239 replies to this topic

[Goose]

… Which can't be right, as we have plenty of instances of it sorting out initial loading stutter.

I get how a lot of the commands in the document I'm reading are for adjusting the gain on a graph we don't have access to, but this works as a performance tweak for a bunch of people …

[Kuritaclan]

Maverdick, on 13 January 2015 - 11:12 AM, said:

I'm a fan of AMD. I would buy AMD if the price/performance comes close to Intel because I want to support competition in the market. However AMD performance has been nowhere near Intel lately.

Why are all so heavly into the price performancy argument?

AMD System
A FX 8320 cost $149^.99 (http://www.newegg.co...3-285-_-Product)
A reasonable Board that are good for oc to get the same performance (VRM) as the intel compare in multhithreating and new components out of 2014 would be MSI 970 AM3+ Board: $99^.89 (http://www.newegg.co...0-790-_-Product)
A resonable Cooler to oc the could be a Noctua U14S: $69^.99 (http://www.newegg.co...8-041-_-Product)
$319.87

Now a Intel System what have same performacy like an 4,8 GHz oced FX 83XX
Xeon 1231v3: $252^.00 (http://www.newegg.co...7-316-_-Product)
Board Gigabyte H97 D3H: $92^.99 http://www.newegg.co...8-712-_-Product
No cooler needed because no oc you can use the boxed cooler and reduce the noise with lower fan speed to a good lvl - or a $25 buck cooler if choose so will pretty much make the system silent
$344.99

Since AMDs AM3+ cpus even if higly oced never reach the IPC / performancy of a single core intel it is likely that this 30$ arn't a good idea of saving. The oc of the Xeon isn't possible so you could go down to B85 Boards which have stable enough VRMs to power this 4core+HT cpu. And you would reduce the gap even more. And yes you can get cheaper cooler on the AMD or another board, but they are mostly not up to date or struggle in vrm or you may have a cpu which is Vcore hungry to reach that lvl of oc need to be up in multithread performancy.
And another point is. Intel CPUs don't get much performancy out of RAM above 1600MHz (B/H Chipset don't even have Ram oc), while AMD CPUs like fast ram 2133MHz is a good shot. Here you have another price gap betwee amd and intel in your rig.
And you could also argue to buy a FX63XX cpu - but than you could also downgrade the intel cpu to a i3/i5 of same performancy without oc to an oced FX cpu. Also in 2015 we see major publisher will produce games with Multithreading use since X-Box etc. are now "8core". And a good equivalent in PC tech are the cpus above. Therefore downgrade of the cpu isn't that good (if your budget is ok with it). And indy games mostly don't be optimized you have high load on one or two cores. So if you are up into those intel have with higher ipc most time a better performancy.

Think about volks.

Well i hope AMD get the corner and present in 2016 a good cpu. But intel did stack his performancy very lazy only ~10% performancy between the last series (maybee they have something that is a hard counter to make a new gap after AMD has filled the ovbious nowadays)

Edited by Kuritaclan, 13 January 2015 - 12:47 PM.

[Chiron]

Kuritaclan, on 13 January 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

Why are all so heavly into the price performancy argument?

AMD System
A FX 8320 cost $149^.99 (http://www.newegg.co...3-285-_-Product)
A reasonable Board that are good for oc to get the same performance (VRM) as the intel compare in multhithreating and new components out of 2014 would be MSI 970 AM3+ Board: $99^.89 (http://www.newegg.co...0-790-_-Product)
A resonable Cooler to oc the could be a Noctua U14S: $69^.99 (http://www.newegg.co...8-041-_-Product)
$319.87

Now a Intel System what have same performacy like an 4,8 GHz oced FX 83XX
Xeon 1231v3: $252^.00 (http://www.newegg.co...7-316-_-Product)
Board Gigabyte H97 D3H: $92^.99 http://www.newegg.co...8-712-_-Product
No cooler needed because no oc you can use the boxed cooler and reduce the noise with lower fan speed to a good lvl - or a $25 buck cooler if choose so will pretty much make the system silent
$344.99

And yes you can get cheaper cooler on the AMD or another board, but they are mostly not up to date or struggle in vrm or you may have a cpu which is Vcore hungry to reach that lvl of oc need to be up in multithread performancy.
And you could also argue to buy a FX63XX cpu - but than you could also downgrade the intel cpu to a i3/i5 of same performancy without oc to an oced FX cpu. Also in 2015 we see major publisher will produce games with Multithreading use since X-Box etc. are now "8core".

While you have some good points, your post is so biased that I had to play devils advocate. A few things to pick apart here.
1) you either purposely, or without consideration, cherry picked parts for the AMD rig that cost more than they should and perform worse than less expensive options. I'll mention the CPU seperately, but the cooler is 2x as expensive as similarly performing coolers, and a motherboard that is both more expensive and less effective at overclocking than other board.

2)The 8320 may just be the worst performing/$ cpu you could have picked to compare. MWO utilizes up to 6 cores most of the time, and additional cores sit at 0-5% utilization. In other words, the 8320 costs more and performs worse at playing MWO. There is very little point in mentioning how it performs in other titles, in a MWO forum. (See Lordred's threads about MWO core utilization, but TLDR is raw speed > # cores.)

3) Good point about the RAM, it's 100% correct. The only thing is that most game benchmarks show a rapidly diminishing return on RAM above 1600mhz. Theres no reason to spend extra $ on fancy ram for gaming. (BTW: I havent seen any MWO specific data, so I have to rely on this: http://www.tomshardw...aming,3409.html)

BTW: Here's a better rig to compare to:
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($96.98 @ OutletPC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 76.8 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($25.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($74.99 @ Micro Center)
Total: $197.85
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-01-13 16:18 EST-0500

[Lord Letto]

Please keep in mind that with the FX CPUs 2 Advertised Cores = 1 True Core based on how they are designed therefore FX-4xxx=Dual Core, FX-6xxx=Tri Core and the FX-8xxx & 9xxx=Quad Core

almost think of it as Hyperthreading with 1 HT Core/Core or something like that.

Edited by Lord Letto, 13 January 2015 - 01:26 PM.

[Smokeyjedi]

DV McKenna, on 13 January 2015 - 10:56 AM, said:

I spoke with Karl Berg in twitch one evening about your configs, some of the things you have won't do anything.

From memory i think he pulled out sys_budget_videomem = 2096 as one he pulled out as being for debug purposes only.

When you launch MWO each time an Omicron log file is created.......It tells you which ones are a problem and which ones go through......very easy to read.......and follow. ill show you here........Ill boot MWO right now........4:35pm EST

BackupNameAttachment=" Build(0) 13 Jan 15 (16 36 20)" -- used by backup system
Log Started at 01/13/15 16:36:20
Running 64 bit version
Executable: C:\Program Files (x86)\Piranha Games\MechWarrior Online\Bin64\MWOClient.exe
FileVersion: 1.3.362.0
ProductVersion: 1.3.362.0
Using STLport C++ Standard Library implementation
Added MOD directory <engine> to CryPak
Executable Command Line: "C:\Program Files (x86)\Piranha Games\MechWarrior Online\Bin64\MWOClient.exe" flowthru

Total number of logical processors: 8
Number of available logical processors: 8
Total number of system cores: 4
Number of cores available to process: 4

Processor 0:
CPU: AMD AMD FX™-8350 Eight-Core Processor
Family: 15, Model: 2, Stepping: 0
FPU: On-Chip
CPU Speed (estimated): 4.9 MHz
MMX: not present
SSE: present
3DNow!: not present
Serial number not present or disabled

Processor 1:
CPU: AMD AMD FX™-8350 Eight-Core Processor
Family: 15, Model: 2, Stepping: 0
FPU: On-Chip
CPU Speed (estimated): 4.9 MHz
MMX: not present
SSE: present
3DNow!: not present
Serial number not present or disabled

Processor 2:
CPU: AMD AMD FX™-8350 Eight-Core Processor
Family: 15, Model: 2, Stepping: 0
FPU: On-Chip
CPU Speed (estimated): 4.9 MHz
MMX: not present
SSE: present
3DNow!: not present
Serial number not present or disabled

Processor 3:
CPU: AMD AMD FX™-8350 Eight-Core Processor
Family: 15, Model: 2, Stepping: 0
FPU: On-Chip
CPU Speed (estimated): 4.9 MHz
MMX: not present
SSE: present
3DNow!: not present
Serial number not present or disabled

<16:36:21> [Error] Error: ConsoleVariableGroup 'sys_spec_environment' key 'e_TerrainTextureLodRatio' is not missing in default
<16:36:21> [Error] Error: ConsoleVariableGroup 'sys_spec_environment' key 'e_TerrainTextureLodRatio' is not missing in default
<16:36:21> [Error] Error: ConsoleVariableGroup 'sys_spec_environment' key 'e_TerrainTextureStreamingPoolItemsNum' is not missing in default
<16:36:21> [Error] Error: ConsoleVariableGroup 'sys_spec_environment' key 'sys_spec_Quality' is not missing in default
<16:36:21> [Error] Error: ConsoleVariableGroup 'sys_spec_environment' key 'e_TerrainTextureStreamingPoolItemsNum' is not missing in default
<16:36:21> [Error] Error: ConsoleVariableGroup 'sys_spec_postprocessing' key 'r_UseEdgeAA' is not missing in default
<16:36:21> Windows 7 64 bit SP 1 (build 6.1.7601)
<16:36:21> System language: English
<16:36:21> Windows Directory: "C:\Windows"
<16:36:21> Prerequisites...
<16:36:21> * Installation of KB940105 hotfix required: no! (either not needed or already installed)
<16:36:21> Local time is 16:36:21 01/13/15, system running for 135 minutes
<16:36:21> 8154MB physical memory installed, 6026MB available, 8388607MB virtual memory installed, 26 percent of memory in use
<16:36:21> PageFile usage: 37MB, Working Set: 27MB, Peak PageFile usage: 37MB,
<16:36:21> Current display mode is 1920x1080x32, (Unknown graphics card)
<16:36:21> IBM enhanced (101/102-key) keyboard and 16+ button mouse installed
<16:36:21> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<16:36:21> Stream Engine Initialization
<16:36:21> GameName: MechWarrior Online
<16:36:21> BuildTime: Dec 22 2014 14:00:24
<16:36:21> Windows Error Reporting is enabled setting exception handler
<16:36:21> Font initialization
<16:36:21> Physics initialization
<16:36:21> Sound initialization
<16:36:21> <Sound> Initializing AudioDevice now!
<16:36:21> <Sound> Initialize FMOD with dynamic memory callbacks
<16:36:22> <Sound> Starting to initialize Windows Audio Session API output!
<16:36:22> <Sound> Playback drivers found: 3
<16:36:22> <Sound> Available playback drivers:
1. Headphones (High Definition Audio Device)
2. Digital Audio (S/PDIF) (High Definition Audio Device)
3. Digital Audio (S/PDIF) (High Definition Audio Device)
<16:36:22> <Sound> FmodEx-AudioDevice: Now running on driver: Headphones (High Definition Audio Device)
<16:36:22> <Sound> Record drivers found: 1
<16:36:22> <Sound> Available record drivers:
1. Microphone (High Definition Audio Device)
<16:36:22> <Sound> Record config is set to autodetect using record driver 0
<16:36:22> <Sound> Using speaker mode: FMOD_SPEAKERMODE_STEREO
<16:36:22> <Sound> Initializing FMOD-EX now!
<16:36:22> <Sound> Initialized FMOD-EX
<16:36:22> <Sound> Using FMOD version: 00044211 and internal 00044211!
<16:36:22> <Sound> Initializing SoundSystem now!
<16:36:22> Renderer initialization
<16:36:22> [Error] Failed to create stereo device
<16:36:22> used GeomInstancingThreshold is 8
<16:36:22> Localized language content(english) not available or modified from the original installation.
<16:36:22> Localized language content(english) not available or modified from the original installation.
<16:36:22> Network initialization
<16:36:22> [net] using iocp socket io management
<16:36:22> network hostname: Trogdorr
<16:36:22> ip:192.168.1.68
<16:36:22> [Network Version]: RELEASE PURE CLIENT
<16:36:22> MovieSystem initialization
<16:36:22> Console initialization
<16:36:22> Time initialization
<16:36:22> Input initialization
<16:36:22> AI initialization
<16:36:22> Initializing Animation System
<16:36:22> Initializing 3D Engine
<16:36:22> Initializing default materials...
<16:36:22> Script System Initialization
<16:36:22> Entity system initialization
<16:36:23> Initializing AI System

this is where the magic happens**


<16:36:23> gp_option_ShowCockpitGlass = 0 []
<16:36:23> r_DepthOfField = 0 [RESTRICTEDMODE]
<16:36:23> r_HDRGrainAmount = 0 [RESTRICTEDMODE]
<16:36:23> r_MotionBlur = 0 []
<16:36:23> r_MultiThreaded = 1 []
<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: cl_fov----------------------------------
<16:36:23> sys_MaxFPS = 144 []
<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: d3d10_TripleBuffering---------------------------
<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: d3d11_TripleBuffering------------------------------
<16:36:23> d3d9_TripleBuffering = 1 [REQUIRE_APP_RESTART]
<16:36:23> e_GsmCache = 1 []
<16:36:23> r_FogShadows = 0 []
<16:36:23> q_ShaderWater = 0 []
<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: r_silhouettePOM--------------------------
<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: r_UsePOM-----------------------------------
<16:36:23> sys_enable_budgetmonitoring = 1 []
<16:36:23> sys_budget_sysmem = 8192 [DUMPTODISK]
<16:36:23> sys_budget_streamingthroughput = 2.048e+007 [DUMPTODISK]
<16:36:23> sys_LocalMemoryGeometryStreamingSpeedLimit = 20000 []
<16:36:23> sys_LocalMemoryTextureStreamingSpeedLimit = 20000 []
<16:36:23> sys_streaming_max_bandwidth = 20000 []
<16:36:23> sys_budget_videomem = 2096 [DUMPTODISK]
<16:36:23> sys_main_CPU = 0 []
<16:36:23> sys_streaming_CPU = 0 []
<16:36:23> sys_physics_CPU = 2 []
<16:36:23> ca_thread0Affinity = 0 [DUMPTODISK]
<16:36:23> ca_thread1Affinity = 4 [DUMPTODISK]
<16:36:23> sys_budget_soundCPU = 6 [DUMPTODISK]
<16:36:23> r_WaterUpdateThread = 7 []
<16:36:23> sys_TaskThread0_CPU = 3 []
<16:36:23> sys_TaskThread1_CPU = 5 []
<16:36:23> sys_TaskThread2_CPU = 5 []
<16:36:23> sys_TaskThread3_CPU = 6 []
<16:36:23> sys_TaskThread4_CPU = 3 []
<16:36:23> sys_TaskThread5_CPU = 6 []
<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: sys_TaskThread6_CPU--------------------------------?
<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: sys_TaskThread7_CPU---------------------------------?
<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: sys_TaskThread8_CPU----------------------------?
<16:36:24> [PlayerProfiles] Login of user 'Chad' successful.
<16:36:24> [PlayerProfiles] Found 2 profiles.
<16:36:24> Profile 0 : 'Smokeyjedi'
<16:36:24> Profile 1 : 'default'
<16:36:24> [GameProfiles]: Successfully activated profile 'Smokeyjedi' for user 'Chad'
<16:36:25> TrackIRManager: DLL Location key not present
<16:36:25> TrackIRManager: Error initializing NPClient interface!! (Err: 4)
<16:36:25> TrackIRManager: Error registering window handle!!
<16:36:25> TrackIRManager: Error querying NaturalPoint software version!!
<16:36:25> TrackIRManager: Error stopping cursor
<16:36:25> TrackIRManager: Error starting data transmission
<16:36:26> Patch Complete Received
<16:36:52> sv_gamerules = mechlab []
<16:36:52> ============================ Loading level mechlab ============================
<16:36:55> ======== mechlab is loaded in 2.8 sec ========
<16:36:56> Finished IS map update for cycle 80, next update in 26383.000000 seconds
<16:37:03> [Error] <Flash> Error: GFxLoader failed to open 'Libs/UI/System\../Screens/Assets/UIWebDownloads/DailyStock.jpg' [Libs/UI/System\Main.gfx]
<16:37:03> [Error] <Flash> GFxLoader failed to open "Libs/UI/System\../Screens/Assets/UIWebDownloads/DailyStock.jpg" [Libs/UI/System\Main.gfx]
<16:37:03> [Error] <Flash> Error: GFxLoader failed to open 'Libs/UI/System\../Screens/Assets/UIWebDownloads/Stock.jpg' [Libs/UI/System\Main.gfx]
<16:37:03> [Error] <Flash> GFxLoader failed to open "Libs/UI/System\../Screens/Assets/UIWebDownloads/Stock.jpg" [Libs/UI/System\Main.gfx]
<16:37:04> Finished IS map update for cycle 80, next update in 26375.000000 seconds

I added ? to the end of the custom thread instruction section because I never seen those cancel out before? I am confused now and must tinker.......Thanks a lot for pointing that out for me(note sarcasm)
Im going to run MWO again and see if it still does this...........................So strange......all of the sudden/

Edited by Smokeyjedi, 13 January 2015 - 01:43 PM.

[xWiredx]

Yeah, the problem with Omicron is that sometimes it lies. Example: It throws a flag on the FOV cvar, yet I can clearly see that it works just fine.

<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: cl_fov

Unknown command? Huh, that's funny. My initial zoom is 0.86 instead of 1.0. If you crank that cvar up, your initial zoom level shrinks more, and if you keep it really close to the default the it goes toward 1.0. Unknown command my arse.

[Smokeyjedi]

Lord Letto, on 13 January 2015 - 01:24 PM, said:

Please keep in mind that with the FX CPUs 2 Advertised Cores = 1 True Core based on how they are designed therefore FX-4xxx=Dual Core, FX-6xxx=Tri Core and the FX-8xxx & 9xxx=Quad Core

almost think of it as Hyperthreading with 1 HT Core/Core or something like that.

But each core is exactly the same, Intel uses 60% of a core for HT cores, a pseudo core.....whilst bulldozer struggled to feed both cores fully..........Vishera fixed that issue and is able to use each thread think 50%/50% while Intels setup for HT ends up being more like 65%/35% for core/HT

xWiredx, on 13 January 2015 - 01:46 PM, said:

Yeah, the problem with Omicron is that sometimes it lies. Example: It throws a flag on the FOV cvar, yet I can clearly see that it works just fine.

<16:36:23> [Warning] Unknown command: cl_fov

Unknown command? Huh, that's funny. My initial zoom is 0.86 instead of 1.0. If you crank that cvar up, your initial zoom level shrinks more, and if you keep it really close to the default the it goes toward 1.0. Unknown command my arse.

I have realized there is some inconsistencie's happening due to the last 2 threads just now randomly omitting their effects...

Catamount, on 13 January 2015 - 09:53 AM, said:

Smokey, I've always been intrigued by your CFGs and found them to be all-in-all reasonable in thread assignment if I'm understanding the basic idea here, but I'm curious: in your four core config you assign ca_thread1Affinity an assignment to core 1, correct? Doesn't that pair ca_thread0Affinity and ca_thread1Affinity to the same module, ie, they'd share an FPU? (the very thing PGI cites as the limiting factor of FX chips)

Aren't those both very intensive threads that might benefit from each having an FPU?

I have found that once you pull that much off the thread 0 and thread 1 load those 2 can share 1 module and not peak either thread @ 100% which is all i tried to do with this whole thing really, take away the extra crap that each thread can do without and fill the lowest utilized cores with said load.

Edited by Smokeyjedi, 13 January 2015 - 01:50 PM.

[Goose]

Type in "ca_GroundAlignment = 1", and you'll get a zero in the Omicron …

There is some smoke involved with Omicron, but not mirrors …

[Smokeyjedi]

Goose, on 13 January 2015 - 01:54 PM, said:

Type in "ca_GroundAlignment = 1", and you'll get a zero in the Omicron …

There is some smoke involved with Omicron, but not mirrors …

It may not be 100% accurate but everything that has been attempted to do here has been in pretty much realtime, I have a 2nd dedicated screen that I filled entirely vertical span with MSI afterburners readout on all 8 CPUs giving real time core usage.
Making adjustments almost every match when I reset the graphs max core usage to 0, It took about 6-7 nights 1-3 hrs to have all but 1 core peak @ >70% but under 100%
my last module is the one to max only 1 thread @ 100% - cant say why, more meddling @ this point never chased it far enough to explain.......1 core @ 100% if fine. probably not worth the diminishing returns @ this point.

all cores ended up >70% (except 100% thread mentioned above) and 1 thread wont go above 68% in over 40 matches easy..............more like 60, (yes I have a problem.) I was satisfied, after every match, repeatably, I could reset my graph and use all cores over 70% on every map except those 2 threads over</\>under the marks I aimed for. in the 300 seconds my fraps benchmark would run........Yes I run a tight ship.

[Kuritaclan]

chiron, on 13 January 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

While you have some good points, your post is so biased that I had to play devils advocate. A few things to pick apart here.
1) you either purposely, or without consideration, cherry picked parts for the AMD rig that cost more than they should and perform worse than less expensive options. I'll mention the CPU seperately, but the cooler is 2x as expensive as similarly performing coolers, and a motherboard that is both more expensive and less effective at overclocking than other board.

Yes the post is biased, as everything else in the world. But what you criticize like the cooler "i said you can use another cooler and save some money." but you need at least one that gets your FX 8320 up to 4,8 GHz. You choose the only 970 Gigabyte Board which is somewhat equal in VRM to the MSI 970, but it has old components since it was realeased before. And you won't go 990FX what are more expensiv. - My point stands true if you downgrade the MSI you could also downgrad from H97 Board down to somewhat B85/H81 and you get another 30-50$ saved without hurting the performance of the Xeon 1231 anyhow.

chiron, on 13 January 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

2)The 8320 may just be the worst performing/$ cpu you could have picked to compare. MWO utilizes up to 6 cores most of the time, and additional cores sit at 0-5% utilization. In other words, the 8320 costs more and performs worse at playing MWO. There is very little point in mentioning how it performs in other titles, in a MWO forum. (See Lordred's threads about MWO core utilization, but TLDR is raw speed > # cores.)

Idk but i also said you could compare lesser FX CPUs, but since you go down there you can also go down on the intel cpus. Between 8320 and 1231 there is a price gap of ~100. Between a FX6300 and a i5 4660 you have a price gap of ~$80. Look it up and those both cpus match with each other pretty well, when a FX6300 is oced to 4,7Ghz.

So there is not much gain. Also the FX6300 is unlikely to get overclocked like an FX83XX - AMD Produce theire CPUs like intel (for example everything von the waver is a Xeon - those with good igpu get i7ks/Xeons those with bad igpu and or no good vcore frequency match get locked i7/Xeons those with bad HT and a igpu become i5 and so on, till the crap of the wavers are Pentiums/i3s) Amd do the same a FX9590 is a well perforing 8320 as a 8350 is such one. The -E are new Gen but they differ the same way. And the choise were the FX8320 for compare since i have data that the 4,8GHz will be same performance on multithreath like a Xeon 1230/31.

chiron, on 13 January 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

3) Good point about the RAM, it's 100% correct. The only thing is that most game benchmarks show a rapidly diminishing return on RAM above 1600mhz. Theres no reason to spend extra $ on fancy ram for gaming. (BTW: I havent seen any MWO specific data, so I have to rely on this: http://www.tomshardw...aming,3409.html)

Faster Ram is in most cases not performancy related in games, however there are exceptions of that rule. Everytime you are not in the graphics limit and the cpu becomes a limit to indirectly ram is also a limit. For example SC II (http://forum.hwbot.o...ead.php?t=99059)

chiron, on 13 January 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

BTW: Here's a better rig to compare to:
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($96.98 @ OutletPC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 76.8 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($25.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($74.99 @ Micro Center)
Total: $197.85
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-01-13 16:18 EST-0500

As said above and in the post itself. FX6300 is no good cpu in 2015 to build a new rig unless you have starved budget (not enough ipc not enough multithreat performancy) The supposed Board has a usable vrm for oc and would be a choice, but it is somewhat a year older than the msi with periphal components. This cooler was first listed in mid 2009, well even in the usa there should be some coolers which are more quite while have better cooling for nearly the same price.

[Catamount]

Chiron, it's true that you can drop an 8320 or 8350 to an FX6300 (though doing so for MWO is not a good idea), but at that point you're not comparing to a Xeon 1231v3 anymore. An FX6300 compares poorly even to a $120 i3-4330.

Drop the AMD chip, drop the Intel chip. See how that ends up working out? I think peformance/$ is the absolute foremost concern, but AMD just doesn't win there at any pricepoint.

[Maver0ick]

Kuritaclan, on 13 January 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

Why are all so heavly into the price performancy argument?

AMD System
A FX 8320 cost $149^.99 (http://www.newegg.co...3-285-_-Product)
A reasonable Board that are good for oc to get the same performance (VRM) as the intel compare in multhithreating and new components out of 2014 would be MSI 970 AM3+ Board: $99^.89 (http://www.newegg.co...0-790-_-Product)
A resonable Cooler to oc the could be a Noctua U14S: $69^.99 (http://www.newegg.co...8-041-_-Product)
$319.87

Now a Intel System what have same performacy like an 4,8 GHz oced FX 83XX
Xeon 1231v3: $252^.00 (http://www.newegg.co...7-316-_-Product)
Board Gigabyte H97 D3H: $92^.99 http://www.newegg.co...8-712-_-Product
No cooler needed because no oc you can use the boxed cooler and reduce the noise with lower fan speed to a good lvl - or a $25 buck cooler if choose so will pretty much make the system silent
$344.99

Since AMDs AM3+ cpus even if higly oced never reach the IPC / performancy of a single core intel it is likely that this 30$ arn't a good idea of saving. The oc of the Xeon isn't possible so you could go down to B85 Boards which have stable enough VRMs to power this 4core+HT cpu. And you would reduce the gap even more. And yes you can get cheaper cooler on the AMD or another board, but they are mostly not up to date or struggle in vrm or you may have a cpu which is Vcore hungry to reach that lvl of oc need to be up in multithread performancy.
And another point is. Intel CPUs don't get much performancy out of RAM above 1600MHz (B/H Chipset don't even have Ram oc), while AMD CPUs like fast ram 2133MHz is a good shot. Here you have another price gap betwee amd and intel in your rig.
And you could also argue to buy a FX63XX cpu - but than you could also downgrade the intel cpu to a i3/i5 of same performancy without oc to an oced FX cpu. Also in 2015 we see major publisher will produce games with Multithreading use since X-Box etc. are now "8core". And a good equivalent in PC tech are the cpus above. Therefore downgrade of the cpu isn't that good (if your budget is ok with it). And indy games mostly don't be optimized you have high load on one or two cores. So if you are up into those intel have with higher ipc most time a better performancy.

Think about volks.

Well i hope AMD get the corner and present in 2016 a good cpu. But intel did stack his performancy very lazy only ~10% performancy between the last series (maybee they have something that is a hard counter to make a new gap after AMD has filled the ovbious nowadays)

That was a long post to convince me that Intel is better. Did you miss the part where I said:

Maverdick, on 13 January 2015 - 11:12 AM, said:

AMD performance has been nowhere near Intel lately.

So we are in agreement that Intel is better then???

BTW my last processor purchases were Intel 4770K (2013), Intel Q9450 (2008) and AMD Athlon (2000) so I haven't bought AMD in a while even though I favour AMD.

I pay the electricity bills for my household so I factor energy efficiency into the price/performance and don't just use the purchase price.

Edited by Maverdick, 13 January 2015 - 05:59 PM.

[MechWarrior4172571]

Smokeyjedi, on 13 January 2015 - 09:12 AM, said:

Anyone not using these is silly and deserves to run @ 10FPS/

Why don't you clean that up first? This way the newbs can see it uncluttered without your experimental things? Here is an advice--make a .txt file of it and save it as such on your hard drive for such a purpose as when someone would seek your expertise. All you would have to do is to copy and paste it here. Make sure to separate your processors' info by separate quotes, like this..

Quote

blah blah 4 processor's config..

blablah = blah
etc.

here comes 6 core..

Quote

same blah blah but tailored for 6 core CPUs

here comes 8 core meanace..

Quote

same blah blah but forged for the 8 core CPUs (make a note also if it's meant for hyperthreading or not).

Also, if you would organize it some more, it would help out also, like this..

Quote

r_thisandthat=this
r_thisandthat=that

sys_blah=1
sys_blah=0

gfx_blah=0.1
gfx_blah=1

Organize them by type.

r is for rendering
sys is for system
gfx is for graphics

etc.

Also add an addendum as to how to make a config file in Windows
environment and where one should place it and how.

Then come and call people crazies and 'silly you peoples' and then
people would actually nod and say, yeah, that guy makes sense.

[Xevius Von Morrigan]

I suggest
AMD Athlon X4 860K Quad-Core 3.7GHz Socket FM2+ 95W Desktop Processor (BLACK EDITION) AD860KXBJABOX
G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133 (PC3 17000) Desktop Memory Model F3-2133C10D-8GXM or G.SKILL Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2400 (PC3 19200) Desktop Memory Model F3-2400C11D-8GAB
ASUS A88X-PLUS FM2+ / FM2 AMD A88X (Bolton D4) SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard
(about 240-260 $)

But, I am sure, there is a Intel CPU/MB/RAM cheaper and faster...

[Goose]

Wat

[Goose]

Smokeyjedi, on 13 January 2015 - 01:38 PM, said:

Total number of logical processors: 8
Number of available logical processors: 8
Total number of system cores: 4
Number of cores available to process: 4

Processor 0:
CPU: AMD AMD FX™-8350 Eight-Core Processor
Family: 15, Model: 2, Stepping: 0
FPU: On-Chip
CPU Speed (estimated): 4.9 MHz

Huh: Comes up as the stock clocks for me …

[Lord Letto]

Xevius Von Morrigan, on 13 January 2015 - 07:14 PM, said:

I suggest
AMD Athlon X4 860K Quad-Core 3.7GHz Socket FM2+ 95W Desktop Processor (BLACK EDITION) AD860KXBJABOX
G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133 (PC3 17000) Desktop Memory Model F3-2133C10D-8GXM or G.SKILL Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2400 (PC3 19200) Desktop Memory Model F3-2400C11D-8GAB
ASUS A88X-PLUS FM2+ / FM2 AMD A88X (Bolton D4) SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard
(about 240-260 $)

But, I am sure, there is a Intel CPU/MB/RAM cheaper and faster...

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Pentium G3258 3.2GHz Dual-Core Processor ($68.98 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: ASRock Z97M Anniversary Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($89.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-2133 Memory ($68.00 @ Newegg)
Total: $226.96
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-01-13 22:50 EST-0500

[Smokeyjedi]

Jesus DIED for me, on 13 January 2015 - 07:12 PM, said:

Why don't you clean that up first? This way the newbs can see it uncluttered without your experimental things? Here is an advice--make a .txt file of it and save it as such on your hard drive for such a purpose as when someone would seek your expertise. All you would have to do is to copy and paste it here. Make sure to separate your processors' info by separate quotes, like this..



here comes 6 core..



here comes 8 core meanace..



Also, if you would organize it some more, it would help out also, like this..



Organize them by type.

r is for rendering
sys is for system
gfx is for graphics

etc.

Also add an addendum as to how to make a config file in Windows
environment and where one should place it and how.

Then come and call people crazies and 'silly you peoples' and then
people would actually nod and say, yeah, that guy makes sense.

LOL I spent the better part of 3 weeks doling out threads and have cleaned it up plenty. Each cfg file has its own instructions and A thread where AMD performance was discussed in a long winded argument when when someone with a G3258 OC'd managed to get his 2 cores totally optimized in MWO. Ive done enough, If you search AMD performance or user.cfg files or low framerates using AMD FX series you will find all of the information regarding my custom files..............about 3 times over....in duplicate.

[Kuritaclan]

Maverdick, on 13 January 2015 - 05:52 PM, said:

That was a long post to convince me that Intel is better. Did you miss the part where I said:



So we are in agreement that Intel is better then???

BTW my last processor purchases were Intel 4770K (2013), Intel Q9450 (2008) and AMD Athlon (2000) so I haven't bought AMD in a while even though I favour AMD.

I pay the electricity bills for my household so I factor energy efficiency into the price/performance and don't just use the purchase price.

Yeah.

Seems a bit similar to what i did, looking @ your cpu history.


For a gaming rig AMD has not much to offer nowadays. The only things you can do nearly as good is video editing (not the wattage consume bill counted in) or math operation workstations with opterons and small office pc's with a AMD A8-7600, the power consumption is also good compared to a near by Celeron G1820. Here AMD has something to offer to compete with Intel.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 15 January 2015 - 10:57 AM.

[Flapdrol]

Smokeyjedi, on 13 January 2015 - 09:10 PM, said:

when someone with a G3258 OC'd managed to get his 2 cores totally optimized in MWO.

There's no "optimizing" for a pentium, pretty much any game can push a 2 thread cpu to 100% unless you change settings so you're gpu limited.

The pentium is always near 100%, although sometimes it's at 120 fps, and sometimes at 50. Cryengine may be multithreaded, but that's more on the graphics than the gameplay side, so wavy grass is multithreaded, but big robots fighting eachother isn't. Somewhere there's one thread holding up the 8350, other threads have to wait for it. The user.cfg core affinity may help a little, but it's no cure.