherboard to which the processor is attached that is actually your bottleneck.

With everything maxed out I'm not able to break 4,000 on the benchmark. I have a Radeon HD 7770 and by all rights my scores ought to be a thousand points higher. They are being held back by a Phenom II X4 processor, which was only mid range when it was new and is now nearly three years old. My motherboard only has an AM3 socket, not an FX socket or AM3+, so my upgrade options are quite limited. If I want to get a higher score, I'm going to need to gut and rebuild myself around a better processor, simple as that.

Moral of the story: A brand new video card will improve your score, but unless you've got a whole brand new EVERYTHING along with it, it won't max your scores out.

Now, with all that said, I just adjusted the in-game resolution to be a notch lower (instead of 1080p I've been running at 1440x900 or somesuch) and dialed down a few of the HQ settings to be medium. And it runs pretty smoothly that way.

Edited, Jun 13th 2013 1:31pm by Catwho


How this translated to actual gameplay, for me, was that the GPU was the obvious bottleneck. I say that because "looking" at a scene full of trees, characters, effects, etc caused the framerate to drop drastically while in-game. Where as at any given point I could look downward at the ground and run at a nice high frames per second. I'm sure processor speeds have huge effect on the benchmark but the game itself, FPS-wise, seems heavily dependent on graphical performance.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#8 Jun 13 2013 at 11:48 AM Rating: Excellent
***
3,178 posts
Wint wrote:
I would also recommend considering waiting until the game is actually launched and see what your performance with the official game. It may not be as bad and another benefit is if you want to upgrade there may be new hardware out that will do better.


Good call. I like ideas that consist of doing nothing.
#9 Jun 13 2013 at 11:49 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,439 posts
It runs fine on my i5 OC with 5850HD - I bought this and made it myself (first time for everything) for 1.0 and it's still going strong. On the the other hand when I tried to run the benchmark on my work laptop i3 on medium settings it was a sub 1k score - didn't try the testing on this system though so I will give it a go and post how good/bad it is.
____________________________
Esuna Forums

#10 Jun 13 2013 at 1:43 PM Rating: Excellent
Catwho wrote:
If you have unexpected low performance, don't immediately blame your video card.

AMD processors are performing lower than their equivalent Intel processors, and there is a good chance that it's either 1. your processor or 2. the motherboard to which the processor is attached that is actually your bottleneck.

With everything maxed out I'm not able to break 4,000 on the benchmark. I have a Radeon HD 7770 and by all rights my scores ought to be a thousand points higher. They are being held back by a Phenom II X4 processor, which was only mid range when it was new and is now nearly three years old. My motherboard only has an AM3 socket, not an FX socket or AM3+, so my upgrade options are quite limited. If I want to get a higher score, I'm going to need to gut and rebuild myself around a better processor, simple as that.

Moral of the story: A brand new video card will improve your performance, but unless you've got a whole brand new EVERYTHING along with it, you probably won't run the game comfortably at maximum everything.

Now, with all that said, I just adjusted the in-game resolution to be a notch lower (instead of 1080p I've been running at 1440x900 or somesuch) and dialed down a few of the HQ settings to be medium. And it runs pretty smoothly that way.

Edited, Jun 13th 2013 1:32pm by Catwho


+1

I was bored last week so I ran the benchmark with my FX-6300 at stock speed then with my normal OC. With a 1 GHz OC the difference was exactly 200 points. I then decided to try my 7870 with my old Phenom 955 BE. The score was 100 points less then my FX-6300 at stock speed. I've also seen from other benchmarks that with a 7870 and an Intel CPU people are scoring 1000 points higher than myself. The benchmark and apparently beta does not play well with AMD processors, so if you really want to boost performance you'll have to go Intel.
#11 Jun 13 2013 at 1:52 PM Rating: Decent
*
89 posts
My box is from mid '09- I had a built 1st gen i7 and since then it's been oc'd to 4.2GHz with 12GB's of ddr3@1600. Earlier this year I upgraded from a GTX275 to a Radeon HD6800

I just ran the benchmark and recieved an 8785 on max settings @1920x1080 with an average FPS of 122

I *think* I'll be able to run it :)

My laptop scored in the mid 3000's so I'll be able to play no matter my location :)

Edited, Jun 13th 2013 3:52pm by sixstroke

Edited, Jun 13th 2013 4:29pm by sixstroke
#12 Jun 13 2013 at 8:56 PM Rating: Decent
9 posts
AMD 955 does not bottleneck this game. 3.2Ghz 660oc 1920x1080 Max 5200score. OC at 3.9ghz same score 5200 Max.
#13 Jun 13 2013 at 9:00 PM Rating: Excellent
notmuch22 wrote:
AMD 955 does not bottleneck this game. 3.2Ghz 660oc 1920x1080 Max 5200score. OC at 3.9ghz same score 5200 Max.


What video card are you running?
#14 Jun 13 2013 at 9:26 PM Rating: Decent
9 posts
you can't fully blame the cpu on this. TERA has similar issues probably. TERA has a problem with performance, even with great rig. i upgraded by vid card and saw only better fps when there was fewer than 10 players around me. it's known that last year, Nvidia was approached to tweak their card to better perform in Tera like they do on other games. Nvidia came back and basically said after careful research, it's not their card, but the game. The game is NOT offloading some processes off the cpu and putting in in the gpu instead. so, you can get better performance if SE tweeked their game to offload as much as they can off the cpu, and it won't cost you a dime for it.

Edited, Jun 13th 2013 11:27pm by niquev71
#15 Jun 13 2013 at 9:56 PM Rating: Decent
9 posts
SkinwalkerAsura wrote:
notmuch22 wrote:
AMD 955 does not bottleneck this game. 3.2Ghz 660oc 1920x1080 Max 5200score. OC at 3.9ghz same score 5200 Max.


What video card are you running?


Gtx 660
#16 Jun 13 2013 at 10:49 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
340 posts
A few simple things to check. Look up the datasheet on your processor. What is the highest memory speed your processor supports. Then look up the data sheet on your motherboard, find out the highest speed your motherboard supports, and then look at your memory. Your memory should ideally be at the same speed as the slowest of the two (ideally both of them will have the same cap). Also, if you built your own computer, check the timings on the memory vs. factory requirements and in the BIOS. You might have memory performing at a lower speed.

Video card wise, if everything checks out fine, and you're still getting low framerates it could be your video. Some of the low-mid range cards can run decent settings at a high res. If you're wanting to push 1080p at Max, you'll want to have a decent mid to high range card, but before you make that investment, make sure you look at the whole machine as a whole.
____________________________
WoW Blackhand-US-Date of Retirement: 9/21/2010... /Sigh
Devari - 90 Rogue 85 DK Druid/Mage/Warrior 70+

FFXI - Shiva "Retired.... Or not? One more try, honest."
Desmar - 65 Sam 36 Mnk 18 Thf 12 War

FFXIV - Devari Garamond - Sargatanas 50 Paladin / Culinarian / Weaver / Armorer
Beta - Devaria Ariadne - Ultros - Pugilist
#17 Jun 14 2013 at 4:15 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
818 posts
I am very very happy to report that they have done amazing optimization. With no changes to my rig I am in 1080p with max settings running at 35-55 fps in town and in Thanalan!
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 71 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (71)