54 replies to this topic

[Thunder Fist]

Sen, on 27 December 2012 - 08:14 AM, said:

http://www.tomshardw...iew,3328-6.html

http://www.tomshardw...ew,3328-13.html

http://www.tomshardw...ew,3328-14.html

http://www.tomshardw...ew,3328-15.html

Alright, let's talk facts. Now, granted,these benchmarks all come from the same review, and the overall conclusion was that Vizshera was generations better than Piledriver, but still not "up" with intel, especially when factoring in power draw for the performance. But wait, we're talking gaming and FPS here, and why O/P is not getting higher frame rates. You blame the processor, yet when you look at the actual real world GAMING BENCHMARKS AT MAX SETTINGS [from your "end all be all tech source]. . .you'll see that in every case the 8350 is within 3 FPS or so of the i7 every time.

Even at lower levels, however, FPS for the 8350 are over 60 anyway, and as such would suggest that the issue here is NOT the processor in this case.

Now, explain to me why the O/P, with a relatively brand new system needs to go out and blow another $300-$500 on a brand new processor and motherboard just to play MwO?

Yes its not the procesor its the dam video card if you want fps them buy the best video card there is like a nvidia gtx 680 or 690 or amd 7950 or 7970 why spend $800 dollars on a new cpu + mother board + memory when all you need is a powerful video card . and a fast ssd would help as well bigger performance jump than a new cpu thats for sure.

[Adrienne Vorton]

i´d say wait...i am currently in the 30´s (medium settings) with "only" an athlon IIx4 650, 8 GB DDR3 and a gforce GT440 (1GB)... and as far as i´m concerned, i could get a good boost with just a faster gfx card (128bit memory interface is a bottleneck afaik) ... so with your system, i really wonder if it´s really worth investing your childrens aducation , since there seems not to be that much difference between many low budget and some highend systems right now^^, i guess the DX11 version will maybe bring a more optimized performance... and PG is still hacking the hell out of the game to make it smoother...

Edited by Adrienne Vorton, 27 December 2012 - 04:13 PM.

[Odins Fist]

Thunder Fist, on 27 December 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

Yes intel rocks!!!!! your wallet, just checked newegg.com there top of the line cpu the Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 3.2GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 2011 130W Six-Core Desktop Processor is $ 569 the same price as a amd 8 core $149 and a high end video card like the EVGA 02G-P4-2680-KR GeForce GTX 680 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express $399 , and you still have $20 dollars to spare, lmao yes intel rocks all the way to the bank

.
FIRST.... Intel outperforms AMD, any day of the week, month, or year.. I'm not debating "COST", and never was in this thread, so sit down, and realize what mistake you just made...
.
SECOND: I have run "ALL" AMD for years, but i'm done after my PHENOM II X6 1100 Thuban is not to my liking..
.
THIRD: Maybe you missed the part where I said my very good friend has a FX-8350, (side note) not enough of a performance boost over the "Bulldozer" for me to even consider for my next "GAMING RIG".
.
FOURTH: I'm currently watching a (4) Core 2011 Socket Intel chip, "OUT CLOCK", and out perform a FX-8350..
.
FINALLY: Worry about your wallet, i'm not worried about mine, and that wasn't even an issue I was talking about in this thread.
.
QUESTION: Troll much..???
.

Az0r, on 26 December 2012 - 05:16 AM, said:

I feel that if you're going to use personal reasons like ethics to justify your hardware advice then you probably shouldn't be giving advice in the first place.

.
Yep, saw that months ago, thanks for saying it again...

Edited by Odins Fist, 27 December 2012 - 05:04 PM.

[Sen]

Quote

Yes its not the procesor its the dam video card if you want fps them buy the best video card there is like a nvidia gtx 680 or 690 or amd 7950 or 7970 why spend $800 dollars on a new cpu + mother board + memory when all you need is a powerful video card . and a fast ssd would help as well bigger performance jump than a new cpu thats for sure.

Um . . Is this sarcasm? I can't 100% tell. if it's not, the O/P already HAS a 7950. If it *IS*, you're an id 10 t.

I think in fanboyish haste to bash the other side, EVERYONE has missed the simplest of facts:

Yes, intel outperforms AMD in gaming. By how much is a matter of some contention, but the fact remains that we're not talking about building some kind of lostech holo grid here. . it's friggin' MwO for Chrissakes! Other builds similar to the O/P are running MwO just fine with 45-60 FPS here, so hijacking the thread to argue AMD vs Intel [no matter how much fun it may be] is kinda pointless.

[author's note: I include myself in that admonishment, I'm just as guilty]

Hows about we all put AMD vs Intel behind us, assume that the O/Ps processor is fine, and focus on what ELSE could be causing the problem here?

[Yes Vulps, I still love you ]

[THOR HAMMER]

Odins Fist, on 27 December 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

.
FIRST.... Intel outperforms AMD, any day of the week, month, or year.. I'm not debating "COST", and never was in this thread, so sit down, and realize what mistake you just made...
.
SECOND: I have run "ALL" AMD for years, but i'm done after my PHENOM II X6 1100 Thuban is not to my liking..
.
THIRD: Maybe you missed the part where I said my very good friend has a FX-8350, (side note) not enough of a performance boost over the "Bulldozer" for me to even consider for my next "GAMING RIG".
.
FOURTH: I'm currently watching a (4) Core 2011 Socket Intel chip, "OUT CLOCK", and out perform a FX-8350..
.
FINALLY: Worry about your wallet, i'm not worried about mine, and that wasn't even an issue I was talking about in this thread.
.
QUESTION: Troll much..???
.

.
Yep, saw that months ago, thanks for saying it again...

Going to have to agree with Thunder Fist on the price vs performance, Im not paying extra $400 for a maybe % 20 boost a good cpu paired with a powerful video card is a better bet, And yes odins fiz we realize that you are rich and probably work for intel and have a intel blowup doll at home but we real men like REAL women and so we are broke, but HAPPY !! and must not listen to the TROLL overlords that spam the internet telling us that intel is the new Messiah and we MUST buy only intel, freedom is a wonderful thing, and shame on you using ODIN's name in vane lol. Have you ever wondered how much intel gives those magazine's that do those !!!! BENCHMARKS !!!! humm but there's no way that intel would do that . check out this link > and decide for your self .http://www.google.co...kKlALJTvUMfehdA

[Thunder Fist]

Odins Fist, on 27 December 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

.
FIRST.... Intel outperforms AMD, any day of the week, month, or year.. I'm not debating "COST", and never was in this thread, so sit down, and realize what mistake you just made...
.
SECOND: I have run "ALL" AMD for years, but i'm done after my PHENOM II X6 1100 Thuban is not to my liking..
.
THIRD: Maybe you missed the part where I said my very good friend has a FX-8350, (side note) not enough of a performance boost over the "Bulldozer" for me to even consider for my next "GAMING RIG".
.
FOURTH: I'm currently watching a (4) Core 2011 Socket Intel chip, "OUT CLOCK", and out perform a FX-8350..
.
FINALLY: Worry about your wallet, i'm not worried about mine, and that wasn't even an issue I was talking about in this thread.
.
QUESTION: Troll much..???
.

.
Yep, saw that months ago, thanks for saying it again...

Are you a intel Spy/Spammer ? i see guys like you posting fake reviews of products on newegg all the time .

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Thunder Fist, on 27 December 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

Yes intel rocks!!!!! your wallet, just checked newegg.com there top of the line cpu the Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 3.2GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 2011 130W Six-Core Desktop Processor is $ 569 the same price as a amd 8 core $149 and a high end video card like the EVGA 02G-P4-2680-KR GeForce GTX 680 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express $399 , and you still have $20 dollars to spare, lmao yes intel rocks all the way to the bank

Either your thick or plain stupid.

Why would you be comparing the Sandybridge E option?

If your going to make a meaningful comparison you make the comparison between the two top end chips of the non E series line (ie the ones that benchmarkers and reviewers compare because they are targeted at the same market)

So try again comparing the AMD 8350 -$209.99 and the I7 3770k or I7 2600k at $329.99 and $279.99 respectively.
And just for you in most relevant gaming benchmarks the 8350 beats neither intel chip, its down to the individual weather the FPS gain is justified in the cost.

Thunder Fist, on 27 December 2012 - 03:59 PM, said:

Yes its not the procesor its the dam video card if you want fps them buy the best video card there is like a nvidia gtx 680 or 690 or amd 7950 or 7970 why spend $800 dollars on a new cpu + mother board + memory when all you need is a powerful video card . and a fast ssd would help as well bigger performance jump than a new cpu thats for sure.

Im going with stupid.

Edited by DV McKenna, 28 December 2012 - 08:57 AM.

[THOR HAMMER]

Thunder Fist, on 28 December 2012 - 12:51 AM, said:

Are you a intel Spy/Spammer ? i see guys like you posting fake reviews of products on newegg all the time .

Hey Thunder i think its funny how all these intel trolls/spammers always say they ran nothing but amd and then one day they had a Epiphany that intel was the gleeming light coming from the sky to save them from the amd scurge lol , And yes ive scene those fake reviews too they are so obvious and stick out like a soar thumb, I believe in real world performance if my system a AMD phenom II x 4 3.0 ghz black edition paired with a Nvidia geforce gtx 670 can run crysis 2 at absolute max at 1400x900 pumping out between 40 and 50 frames per second run smooth and look great then thats all i need, why pay $400 extra for a extra few frames per second, and after you hit a certain number of frames like 50 fps you cant tell the difference any more but you cant tell this to some people they must have all the frames they possiably can get, and let them!! we will run our rigs spending a quarter of what they spend and play the game just fine, last word on this subject what we dont like is people trying to pull off a sales pitch using Troll spamming trying to convince us that we are stupid for not doing it there way, well to quote the great Frank Sinatra !!!!! I DID IT MY WAY !!!!! . See you warrior 's on the battle field .

[Oderint dum Metuant]

THOR HAMMER, on 28 December 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

Hey Thunder i think its funny how all these intel trolls/spammers always say they ran nothing but amd and then one day they had a Epiphany that intel was the gleeming light coming from the sky to save them from the amd scurge lol , And yes ive scene those fake reviews too they are so obvious and stick out like a soar thumb, I believe in real world performance if my system a AMD phenom II x 4 3.0 ghz black edition paired with a Nvidia geforce gtx 670 can run crysis 2 at absolute max at 1400x900 pumping out between 40 and 50 frames per second run smooth and look great then thats all i need, why pay $400 extra for a extra few frames per second, and after you hit a certain number of frames like 50 fps you cant tell the difference any more but you cant tell this to some people they must have all the frames they possiably can get, and let them!! we will run our rigs spending a quarter of what they spend and play the game just fine, last word on this subject what we dont like is people trying to pull off a sales pitch using Troll spamming trying to convince us that we are stupid for not doing it there way, well to quote the great Frank Sinatra !!!!! I DID IT MY WAY !!!!! . See you warrior 's on the battle field .

At a low resolution for 1400*900 that's not a surprise, and your also using a Phenom II which are better gaming chips than bulldozer chips.
You can notice a difference up to 60FPS btw.

However something on your system is not pulling its weight, i run an i5 2500k and a GTX 670 like you, on a single 1920*1080 monitor it runs 57-60FPS, across tri monitors 5760*1080 is runs between 30-40 FPS.

Could bad optimization of the game i guess.

[Sen]

Or a bad update? [already suggested] or not running latest drivers, or buying a prebuilt computer with a whole bunch of crapware on it, or not having antivirus/antispyware installed and contracting Simulacrum transmitted degradations.

Missing chipset drivers, bad/no windows optimiztaions/installing the game on a quarter moon the 2nd week of December without sacrificing two chickens and a goat. . ..

I could go on

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Sen, on 28 December 2012 - 01:30 PM, said:

Or a bad update? [already suggested] or not running latest drivers, or buying a prebuilt computer with a whole bunch of crapware on it, or not having antivirus/antispyware installed and contracting Simulacrum transmitted degradations.

Missing chipset drivers, bad/no windows optimiztaions/installing the game on a quarter moon the 2nd week of December without sacrificing two chickens and a goat. . ..

I could go on

And on

[Sen]

http://www.addictive...s-xp-and-vista/

http://www.pcmag.com...7,887799,00.asp

and on. . . .

[Youngblood]

Sen, on 28 December 2012 - 01:39 PM, said:

http://www.addictive...s-xp-and-vista/

http://www.pcmag.com...7,887799,00.asp

and on. . . .

How much of a difference do those optimizations make on new systems nowadays anyways? I mean, how much CPU usage are we really talking about reducing here compared to what MWO consumes?

[THOR HAMMER]

DV McKenna, on 28 December 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

At a low resolution for 1400*900 that's not a surprise, and your also using a Phenom II which are better gaming chips than bulldozer chips.
You can notice a difference up to 60FPS btw.

However something on your system is not pulling its weight, i run an i5 2500k and a GTX 670 like you, on a single 1920*1080 monitor it runs 57-60FPS, across tri monitors 5760*1080 is runs between 30-40 FPS.

Could bad optimization of the game i guess.

the reason i dont get better fps is that i like to adjust the setting's for each game and often force alot of the settings to increase visuals probably would get in the near 60s if i just ran everything application controlled, i get a score of 90fps in evga oc scanner at 1400x900 with fxaa enabled full screen.

[Sen]

Quote

How much of a difference do those optimizations make on new systems nowadays anyways?

You'd be surprised at how much of a system hog indexing is, even in windows 8, on SSDs, you don't want the constant writing to the drive for the lifespan anyway, so it's still kinda a no brainer.

People have actually handed me brand new notebooks with standard HDDs in them, and I've personally watched their jaws drop after just disabling indexing on the main drive. It's worth it ^^

Moving windows Kernel to RAM Is another one that just seems to make things snappier. I have 0 data to back that one up, but I do it anyway. I like how it makes Windows respond.

As to the rest, for windows 7 and older I have a half page list of registry tweaks and settings that I modify when people come to me asking for help with their slow, bogged down machines. Razer also jumped in on GameBooster, which from the looks of it is capable of temporarily applying most if not all of those modifications.