Benchmark is up! :: Final Fantasy XIV (FFXIV, FF14)

Quote Reply

#202 Jun 05 2013 at 1:57 PM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1675037783679

View User Forum

Guru

12,363 posts

EvilMadMike1982 wrote:

I'm actually building a new comp for this game(that and other stuff but mostly for the game). I'm already buying the parts as we speak and at the end of it my specs should read

Windows 7 Home 64bit
8 GB rams 1600 DDR3
EVGA Geforce 650 TI 2GB GDDR5
I5-3470 Quad core 3.2GHz

I'm hoping for a really good score since they're making the game more poor friendly lol

My comp is similar (2600k and wx 650 Ti BOOSTs) and I'm getting mid 5000's on everything max 1920x1080. Only other difference is I have a SSD.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#203 Jun 05 2013 at 2:19 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1605485999042

818 posts

ShadowField wrote:

I just went through a CPU upgrade and wanted to share some pretty surprising results!

Old
Phenom II 955 Stock Speeds
8GB DDR2 1066
Radeon HD 6870 Stock Speeds

New
Core i7 4770
16GB DDR3 1600mhz
Radeon HD 6870 Stock Speeds

So you can see that the video card stayed the same.

FFXIV
1280*720
Medium Preset - OLD 8092 - NEW 12647

1920*1200
Medium Preset - OLD 6679 - NEW 8892
Maximum Preset - OLD 4056 - NEW 4604

As you can see, a Phenom II 955 at stock speeds was holding back FFXIV by quite a bit! It looks to be a really CPU dependent game.

I hope this info will help some people prep for FFXIVv2!

Edited, Jun 4th 2013 11:35pm by ShadowField

It shouldn't be so CPU dependent, especially in the benchmark. That, to me, sounds like bad PC coding.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#204 Jun 05 2013 at 2:30 PM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1675037783679

View User Forum

Guru

12,363 posts

electromagnet83 wrote:

It shouldn't be so CPU dependent, especially in the benchmark. That, to me, sounds like bad PC coding.

Without DX11 or SLI/Crossfire (or GPU optimizations in general) done yet, why would this be any different? Not to mention (dare I say it) this is a beta benchmark Smiley: tongue

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#205 Jun 05 2013 at 7:45 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1607300262231

Scholar

304 posts

electromagnet83 wrote:

It shouldn't be so CPU dependent, especially in the benchmark. That, to me, sounds like bad PC coding.

I was surprised with the benchmarks myself. Originally considering how good FFXIV2.0 looks, I didn't even consider being CPU limited.

But the benchmarks don't lie. After looking through other people's benchmarks in this thread, I think there are quite a few people out there who are limited more by their CPU than GPU.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#206 Jun 05 2013 at 7:51 PM Rating: Good

Montsegurnephcreep

View User Forum

Sage

1,994 posts

Most MMO's are cpu intensive though. They want this stuff to run on any machine and high end gpus aren't what people normally have.

____________________________

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#207 Jun 06 2013 at 4:20 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1605485999042

818 posts

Montsegurnephcreep wrote:

Most MMO's are cpu intensive though. They want this stuff to run on any machine and high end gpus aren't what people normally have.

Agreed and it is due to massive amounts of data changing hands. The benchmark however deals primarily with graphic performance measured in average fps. This portion should not really be a strain on any cpu

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#208 Jun 06 2013 at 7:52 AM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1653869826415

View User Forum

Guru

1,422 posts

I've noticed that AMD processors don't do as well in the benchmark as Intels. Catwho posted about it last page I think. The move from AMD to Intel could also be contributing to the big jump in his scores.

Edit:

Found this chart. Looking at the scores for my video card they are 1000 points higher than mine. They are both with Intel CPUs, whereas I have an AMD FX-6300.

Edited, Jun 6th 2013 7:05am by SkinwalkerAsura

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#209 Jun 06 2013 at 8:29 AM Rating: Good

Montsegurnephcreep

View User Forum

Sage

1,994 posts

AMD has been behind in recent years in terms of CPU's, but bang for your buck it's extremely hard to beat. For most gaming situations, especially ones that are highly dependent on the GPU, it's fine. When you consider the FX-8350 goes for about 190$, that's damn good value compared to some of the I5-I7 chips.

Edited, Jun 6th 2013 10:38am by Montsegurnephcreep

____________________________

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#210 Jun 06 2013 at 8:41 AM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1653869826415

View User Forum

Guru

1,422 posts

Montsegurnephcreep wrote:

AMD has been behind in recent years in terms of CPU's, but bang for your buck it's extremely hard to beat. For most gaming situations, especially ones that are highly dependent on the GPU, it's fine. When you consider the FX-8350 goes for about 190$, that's damn good value compared to some of the I5-I7 chips.

Edited, Jun 6th 2013 10:38am by Montsegurnephcreep

Agreed. My last 3 CPUs have been AMD. Doesn't look like the benchmark is optimized for AMD, but it is probably exactly as Wint said: a beta benchmark.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#211 Jun 06 2013 at 8:42 AM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1675037783679

View User Forum

Guru

12,363 posts

For the record I have nothing against AMD, if you are on a budget and need performance they're a solid choice. However for a little more scratch you can usually get some pretty good results from Intel, I love my 2600k.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#212 Jun 06 2013 at 1:49 PM Rating: Good

Allestra

Sage

126 posts

very pleased to see the difference in performance with benchmarks....struggled a bit with original release but this one "extrememly high" (same pc)
cool! :o)

____________________________

http://i.imgur.com/FokEtHo.png

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#213 Jun 06 2013 at 5:53 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1711930565044

Sage

230 posts

I wonder when we will get the mythical Character Creator Benchmark..

▲ Page top

Benchmark is up!Follow