239 replies to this topic

[Flapdrol]

Both dip, amd dips deeper. More efficient code would be welcome for both of course.

[Lord Letto]

Clears Throat (These are not mine, I Googled AMD Vs. Intel and found these):

[xWiredx]

Bill Lumbar, on 23 January 2015 - 06:00 AM, said:

While I agree with some of what you are saying..... What about Kain? He has a bad ass Intel rig, has spent a butte load of money, and he was still not happy with the "dips" this game produces. No misinformation there, just goes to show that Mid-higher end Amd CPU's are not the weak link in this issue, its this game. That is a fact, and one that many seem to over look and say, "just go Intel dude, its better." Does Intel put out better numbers then Amd.... no doubt about it, in most games yes it does, I have played with both Intel and Amd gaming rigs. Say what you like, I don't have low standards when it comes to my gaming rigs, and my FX-8350 plays this game just fine, like it does ANY other game I have ever played with my rig.

If he's not happy with the dips, he'll have to suck it up. I can't be bothered to go find out what he's using again.

Dips are different than overall poor performance. Dips should be thought of as anomalies, random semi-drastic dips in fps that recover pretty much immediately. You know, stutters. Poor performance is where it either starts off, or eventually degrades, so that your fps is lower than a nominal 'good' number for periods of time while playing. This is why mins, maxes, and averages are all good numbers to look at (not to forget frame times, where those 3 numbers are also useful to measure performance in addition to fps). If he's got little dips, welcome to the "I overclocked my system to insanity and still don't get 60fps minimums" club. If he's got poor performance overall, there's an issue to be worked on somewhere.

I upgrade every 2-3 years. This is my first top-tier system so it could be even 4 years this time. It all depends on what upgrades are available, at what costs, and how much is it going to benefit what I use it for. That's why I went with "only" the 5820K.

There is a major difference in overall performance when comparing MWO on AMD and Intel. That doesn't mean better pilots and better k/d ratios, it just means enjoying your game experience more (which, for me, is more of a priority because I tend to launch in any of my 107 mechs rather than favoring a few that I'm exceptionally good in... like those dragons I've been playing with recently).

[FatYak]

As a side note, im awaiting parts for a home computer im building for my parents. It's nothing more than a home office computer so im using a FX6300 for it.

Ill drop my R9 290 in it and see how it goes with MWO, just for giggles

[Golrar]

I've come to the realization that I would have been better off last year grabbing an i5 4670K than my current FX-8350. At the time the CPU price difference was about $80. Unfortunately, the mobo price difference was much more if I went with the same ASUS line. That's on me for being short sighted. But now with the recent GPU upgrade, I don't even turn on the fps counter any more. Yeah, I still get those occasional "dips" but like xWiredx says, those are anomalies. I start off at 85fps and stay there for the most part.

I just know next time it comes to upgrading, unless AMD gets off their butts and actually develops an architecture that can compete in EVERY instance, I will go Intel. I get what Bill is saying, but I also understand that numbers don't lie. AMD performance does suffer in this game and other CPU intensive, non threaded apps. I play MWO almost exclusively so I made a bad choice. I am over it. Yeah, I'd like to have the baddest on the block, but I just deal with what I have for now.

Kind of strange for me, though. Haven't run an Intel since my Pentium Pro 200.

Edited by Golrar, 23 January 2015 - 10:13 PM.

[Vassago Rain]

Golrar, on 23 January 2015 - 10:12 PM, said:

I've come to the realization that I would have been better off last year grabbing an i5 4670K than my current FX-8350. At the time the CPU price difference was about $80. Unfortunately, the mobo price difference was much more if I went with the same ASUS line. That's on me for being short sighted. But now with the recent GPU upgrade, I don't even turn on the fps counter any more. Yeah, I still get those occasional "dips" but like xWiredx says, those are anomalies. I start off at 85fps and stay there for the most part.

I just know next time it comes to upgrading, unless AMD gets off their butts and actually develops an architecture that can compete in EVERY instance, I will go Intel. I get what Bill is saying, but I also understand that numbers don't lie. AMD performance does suffer in this game and other CPU intensive, non threaded apps. I play MWO almost exclusively so I made a bad choice. I am over it. Yeah, I'd like to have the baddest on the block, but I just deal with what I have for now.

Kind of strange for me, though. Haven't run an Intel since my Pentium Pro 200.

I used to be AMD all the way, but they haven't delivered anything worthwhile since like 2006.

Edited by Vassago Rain, 24 January 2015 - 07:35 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

Verapamil, on 22 January 2015 - 09:47 PM, said:

I think this is a very reasonable discussion on the topic

MWO clearly doesn't like AMD. This is the MWO forums. We recommend and discuss hardware to play MWO, not to do rendering, or play other games.

There's currently no reason to get AMD, because everything intel, right down to the 20th anniversary pentium, provides better MWO performance for the dollars spent.

[Bill Lumbar]

Vassago Rain, on 24 January 2015 - 07:35 AM, said:

I used to be AMD all the way, but they haven't delivered anything worthwhile since like 2006.

Correction Vass, IYO, AMD hasn't put out any CPU's worthwhile. The truth is that AMD hasn't been able to take the crown back from Intel. IMO, AMD has produced several CPU's that are very worthwhile.

Vassago Rain, on 24 January 2015 - 07:55 AM, said:

MWO clearly doesn't like AMD. This is the MWO forums. We recommend and discuss hardware to play MWO, not to do rendering, or play other games.

There's currently no reason to get AMD, because everything intel, right down to the 20th anniversary pentium, provides better MWO performance for the dollars spent.

There are several reason's for some to go with AMD, one of them for me is that as long as AMD puts out CPU's that can handle the games I play, and does the things I need my computer to do in a decent amount of time, I am fine with that. Biggest reason is I support the underdog as long as they meet the first requirement for my needs.

I really would not want to see AMD go under or completely get out of the desktop CPU market as long as they are trying to produce decent CPU's. They have failed to take the crown for sure, and yes.... all of us FX-8350 owners are seeing lower frames per second then many of the Intel crowd. So what?? It doesn't effect my game play in the least, and MWO is not a game to be judging CPU performance on, it is poorly optimized for all systems. Hopefully this will change, and soon, and not as in Soon "TM"

[FatYak]

So, just played a few matches on an AMD FX6300, 8gb RAM, and and a R7 260x. For the most part had an enjoyable time at 35-45FPS with the settings maxed out.

But by god, when it dips it really dips, and setting the graphics to low did not really do anything to remedy it.

Still, much fun gaming to be had if you absolutely had to have an AMD.

Didn't feel anything like my i5 4690K though

[FatYak]

Bill Lumbar, on 24 January 2015 - 02:04 PM, said:

I really would not want to see AMD go under or completely get out of the desktop CPU market as long as they are trying to produce decent CPU's. They have failed to take the crown for sure, and yes.... all of us FX-8350 owners are seeing lower frames per second then many of the Intel crowd. So what?? rmance on, it is poorly optimized for all systems.

For sure. gamers don't want to be in a situation where Intel ends up with an insurmountable monopoly on processors

[Bill Lumbar]

I have been on the egg and Microcenters website looking at Intel's newest options and the Z99 boards, and also looking at the I7 4970K and a Asrock Fatility Z97 board with the killer 2200 chip set and some G.skill rip jaws @1888-2400. I am also looking at upgrading my monitor, and having a hard time deciding if I should go with a IPS that is 2560x1440 5 ms or a 120-144 mhz Tn panel. Any advice guys? I most likely will keep using my XFX 7970 3gb card for now, until some newer cards come out from both sides. Its been awhile since I have had a Nvidia card in one of my rigs, but I am open to buying one. I am coming off a 4 year old Hanns-g 30" that is a TN panel, 60 refresh rate and 16:10 and 1920x1200. I have been pretty happy with this monitor, just to give you a Idea of what I am used to using.

Biggest concern is that if I upgrade to a new rig, I want to see a real difference in FPS and smoothness in game play over my Fx-8350 rig. 60 FPS min, and smooth game play for this game. Any suggestions? Should I wait for Broadwell to see what it offers over Haswell? If I take a IPS panel with 60 refresh rate vs. a 120 or 144 refresh rate, will it hold my system back? Will my XFX 7970 hold my system back if I go with the 4970K from getting 60 fps min or close to it?

Edited by Bill Lumbar, 29 January 2015 - 09:14 AM.

[Flapdrol]

If you want to buy something now I'd get the 5820K and X99 board. Could use 2x4GB ddr4 to lower the cost a bit, then get quadchannel when ddr4 prices drop.

I'd postpone monitor and gpu upgrades until freesync screens are available, see if gsync screens drop in price, then see what screen you want and buy a gpu to match freesync/gsync.

[xWiredx]

Honestly, I wouldn't trade my 5820K for anything else except a 4790K (that's the Haswell refresh one, right?). Thought you were happy with your AMD chip, though? And it's performance was almost as good, right? If that is really the case, you wouldn't notice a difference.

I've been eyeing that ASUS ROG Swift monitor for a couple weeks now. Too many other life factors atm to decide whether to get it or not (mainly office space as my rental house is rather tiny and the GF is moving in a few months from now). If I were going to get a monitor right now, though, that would be it.

[Bill Lumbar]

Flapdrol, on 29 January 2015 - 09:38 AM, said:

If you want to buy something now I'd get the 5820K and X99 board. Could use 2x4GB ddr4 to lower the cost a bit, then get quadchannel when ddr4 prices drop.

I'd postpone monitor and gpu upgrades until freesync screens are available, see if gsync screens drop in price, then see what screen you want and buy a gpu to match freesync/gsync.

In all honesty, is the Z99 and ddr4 really worth it over the Z97 and the I5 4670 devils cannon or the I7 4970K and ddr3? Isn't one of the big reasons to go with the newer Z99 builds because of bandwidth on the PCI-e lanes and a improvement if you are running SLI/Crossfire? The GPU is something I have already considered holding off right now because unless my xfx 7970 gb would gimp my upgrade choices I see no reason to upgrade GPU yet till some of the newer cards come out.

The monitor is a different story right now, and yeah prices for some of them seem insane but I am seeing what looks like to be good deals on IPS monitors if I stray away from the 120-144hz refresh ones and stay at 60hz refresh rate. Even at 60hz refresh rate I can just put on V-sync and should stay at a steady 60hz fps at 2650x1440 as long as my upgraded Intel system and my 7970 card can keep up with MWO at a steady 60 fps min, right?

xWiredx, on 29 January 2015 - 09:45 AM, said:

Honestly, I wouldn't trade my 5820K for anything else except a 4790K (that's the Haswell refresh one, right?). Thought you were happy with your AMD chip, though? And it's performance was almost as good, right? If that is really the case, you wouldn't notice a difference.

I've been eyeing that ASUS ROG Swift monitor for a couple weeks now. Too many other life factors atm to decide whether to get it or not (mainly office space as my rental house is rather tiny and the GF is moving in a few months from now). If I were going to get a monitor right now, though, that would be it.

Yes I am looking at the I7 4790K (the $339.00) dollar one on the egg right now, and a AsRock Z97 fatality board with the killer 2200 chipset. Its not the one that is around 99.00 bucks that is on sale right now, (I believe this board doesn't support SLI, but does support Crossfire) It is the one that is around $158 on sale and supports both SLI, and crossfire. I also considered getting the Asus hero VII mother board for around $209 on sale right now. I am trying to keep my upgrades around $600-700 if I don't pick up a new monitor and around $1000-1200 if I do pick up a new monitor. I really like the specs on the Asus ROG swift monitor, I too thought about pulling the trigger, Its got the 2560x1440 res I want, and the better refresh rate, and I believe is a IPS panel, but damn man.... $799 dollars just seems a bit steep on this monitor for me at this time.

I am happy very happy with my FX-8350 setup, LOL. I am however about at that time where I sell of two or three of my older gaming rigs, This year will be one Intel and one AMD system, and go with a nicer, newer build. With my monitor starting to push the 5 year mark in age, even though I love it and have enjoyed if for all this time, I think its time for a upgrade and step it down to a secondary rig. Last year and the year before as I was in Micro centers west mount store, they was running to good of sales to pass up the FX-8350 and the MB they had on combo. With what hardware I already had, its like I got two AMD systems for the price of one. I got a AsRock 970fx board, ddr3 1886 ram, and a Phenom II 960T for almost nothing. I could of picked up the FX-4100 quad but picked the 960T and was able to unlock the two cores and stable making it a 1060T.

As I have told you before Wired, I try to stay about a year behind the ticks and the tocks so I am not paying crack prices for hardware anymore. I used to be all about chasing the next best thing when it came out. I stopped doing that about 3 years ago and bought some land and built my home with the help of my father, and for cash, no loans. I have more important things to spend my cash on then chasing the FPS dragon. I am however at a point that its about time to get my next system.... So I am looking for advise mostly based on lack of experience in running Intel's newer offerings and regarding how it performs in this game only. I am looking to see if there is as much fire behind all the smoke you and a few others have claimed with running the newer I5's and I7's in this game.

[Odins Fist]

Intel is just better END OF DEBATE.
If you don't have the cash then you have to go AMD.

Case Closed

Edited by Odins Fist, 29 January 2015 - 10:29 AM.

[Kuritaclan]

The Asus Rog Switf is a nice Monitor, but it wouldnt be on 1:1 Ratio FPS to Hz for MWO unsless you will go MGPU Setup what will cause micro stuttering. So the only benefit is the 1440p.

A X99 Plattform with a 5820K isn't worth it sinc mwo doesn't handle the 6 cores to gain more performance and if you don't set it unter H20 you won't get the IPC the i7490k pull of unter air. You may get the 5820k over 4GHz but a wall will be 4.2 and above. This is round about 5Ghz less than the i7 4790k.

@Bill Lumbar:

Quote

Biggest concern is that if I upgrade to a new rig, I want to see a real difference in FPS and smoothness in game play over my Fx-8350 rig.

I think you wouln't see that much of a difference. Yes you could gain a good amount of Min FPS for Smoutness. The upgrade don't seem worth to me price related. Just overclock your FX8350 as much and best as you can. Idk what RAM you use maybee there are a couple FPS within. Stay tuned for the umcoming Skylake this may be a plattform for a new rig.

Quote

I most likely will keep using my XFX 7970 3gb card for now, until some newer cards come out from both sides. Its been awhile since I have had a Nvidia card in one of my rigs, but I am open to buying one. I am coming off a 4 year old Hanns-g 30" that is a TN panel, 60 refresh rate and 16:10 and 1920x1200. I have been pretty happy with this monitor, just to give you a Idea of what I am used to using.

As long as you stay by the 7970 you won't gain that much DPS to have a good feeling on a higher Resolution Display. I guess best thing to do is w8 for der AMD 380/390 cards and get one of those. Then also upgrade your monitor to a 1440p IPS Panel.

Quote

Yes I am looking at the I7 4790K (the $339.00) dollar one on the egg right now, and a AsRock Z97 fatality board with the killer 2200 chipset.

The Asrock Fatality Boards are not that great. The ASRock Fatal1ty Z97 Professional has Sound issues. The ASRock Fatal1ty Z97 Killer has a bad VRM. If a Fatal1ty board that the ASRock Fatal1ty Z97X Killer is okayish (see the "X" in the name, than it is the right one) since it has better powerstages. The Killer NIC is no real Bonus. Software can trick you hard to get it working. The performance is as good as the Intel 218V what windows find by itself. If you need a Package controll Software like the Killer Chips provide get cfos. Also Asrock provide that software with the ownership of such Boards. My Z97 Asrock Extrem6 has it for example. Im not that hard into us prices, but a couple of good "normal oc" boards are: http://geizhals.de/?...=1106887#xf_top (sry no us link) Asus hero VII is also a good Board but very expensiv and more for extreme oc like ln2. But as i mentioned i don't think the upgrade is worth the price you pay for it.

If you do not wanna oc the fx as much as you can, ok the you should pickup a i7 4790k with a good z97 board and 2400mhz DDr3 RAM (double ranked) like the G.Skill TridentX as base for your computer, to stay behind the tick/tock. Netherless after this buy you may not need a upgrade for like 5 years.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 29 January 2015 - 10:46 AM.

[Bill Lumbar]

Kuritaclan, on 29 January 2015 - 10:31 AM, said:

The Asus Rog Switf is a nice Monitor, but it wouldnt be on 1:1 Ratio FPS to Hz for MWO unsless you will go MGPU Setup what will cause micro stuttering. So the only benefit is the 1440p.

A X99 Plattform with a 5820K isn't worth it sinc mwo doesn't handle the 6 cores to gain more performance and if you don't set it unter H20 you won't get the IPC the i7490k pull of unter air. You may get the 5820k over 4GHz but a wall will be 4.2 and above. This is round about 5Ghz less than the i7 4790k.

@Bill Lumbar:

I think you wouln't see that much of a difference. Yes you could gain a good amount of Min FPS for Smoutness. The upgrade don't seem worth to me price related. Just overclock your FX8350 as much and best as you can. Idk what RAM you use maybee there are a couple FPS within. Stay tuned for the umcoming Skylake this may be a plattform for a new rig.



As long as you stay by the 7970 you won't gain that much DPS to have a good feeling on a higher Resolution Display. I guess best thing to do is w8 for der AMD 380/390 cards and get one of those. Then also upgrade your monitor to a 1440p IPS Panel.

I am running Kingston Hyper X ram 16 GB DDR3 1600 mhz OC to 1866 right now, and I do believe it might be holding my FX-8350 back a bit. I am looking to pick up 8-16 GB of G.skill 1866-2400 ripjaws to see if they run better or give me a better OC on my FX-8350, I am at 5ghz stable atm and 1.45 volts. I have a custom water loop I put together from the Danger den about 4 years ago, and I can switch it over to the new Intel rig if I go that path, I will just need to pick up a new water block for the CPU, and I already have checked into the one I will get. Cooling and over clocking the new Intel will not be a Issue or it shouldn't be anyways. I am torn on getting the cheaper I5 4670K vs the I7 4970K because of some saying the extra cores make no difference in MWO, However, the 4970K has 2 more mb of cache... but for a $100 more, so not sure if it is worth it if basing my needs only on this game and how it plays. Either way I am expecting I should be able to push either one into the 4.4 ghz range easy with my water loop and triple rad.

If I do the upgrade to Intel, and keep the XFX 7970 for right now, and with getting a new IPS 2560x1440 27" monitor with 60 refresh rate, I was just hoping to be able to see around 60 fps mins in this game. Any one know if this is what I can expect from the new system? I should be able to put V-sync on and be able to run fraps and see min fps rates not drop below 50-60, NO?

Yes.... the Fatality board that I was considering has the X in it. I was looking at the Ripjaws or the tridents.... either way I have had very good luck with G.Skill ram. I still have 8gbs of DDR2 1066 G.skill running in my Q9550 build. My FX-8350 OC's like a beast, at 5Ghz now, and my loop keeps it below 40C but I don't think I can get much more out of the OC on it. Could be my cheaper Kingston ram, but I would say anything above 5ghz is pushing it.

Edited by Bill Lumbar, 29 January 2015 - 10:57 AM.

[Bill Lumbar]

Odins Fist, on 29 January 2015 - 10:29 AM, said:

Intel is just better END OF DEBATE.
If you don't have the cash then you have to go AMD.

Case Closed

Funny.... I have had the cash over the last two years when I bought two new systems, and I went with AMD regardless.

[Kuritaclan]

Bill Lumbar, on 29 January 2015 - 10:44 AM, said:

I am running Kingston Hyper X ram 16 GB DDR3 1600 mhz OC to 1866 right now, and I do believe it might be holding my FX-8350 back a bit. I am looking to pick up 8-16 GB of G.skill 1866-2400 ripjaws to see if they run better or give me a better OC on my FX-8350, I am at 5ghz stable atm and 1.45 volts.

If I do the upgrade to Intel, and keep the XFX 7970 for right now, and with getting a new IPS 2560x1440 27" monitor with 60 refresh rate, I was just hoping to be able to see around 60 fps mins in this game. Any one know if this is what I can expect from the new system? I should be able to put V-sync on and be able to run fraps and see min fps rates not drop below 50-60, NO?

Well the RAM controller in the FX Chips take RAM up to 2133MHz you get a little bit better Performance out of higher frequenzy RAM. But since you have 1866MHz stable it isn't that much of a gain. Well 5Ghz is pretty much on a 8350. Did you overclock the NB? There are a couple of FPS layed in. 16GB won't do anything 8GB are ok right now for 99% of all games. As long as you don't make photo/video editing or math processing it isn't needed to have more. However if you wanna have 16GB because of Xhundered browser tabs, it could be ok. If you make a new setup with the i7 4790k get the 2400Mhz RAM and sell your "old stuff".

Bill Lumbar, on 29 January 2015 - 10:44 AM, said:

I have a custom water loop I put together from the Danger den about 4 years ago, and I can switch it over to the new Intel rig if I go that path, I will just need to pick up a new water block for the CPU, and I already have checked into the one I will get. Cooling and over clocking the new Intel will not be a Issue or it shouldn't be anyways. I am torn on getting the cheaper I5 4670K vs the I7 4970K because of some saying the extra cores make no difference in MWO, However, the 4970K has 2 more mb of cach... but for a $100 more, so not sure if it is worth it if basing my needs only on this game and how it plays. Either way I am expecting I should be able to push either one into the 4.4 ghz range easy with my water loop and triple rad.

The HT will help in mutithreading heavy games (mwo doesn't provide support for it right now - maybeeeee this will come later, like it was afterwords introduced to world of warcraft, but newer games by big publishers will have it most likely) - If you have the money get a i7k. If you need to stay in Budget get the i5 4690k. (Keep in mind a i5 is a worse i7/Xeon and has some damaged parts so intel labeled it an i5 and this goes down to i3 and the worst i7/Xeons are labeld as pentiums.) - I would pick up the i7 4790k since it is a bit future savety. Since the i7 4790k has 4.4Ghz Turbo and it only needs one bios click to set this frequenzy on all cores this is the minimum to chase for. With a costum Water loop you should get the i7k up to 4.7+ GHz @ 1.3V to 1.325V maximum. Its luck to get a good one, so there is no guarantee.

Bill Lumbar, on 29 January 2015 - 10:44 AM, said:

If I do the upgrade to Intel, and keep the XFX 7970 for right now, and with getting a new IPS 2560x1440 27" monitor with 60 refresh rate, I was just hoping to be able to see around 60 fps mins in this game. Any one know if this is what I can expect from the new system? I should be able to put V-sync on and be able to run fraps and see min fps rates not drop below 50-60, NO?

I don't know about the real performance of the 7970 (new labeld 280X) but it is a good card and on the same niveau like the GTX 770 in some games above in others below. For example i have i7 4770k@4.5GHz and a GTX770 oced @ Full HD i'm fully over 60FPS. So i would guess your card is in the same region on Full HD. On 1440p it might by avg. the 60FPS but it may drop in some situations below it (also a matter of details you set) - To have full details a new card when it come out like the 380/390 is a reasonable deal.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 29 January 2015 - 11:08 AM.

[xWiredx]

Kuritaclan, on 29 January 2015 - 10:31 AM, said:

The Asus Rog Switf is a nice Monitor, but it wouldnt be on 1:1 Ratio FPS to Hz for MWO unsless you will go MGPU Setup what will cause micro stuttering. So the only benefit is the 1440p.

A X99 Plattform with a 5820K isn't worth it sinc mwo doesn't handle the 6 cores to gain more performance and if you don't set it unter H20 you won't get the IPC the i7490k pull of unter air. You may get the 5820k over 4GHz but a wall will be 4.2 and above. This is round about 5Ghz less than the i7 4790k.

Lets not drag things too off-topic with the monitor bit, but you obviously don't understand how G-sync works. G-sync is definitely a benefit. (well, for us Nvidia users - for Bill, not so much)

IPC has nothing to do with clock speed, either. Haswell-E has a very tiny, barely measurable IPC increase over Haswell/Haswell refresh due to the larger cache (and it's only really measurable at all with specific work loads). Overall per-core throughput is what you're talking about in the quote. Also, most people that are going X99 are going to be using custom loops or higher-end AIOs, and that vast majority of 5820K users are reporting 4.3-4.6GhZ (mine is at 4.37GhZ and I can tell it still has breathing room).

Either way, if you don't intend on running things that can take advantage of 6-12 cores or large amounts of memory or large amounts of memory bandwidth, then the 4790K is the way to go.

Edited by xWiredx, 29 January 2015 - 11:19 AM.