Guild Wars 2

I just want to mention: playing X-Rebirth showed, that many high-end rigs did perform very poor while medium to low-cost rigs did get better fps.
For me that means that even the best rig can struggle cause of the coding while a medium rig COULD perform better in some cases

CptTrips.6512:

I just want to mention: playing X-Rebirth showed, that many high-end rigs did perform very poor while medium to low-cost rigs did get better fps.
For me that means that even the best rig can struggle cause of the coding while a medium rig COULD perform better in some cases

I do not see how this is even possible, there MUST be other factors involved.

Are you comparing apples with apples or apples with marshmellows?

Novuake.2691:

Anyandrell.6238:

I only got an i7-3770k (multicore, yes, x 8 ) with an AMD Radeon 7900 series and I have absolutely no problems with lag or fps drop and I always play with highest settings possible. Try Ibuypower. They have really good gaming computers.

Ibuypower does NOT have good gaming computers.

They overcharge badly.
Use subpar and barely capable hardware to run the system.
Their prebuilt system are all totally unbalanced with either overpowered motherboards,CPUs, GPUs or RAM in relation to the rest of the system.

Custom build, or ask on an ACTUAL hardware forum like Toms Hardware, which I frequent often.

Feel free to PM me if you need help selecting a balanced gaming system.

I would. If you would have even noticed that what I had posted that I have as a rig is NOT one of their pre-built systems (I dare you to find any of their pre-built PCs that would be 8-core). You didn’t, so, allow me to kind of not give much value to the advice.

Also, their machines can be purchased through other sources, that bring the price drastically – I paid for mine about 65% of the price on the website.

Some of us posting here have worked on computers when they (the computers) were as big as a room and used punch cards. Think on that a little.

Novuake.2691:

CptTrips.6512:

I just want to mention: playing X-Rebirth showed, that many high-end rigs did perform very poor while medium to low-cost rigs did get better fps.
For me that means that even the best rig can struggle cause of the coding while a medium rig COULD perform better in some cases

I do not see how this is even possible, there MUST be other factors involved.

Are you comparing apples with apples or apples with marshmellows?

I didn´t dive deep into this but as far as I know it was about messing up some … let´s say “thread-to-core-binding” (not a native english, so sorry) and the more cores you got, the bigger the problem was.

I´m not saying this is the case with gw2 too, just wanted to point out, that in some circumstances it COULD be that a medium rig works better than a high-end rig. As seen with Rebirth (there also for some time no one could imagine why the high-end rigs had so much more issues than the cheaper ones)

Anyandrell.6238:

I would. If you would have even noticed that what I had posted that I have as a rig is NOT one of their pre-built systems (I dare you to find any of their pre-built PCs that would be 8-core). You didn’t, so, allow me to kind of not give much value to the advice.

Also, their machines can be purchased through other sources, that bring the price drastically – I paid for mine about 65% of the price on the website.

Some of us posting here have worked on computers when they (the computers) were as big as a room and used punch cards. Think on that a little.

Prebuilt or not, their OPTIONS are generally not worth it, MOST notably power supplies. I think the “best” quality units they provide (that isn’t complete wattage overkill) are like the Corsair CXs, which have sub par build quality and dodgy CAPs susceptible to overheating and failure.
As in attached the only decent units are the Corsair RM750-850, which is WAY more wattage than MOST systems require. Not to mention around that price the RMs are actually just a bad choice since there are BETTER and CHEAPER units at lower cost.

As for how old and what computers you worked on, I do not see how that is relevant now? The fact that you seem to be starting towards a kitten measuring contest makes me question your actual age… But that is just a passing thought and I am NOT trying to insult you.

I just wanted to add my test results (just a quick test, didn’t try different settings, or run around the whole event area). I was defending north turrets. All settings on max (except the cheap AA, because I supersample instead) @ 2560×1600. The lowest I saw was 19 fps looking directly at the zerg, zoomed out, from north turret area (ran a little closer, didn’t make a difference). I also didn’t get very far into the fight before the game crashed from hitting the 3.7GB memory limit (because its 32-bit).

Relevant specs:
CPU: Intel Core i7-4790k (stock settings = 4.3 GHz constant on my mobo)
GPU: ASUS AMD Radeon HD7970
RAM: 16GB, 1866MHz, CL 8-9-9

CptTrips.6512:

I didn´t dive deep into this but as far as I know it was about messing up some … let´s say “thread-to-core-binding” (not a native english, so sorry) and the more cores you got, the bigger the problem was.

I´m not saying this is the case with gw2 too, just wanted to point out, that in some circumstances it COULD be that a medium rig works better than a high-end rig. As seen with Rebirth (there also for some time no one could imagine why the high-end rigs had so much more issues than the cheaper ones)

Ah yes, I understand what your saying.

Back with the first Intel Quad cores they would actually have a lower clock speed than their dual core variants. Since games were, and to a degree still, prefer single cores with higher clock rates they would have run better on the higher clocked(and cheaper) dual cores.

This isn’t really relevant anymore though.

Rainmaker.7594:

I just wanted to add my test results (just a quick test, didn’t try different settings, or run around the whole event area). I was defending north turrets. All settings on max (except the cheap AA, because I supersample instead) @ 2560×1600. The lowest I saw was 19 fps looking directly at the zerg, zoomed out, from north turret area (ran a little closer, didn’t make a difference). I also didn’t get very far into the fight before the game crashed from hitting the 3.7GB memory limit (because its 32-bit).

Relevant specs:
CPU: Intel Core i7-4790k (stock settings = 4.3 GHz constant on my mobo)
GPU: ASUS AMD Radeon HD7970
RAM: 16GB, 1866MHz, CL 8-9-9

Seems about right, maybe a little on the low side, but that could just be the RAM limitation. GET 64BIT NOW! :P

Novuake.2691:

Rainmaker.7594:

I just wanted to add my test results (just a quick test, didn’t try different settings, or run around the whole event area). I was defending north turrets. All settings on max (except the cheap AA, because I supersample instead) @ 2560×1600. The lowest I saw was 19 fps looking directly at the zerg, zoomed out, from north turret area (ran a little closer, didn’t make a difference). I also didn’t get very far into the fight before the game crashed from hitting the 3.7GB memory limit (because its 32-bit).

Relevant specs:
CPU: Intel Core i7-4790k (stock settings = 4.3 GHz constant on my mobo)
GPU: ASUS AMD Radeon HD7970
RAM: 16GB, 1866MHz, CL 8-9-9

Seems about right, maybe a little on the low side, but that could just be the RAM limitation. GET 64BIT NOW! :P

Yeah, I really wish they would release a 64-bit version of GW2. While I usually stick to dungeons anyway, I can’t really do zerg bosses if I wanted to because I have a high chance of hitting the memory limit. I know I could just lower the game settings, but I didn’t spend as much as I did to build this PC to play on low settings (and I’m just too lazy to change the settings before and after events ).

The game runs under DX9 and 32 bit IIRC. Limited draw calls and RAM from the program most likely.

Anet it’s 2015.. give us at least DX11… there is already GPU’s with DX12… -_-

Shakki.3219:

Anet it’s 2015.. give us at least DX11… there is already GPU’s with DX12… -_-

Games take YEARS to design, HOW THE HECK do you expect them to serious port everything to DX11? LOL

Novuake.2691:

Shakki.3219:

Anet it’s 2015.. give us at least DX11… there is already GPU’s with DX12… -_-

Games take YEARS to design, HOW THE HECK do you expect them to serious port everything to DX11? LOL

Well WoW dindt had that problem..

Scoobaniec.9561:

Novuake.2691:

Shakki.3219:

Anet it’s 2015.. give us at least DX11… there is already GPU’s with DX12… -_-

Games take YEARS to design, HOW THE HECK do you expect them to serious port everything to DX11? LOL

Well WoW dindt had that problem..

WoW is a 11 year old game, GW2 is 2 years old.

WoW is subscription based.

WoW NEEDED a visual upgrade, GW2 does NOT and GW2 is STILL a better looking game.

WoW is NOT to be compared to GW2.

And finally.

DX11 does not instantly mean it will perform better or even look better.

Scoobaniec.9561:

Novuake.2691:

Shakki.3219:

Anet it’s 2015.. give us at least DX11… there is already GPU’s with DX12… -_-

Games take YEARS to design, HOW THE HECK do you expect them to serious port everything to DX11? LOL

Well WoW dindt had that problem..

Blizzard also earns 150 million dollars every month from subscribtions alone.
Normally they should even have the money to toss out a full expansion every
2-3 months for free with that.

Fine, another game is lotro..i guess thats a bad example too?

Also noone really asked about better visual effects etc. And trust me dx11 will perform better than dx9.

Would be cool to get 64bit client at least.

Scoobaniec.9561:

Fine, another game is lotro..i guess thats a bad example too?

Also noone really asked about better visual effects etc. And trust me dx11 will perform better than dx9.

Would be cool to get 64bit client at least.

I agree with 64 bit.

But no, DX11 MIGHT perform better. Without understanding the code you can not possible know, and MOST games get near zero improvement from a DX9 to DX11 port.

I tried lotro with DX11 and the performance was not better .. sometimes even worse
than with DX9, and i also had some issues where things looked not so good and i
quickly went back to DX9.

That is ther perfect example that just changing to another DX version doesn’t
automatically makes everything better. It needs a lot of work to do it right.

I think this depends on hardware and software really I never lag at all or have frame rate issues even with 200 people on the screen and I run every thing at max.

i7-4790k
Gigabyte GA-Z97X-UD5H-BK mother board black edition
16 gigs @2133 Gskill sniper series ram
2X Samsung 840 pro ssd 120 gig each 1 boot 1 games
1X corsiar gt3 ssd 60 gigs older ssd drive for games
1X 1 TB WD black storage drive
2X dvd blue ray burner
1X Gigabyte 780 GTX gigahertz edition 3gig
Cooler master silent pro gold 1100 watt power supply
Cm storm keyboard
Razer naga mmo mouse
28 inch Asus monitor
Win 7 64 bit
My internet is a 70 meg connection

Considering the engine optimizations we have (not) had in the recent past, I think Anet doesn’t have too many client programmers on their payroll at this time. Thus any major upgrades to the game client are unlikely to happen anytime soon.

hellchamp.5412:

I think this depends on hardware and software really I never lag at all or have frame rate issues even with 200 people on the screen and I run every thing at max.

i7-4790k
Gigabyte GA-Z97X-UD5H-BK mother board black edition
16 gigs @2133 Gskill sniper series ram
2X Samsung 840 pro ssd 120 gig each 1 boot 1 games
1X corsiar gt3 ssd 60 gigs older ssd drive for games
1X 1 TB WD black storage drive
2X dvd blue ray burner
1X Gigabyte 780 GTX gigahertz edition 3gig
Cooler master silent pro gold 1100 watt power supply
Cm storm keyboard
Razer naga mmo mouse
28 inch Asus monitor
Win 7 64 bit
My internet is a 70 meg connection

One persons lag is not the same to the next. What is your lowest dips in Teq burn phase?

Beldin.5498:

I tried lotro with DX11 and the performance was not better .. sometimes even worse
than with DX9, and i also had some issues where things looked not so good and i
quickly went back to DX9.

That is ther perfect example that just changing to another DX version doesn’t
automatically makes everything better. It needs a lot of work to do it right.

Cause in general newer dx version = better graphic and so on which means more things to calculate by cpu and gpu. Howered if you port current game from dx9 to 11 without adding extra stuff the result is http://media.bestofmicro.com/V/Y/272014/original/AMD-DX9-Vs-DX-11-FPS.png
http://pixelsmashers.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/dx-9-v-dx-11-wow.jpg the olny thing that changed here is water..Sry was2lazy to upload pics on forum.

Also http://wccftech.com/dx12-revealed-compared-dx11/
http://www.gaminglaptopsjunky.com/dx11-vs-dx12-performance-and-power-consumption-tests-huge-improvements/

no idea next time I do him I will look. I did teq yesterday not sure how many people where there we failed but I didn’t notice anything and I don’t run with the setting window open. You don’t notice anything under 20 fps anyways you as a person can only see so fast.

WvW after waiting 45 minutes to get into a map had some huge zerg fights no lag there either.
Now isn’t GW2 DX10 game? it used to run like crap on my old setup with all the same hd and ssd vid card until I installed msi after burner and just installed every thing including the vid stuff and I was missing some DX10 files and that helped with game a little.

I believe the FPS issues are stemming from driver updates with some newer nVidia chips. So far, almost all FPS complaints I’ve seen recently have stemmed from 900-series users after a recent driver update.

I assume that problem will be fixed within the near future, though.

Rainmaker.7594:

Novuake.2691:

Rainmaker.7594:

I just wanted to add my test results (just a quick test, didn’t try different settings, or run around the whole event area). I was defending north turrets. All settings on max (except the cheap AA, because I supersample instead) @ 2560×1600. The lowest I saw was 19 fps looking directly at the zerg, zoomed out, from north turret area (ran a little closer, didn’t make a difference). I also didn’t get very far into the fight before the game crashed from hitting the 3.7GB memory limit (because its 32-bit).

Relevant specs:
CPU: Intel Core i7-4790k (stock settings = 4.3 GHz constant on my mobo)
GPU: ASUS AMD Radeon HD7970
RAM: 16GB, 1866MHz, CL 8-9-9

Seems about right, maybe a little on the low side, but that could just be the RAM limitation. GET 64BIT NOW! :P

Yeah, I really wish they would release a 64-bit version of GW2. While I usually stick to dungeons anyway, I can’t really do zerg bosses if I wanted to because I have a high chance of hitting the memory limit. I know I could just lower the game settings, but I didn’t spend as much as I did to build this PC to play on low settings (and I’m just too lazy to change the settings before and after events ).

I’ve been having game crashes lately with my system (right after I tried the Nvidia video settings for GW2). I too have a 2560×1600 monitor and I think your post above about the game client being 32 bit being the culprit is right on the mark. I had to lower my settings (which pains me, not why I bought the Titan Black graphics card) to keep it from crashing in large zerg situations (and then not getting the reward for killing the boss).

what kind of crash do you have black screen or the NVidia driver crash ?

Anyandrell.6238:

Some of us posting here have worked on computers when they (the computers) were as big as a room and used punch cards. Think on that a little.

Well that describes me, and you are talking rubbish.

I used to design motherboards. Think on that a lot

Just built a 4790k machine about 4-5 months ago upgrading from AMD 970 phenom Quad.

The difference is I used to hit 8fps in wvw all the time. The 4790k never goes below 43 fps even in the thickest zergs.

In Diablo 3 I used to drop down to 5 fps and now D3 is a solid 50 fps in the thickest of mob packs.

I can even get Dayz to run at a solid 60 fps now.

Best gaming rig I’ve ever built. I can’t recommend the 4790k enough. The 4790k is future proofed for at least 4 years. Proc’s aren’t going to get much better than the 4790k for awhile.

Guardian of Angels.9867:

I’ve got the 4790k @ 4,6ghz and believe it doesn’t go over 80% with GW2.

There’s always a huge drop in FPS, I go from 40-60 fps to 7-11 on full maps world bosses. (Karka, Svanir)

GPU: GTX770

I have this exact build and I run about the same. I don’t think I have ever seen it below 10 FPS though.

hellchamp.5412:

what kind of crash do you have black screen or the NVidia driver crash ?

The crash, if the same as mine, is an over memory limit crash. It usually results in a crash to desktop with a send error report to ANet screen popping up. But this last time, it completely froze (background music still played), could not Alt+F4 or Alt+Tab, I had to open task manager and kill the process. From there I saw that it was at 3.7 GB memory usage. This is caused by the game being 32-bit, as such programs are limited to between 3.4 to 4GB, depending on the nature of the program (in this case limited to 3.7GB). Making the game 64-bit would solve this problem (technical memory limit would be in exobytes, but the OS/motherboard would limit this to around 32-64GB currently).

I don’t think it really matters how badly your game runs on your current Intel hardware, because it can’t be anything like as bad as how an AMD system runs it. >__<

I built this AMD system I currently own over 3 years ago and realised at the time I started playing GW2 that I went for brand loyalty over smarts (been gaming with AMD for over 12 years, back when they were leaving Intel behind with different instruction sets).

GW2 is really the only game that this hardware struggles with, being CPU-bound. I ran max settings on Skyrim and never even discovered a hiccup. It still runs it flawlessly.

Having said this, I shall be upgrading this outdated boat-anchor of a system with a very similar build to what most people have described here:

i7-4790K
Asus Maximus VII mobo
Corsair Vengeance Pro 2133 (16Gb)
Gigabyte GTX 970 G1 Gaming (4Gb), DX12-spec
Corsair HX750i (80 Platinum) full modular PSU
Corsair H80i CPU water cooler
Noctua NF-F12 push-pull fans to keep this bad boy quieter than what I currently have
All mounted in my current Zalman GS1200 full tower.

To be clear, I’m not building this new rig to enhance GW2, although it’ll kitten all over what I currently own, but it’s more for other games and to keep it a bit more modern. Also, the mobo I’ll get will be compatible with Broadwell CPU’s, so with this iteration it’ll have its own degree of upgradability without tearing the whole system down.

All my crashes came from my vid card Gigabyte 780 gtx ghtx edition I thought it was because its over clocked so high…but I installed msi after burner and I was missing some DX 10 files maybe some DX9 files and after that I never had to down clock the core clock again to stop the crashes. I haven’t had that gw2.exe error that some of you have had in some time now after this upgrade and doing this

Guardian of Angels.9867:

One theory I’ve heard was:
That the servers aren’t capable of feeding your pc with the required information, which causes the lagg aka fps drop.

lag also known as fps drop? No a lag is a network related issuse. A framedrop is most of the time a hardware/software related problem

So, I read some of this stuff and skipped a few, just like to add that…

I came from a (early 2010? 2011?)MBP (win7 64bit bootcamp) (i7 2820HQ (or something like that), radeon something useless, and ssd) to…

i7 4790k (4.6ghz)
Zotac 980 AMP! Extreme edition
Asus VII Hero
SSD
bla bla bla

and the difference is….
MBP: 15-45 fps (situational) all lowest settings with native sampling, and “low” model limit and quaitly… CPU temps around 85*C

to…

PC: 30-112 fps (situational) all highest settings except shadows are not at ultra, and native sampling because these two options generally didn’t do anything for me but i lose 2-6 fps.

so in LARGE WvWvW zerg fight I went from 15 fps to 30 fps
World boss trains, went from 20fps to average 55 fps
and open world, not much people around, i sit cleanly around 80 fps…

I do not know how my system stacks up with other people, but people in the game just talks about how their computers are running solid 75+ fps in all situations. no idea how they achieve this, and kind of believe they are lying.

I also get random gw2 crashes once every 3-7 hours, the screen either goes gray, or minimizes, everything else is perfect and the sound still plays.. i can hear myself die, but no graphics. I think my graphics card isn’t well supported by gw2 in general, this also happens more when my card is overclocked with the factory software, something isnt stable with my card and i’d have to figure out what.

circuitnerd.5863:

If so, how does it run with a large group of people such as during teq? Is there still a big drop in fps?

Processor means nothing, I’m on an nvidia 970 and i5-4690k, I get 60+ FPS in 100 man WVW zergs, teq zergs, wurm zergs, etc. I’m maxed settings and just turn culling to lowest, I also get 60+ fps while streaming with shadowplay during those huge fights.

naiasonod.9265:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Think of your system as a 4-man relay. If one runner is slow, your whole performance will be low.

With that said, you cannot focus on CPU and GPU alone. All data are stored in your hard drive and if your hard drive cannot keep up with the CPU’s and GPU’s demands, your system will only be as fast as your hard drive can go.

So to get the full potential out of an i7 you need to also upgrade your MB, your RAM and your hard drive, preferable an SSD.

However all these will mean nothing if the issue is on the Anet’s server.

All good and salient points, right here. I noticed improvements on load times when zoning into new areas when I installed GW2 onto one of my SSD’s many moons ago.

Didn’t seem to have any impact that I recall on FPS though. When I upgraded from my old GTX 580 to the 780 a while back, that made a significant improvement to keeping a stable 60 fps @ 1920×1080p at max settings/normal sampling.

Gotta say, GW2 seems to love a powerhouse GPU as much as it loves a strong CPU. I often hear it said that its more CPU intensive, but I’m not sure I buy that. Seems to me to be a fairly demanding game all around, when you get some business going on screen.

It is. the fact i can barely get 50 fps on 1440 in most areas with gtx 970 and a 3770k oced to 4.3 is wicked dumb. Until someone proves its graphics related im holding out on 970sli

Ill get 30-40 on 4k if im lucky

Shiyo.3578:

circuitnerd.5863:

If so, how does it run with a large group of people such as during teq? Is there still a big drop in fps?

Processor means nothing, I’m on an nvidia 970 and i5-4690k, I get 60+ FPS in 100 man WVW zergs, teq zergs, wurm zergs, etc. I’m maxed settings and just turn culling to lowest, I also get 60+ fps while streaming with shadowplay during those huge fights.

You had to change settings though.

I find that hard to believe really, considering i max everything else out with 0 issues