75 replies to this topic

[Napoleon_Blownapart]

i have read MWO runs better on a quad core than 6 or 8 cores but the posts are older.i read many posts about core parking on more cores.

i currently have
athlonIIx4 640 processor 3.0ghz i think
4g ddr3 1600 ram
asrock 980de3/u3s3 mb
120g ssd
radeon HD7770 oc vid card 1g ddr5
win7 32bit

with DX11 does the game run better on more than 4 cores now?i have been looking at inexpensive cpus like the amd fx6300black 6core 3.5ghz vishera for around $100 but also found a amd fx4130black quad core 3.8/3.9ghz for only 40 bucks.

i only use the pc for gaming and browsing and watching videos.i understand the quadcore upgrade would be less but would the clock increase help much?

my birthday is coming up and im investigating upgrades that would improve mwo, im already getting 40-60 fps on mostly low setting (a cpl are medium) at 1280x900.and will be adding another 4g ram and switching to win7 64 bit soon.id like to hear some opinions (not intel vs amd since i have an amd mb please)

[ninjitsu]

What motherboard do you have?

Avoid first gen AMD bulldozer chips!!! they are flawed. the 4130 is bad. it would be a downgrade from what you have. if your stuck in an AMD board, I'd try for an 8 core. you'll be much better off! 8320 isn't much more expensive than then 6300.

[Belorion]

The 8350 goes on sale on Newegg a fair amount.

[Napoleon_Blownapart]

the 4130 only caught my eye because it was 3.8ghz as opposed to my 640s 3ghz and only considered it because ive read post saying people with 6 or 8 cores were surprised they didnt get improvements and complained about bottlenecking on the over4 core cpus but that was b4 dx11 support.i have also read that the piledriver is better than the bulldozer.i have a microcenter nearby and they are competitive with newegg.
it says the 6300 is piledriver (vishera) not bulldozer.

my motherboard is asrock 980de3/u3.

but is the game running better on 6 or 8 cores now without parking cores or tweaking the user.cfg?

Edited by Gorantir, 29 June 2014 - 09:57 PM.

[ShadowPuppet]

My specs are:
AMD FX 6300
Asus M5A970 R2.0 mobo
Asus R7 250 1Gddr5 128bit (slightly lower perf than your 7770 but close enough)
10GB DDR3 1600
No overclocks for any component, running stock coolers at the moment and generally high ambient temperatures over here in Malaysia anyway.
Win 7 64-bit

I average between 48-85fps on low settings (textures on high) depending on maps and whether there are enemy units in the distance (if there are unsighted enemies in the distance the fps will drop when you are looking in their direction btw)

I believe that my setup is representative of what you would want to achieve with your upgrade, and my advice would be that upgrading to an FX 6300 not so much of an improvement that is worth spending the cash on. Maybe an 8 core 8350 would be a better idea, but the differences would be marginal for the cost involved.

If you're planning to play Star Citizen in the future then I'd recommend that you wait and save up until it is released then build an awesome rig when that happens. It was what I was planning to do until my previous PC kicked the bucket.

Hope my 2 cents helps you make an informed decision.

[Reported for Inappropriate Name]

game runs fine for me on a core unlocked phenom 2 555 and a HD 6850, although in the summer I cannot overclock with my current heatsink because this game boils my cpu and older phenom 2's haet temps over 56c or so.

[Golrar]

I upgraded from a Phenom II X6 1055T (2.8Ghz) to a FX-8350. I bumped my ASRock 970 Extreme 3 board to the ASUS Sabertooth R2.0 990FX. RAM(G.Skill Ripjawk 8GB 1600) and GPU stayed the same, as well as storage. I went from all medium settings, with low particles and low shading on 1080p DX9 to All High settings, with particles still on low DX11. I use the core unpark app when I play and I have a slightly modded user.cfg (not at home so I can't give particulars, but you can search the forums for one). I have max FPS capped at 60, and I never drop below 40. I have a very limited GPU (GTX 650Ti 1GB 128bit) and it still runs very well and pretty.

I think I paid just around $430 for the upgrade (also bought a Corsair H100i liquid cooler). Two weeks after my purchase, newegg dropped the CPU price by about $20, so it is even better now.

Good thing is your mobo will support the FX-8350, but there have been issues with more than light overclocks and socket temp on that board. But my FX isn't even OCed yet and I run the game beautifully for the money I paid.

[ninjitsu]

I upgraded from a 1055t to a 6300 and hated it. The new AMD 6 cores are closer to tri cores because of how AMD is designing it's CPU's. That's why I'm saying to go for the 8 core piledriver chips, they're more equivalent to quad cores.

[Xyroc]

Had Phenom II x4 955 upgraded to FX-8350 both run MWO just fine no hang ups. 8350 does do it better though ; D

[Tannhauser Gate]

I have an AMD x8. I bios-disabled the last 4 cores on my x8 and had noticeable improvement. My game runs fine but I need a gaming mouse badly. My pos mouse can barely highlight text.

[Alreech]

Gorantir, on 29 June 2014 - 07:49 PM, said:

my birthday is coming up and im investigating upgrades that would improve mwo, im already getting 40-60 fps on mostly low setting (a cpl are medium) at 1280x900.and will be adding another 4g ram and switching to win7 64 bit soon.id like to hear some opinions (not intel vs amd since i have an amd mb please)

Your Athlon is a native Quad Core CPU. You have four integer Cores and four FPUs

The FX 4XXX is a CPU with 2 modules, each module is two integer Cores and one FPU.
The FX 6xxx is a CPU with 3 modules, the FX 8xxx a CPU with 4 modules.

Switching from an Athlon X4 to a FX 4xxx / 6xxxx would be a downgrade (only 2 or 3 complete cores).
Even switching to a FX 8350 wouldn't bring you what much FPS, because your GPU is also limiting.

IMHO you should buy a faster GPU (R7 270 / R9 280).

[Bullseye69]

I was running the exact same processor and resolution with the same amount of ram and a R9 270X rebranded 7870 XT video card and could not get a good steady frame rate at all. The system i built my nephew uses the 8350 and 8 gig ram and a r9 280X rebranded 7970ghz video card and he gets better frame rate that my old setup. The processor is the key along with the speed it running. The FX chipos the 8 core even though it 8 core the game really only uses 4 core even under direct X 11 simply because the chip design. Think of it this way the 8 core is basicly according to the game a 4 core the 6 core is basically a 3 core that the way the game sees it.

Now what i had to do $650 later was a change out of the motherboard, processor ram and new OS and ssd. I get very good frame rate with v-synce off low is 75 and high is 115 and that on 1600 res and high detail.

What you could do is bump the processor speed up a couple of hundered mhz and see if it helps the game if it does then you could get a better cpu fan and try to run it at that speed. I have heard that the 6 core 6350 does good because of the higher clock speed but I have no first hand knowledge of it though.

I am a AMD fan but running a Intel now just to get the game running good. Got a deal on parts from a friend upgraded his system he was going to ITX small form factor so got his 4770K motherboard case and order up a os and ram and it runs great but we should have to do that since we specs wise has what it take to run the game recommend except for 300 mhz less speed.

[ninjitsu]

Yeah, I've been a big AMD fan for many years but the new core designs are lack luster. I'm much happier with my Intel chip. I think's it's funny how Intel can do more at lower speeds with roughly half the power

[Stickjock]

Quote

OS Version: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit
System RAM: 8191 MB
CPU Name: AMD Athlon™ II X4 650 Processor
CPU Speeds: 3200
Physical CPUs: 1
Virtual CPUs: 4
Video Card Description: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760
VRAM: 2048 MB
Primary Display Resolution: 1920x1080
Multi-Monitor Desktop Resolution: 5760x1080
Microphone: True
Language: English (United States)
Free Hard Drive Space: 410845 MB
Total Hard Drive Space: 942353 MB
Windows Experience Index Rating: 5.9

^^ My current system specs... I DO run with V-Sync turned on to limit my framerates tho'.

Average FPS runs 40-60 on most games with DX11 and settings on High and Full Window mode. With V-Sync off, I would notice my FPS totally SKY ROCKET (like 1200+) after connecting to a game and waiting for the team window to show... didn't like the idea of my GPU cooking itself, or even the possibility of it...

When playing, game is on my center 32" screen, left side 23" monitor typically has Teamspeak open and running on it, along with controls for my Nvidia Shadowplay software as well (set to Desktop record since I hate running in Full Screen mode) and my music software (Zune for me) with tunes playing, while the right hand 23" typically has Chrome open showing FB chat for a few guys that drop with me in game as well as a seperate tab for Mechspecs and one for Smurfy's...

So I've got a bit running at the same time, and no worries about the system struggling to keep up... I feel with the V-Sync I'm actually reigning it in a bit... maybe over cautious on my part but still...

Thought I'd throw system up... see a lot of players say AMD CPU's have a rough time but havent' noticed it myself...

[ninjitsu]

Stickjock, on 01 July 2014 - 10:13 AM, said:

^^ My current system specs... I DO run with V-Sync turned on to limit my framerates tho'.

Average FPS runs 40-60 on most games with DX11 and settings on High and Full Window mode. With V-Sync off, I would notice my FPS totally SKY ROCKET (like 1200+) after connecting to a game and waiting for the team window to show... didn't like the idea of my GPU cooking itself, or even the possibility of it...

When playing, game is on my center 32" screen, left side 23" monitor typically has Teamspeak open and running on it, along with controls for my Nvidia Shadowplay software as well (set to Desktop record since I hate running in Full Screen mode) and my music software (Zune for me) with tunes playing, while the right hand 23" typically has Chrome open showing FB chat for a few guys that drop with me in game as well as a seperate tab for Mechspecs and one for Smurfy's...

So I've got a bit running at the same time, and no worries about the system struggling to keep up... I feel with the V-Sync I'm actually reigning it in a bit... maybe over cautious on my part but still...

Thought I'd throw system up... see a lot of players say AMD CPU's have a rough time but havent' noticed it myself...

You've got a pre-piledriver chip, it's a proper quad core. You've also got a pretty good video card.

[DjPush]

My rig:

FX8320 @ 4Ghz
Asus M5A99FX Pro
GTX 770 4GB (SLI)
16GB 1600Mhz DDR3 Ram
Corasair 750W PSU

(SLI disabled when playing MWO cuz it hates SLI)

Here is the thing about MWO. It doesnt work on any system well enough to maintain 60fps. I have sent service tickets to PGI and they told me that 30fps is within their standards. Their words "MWO just isn't designed to work on high end gaming systems." So if you are looking to upgrade just to play MWO I would stick with that video card you have and get a little more powerful CPU like the FX6300 or 83xx. I usually get around 40fps on very high settings but a lot of the time the game drops into the 20's. It doesnt like high end systems. I got better performance on my AMD Phenom 965BE and a HD7850 than I do now with the rig I just listed.

[Stickjock]

ninjitsu, on 01 July 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

You've got a pre-piledriver chip, it's a proper quad core. You've also got a pretty good video card.

Good to know about the chip... I know just enough to be dangerous putting components into my system... hadn't really even checked on my processor as to how good it was or not...

[xWiredx]

DjPush, on 01 July 2014 - 10:35 AM, said:

My rig:

FX8320 @ 4Ghz
Asus M5A99FX Pro
GTX 770 4GB (SLI)
16GB 1600Mhz DDR3 Ram
Corasair 750W PSU

(SLI disabled when playing MWO cuz it hates SLI)

Here is the thing about MWO. It doesnt work on any system well enough to maintain 60fps. I have sent service tickets to PGI and they told me that 30fps is within their standards. Their words "MWO just isn't designed to work on high end gaming systems." So if you are looking to upgrade just to play MWO I would stick with that video card you have and get a little more powerful CPU like the FX6300 or 83xx. I usually get around 40fps on very high settings but a lot of the time the game drops into the 20's. It doesnt like high end systems. I got better performance on my AMD Phenom 965BE and a HD7850 than I do now with the rig I just listed.

I've got it running pretty well with SLI. There's a post floating around with some good information on getting it working properly.

I am probably beating this horse to death, but high-end AMD is not the same as high-end Intel for MWO. With a couple of small changes, I am now running almost everything at Very High with DX11 and getting 60fps+ (I was experiencing some dips down to 40fps, but I have fixed that with a rather mild OC on my cards). There is a lot of stuff floating around about how to maximize performance with AMD chips in MWO so you can do a little bit of work to your system and get a better experience. Still, don't expect any AMD chip to perform as well as an Intel equivalent in MWO (or really most things).

[ninjitsu]

xWiredx, on 01 July 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

I've got it running pretty well with SLI. There's a post floating around with some good information on getting it working properly.

I am probably beating this horse to death, but high-end AMD is not the same as high-end Intel for MWO. With a couple of small changes, I am now running almost everything at Very High with DX11 and getting 60fps+ (I was experiencing some dips down to 40fps, but I have fixed that with a rather mild OC on my cards). There is a lot of stuff floating around about how to maximize performance with AMD chips in MWO so you can do a little bit of work to your system and get a better experience. Still, don't expect any AMD chip to perform as well as an Intel equivalent in MWO (or really most things).

I approve of this message.

[Smokeyjedi]

ninjitsu, on 01 July 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

I approve of this message.

ANYTHING you can do, I can do cheaper....LOL suckers. AMD baby!!!! A cinebench score of 8.25 is nothing to shake a stick about. If that is poor performance, than u need to deal in server parts.