Guild Wars 2

Nikola.3841:

Avelos.6798:

I already did by purchasing an i7 4770K. I’m satisfied.

I stopped playing, its not bad solution either

haha, too true.

But if you want to play, and you want decent performance…the only option is a i5/i7 K series pushed to 4.6ghz. Nothing else is comparable.

Still with low level API even FX 4300 can beat your CPU – i7 4770K
i5 2500K 5.3Ghz is the best solution

My i7 overclock was so bad. I got it to the point where it was stable only in guild wars 2 but other games it was kitten. So I removed it. Running 3.5 GHz under a Corsair H100. InB4 people go “Why do you have such expensive cooling for no OC…” and I’m like “Because I like it running lower than 40 degrees.”

Even at 3.5 GHz it still smashes what my FX-8350 could do in this game ._.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

Still with low level API even FX 4300 can beat your CPU – i7 4770K
i5 2500K 5.3Ghz is the best solution

Remind me why I should care if Mantle can help a slower processor suddenly become faster than mine because the processing load was shifted to the graphics unit… Mantle is not in Guild Wars 2 and it won’t ever be, and it’s only in one game officially released.

Oh and just for the record, Mantle can work with an Intel platform using AMD Radeon GCN graphics so uh, no the FX-4300 won’t beat out my i7 because I’m running two 7970s.

THAT is not the point.
You gave for your i7 4770K more than 300$ while you can get FX 8320 for 120$.
Problem is that no CPU can handle GW2 – even if you CPU is 100% faster than Fx 8320
when FX 8320 deeps to 10 FPS you wont get more than 20 FPS.

So is I7 4770K worth your money?

I can make my FX go to 5.4Ghz with 1 core in module but it isnt worth it..

What’s your point? My FPS is now more than satisfying for me than when I had my FX-8350. Your reasoning on why I bought my i7 does not matter to me. My reasoning does and I bought it because I wanted better performance and thus I am satisfied with what I have.

If you’re satisfied with your FX 4300, then cool. I’m satisfied with my i7.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

So is I7 4770K worth your money?

Yes.

i have FX 6300 at 4.5Ghz also i had i7 3770K… And in big fights there is no big difference both CPUs deep under 20 FPS.
FX 12FPS
I7 16 FPS

I’d take the 16 FPS over 12 FPS. But there’s a key thing here. I don’t do World Versus World so big fight problems that wvw’ers have don’t effect me except for when tequatl happens when I feel like I want to do that. Other than that I don’t have problems.

When I first participated in Claw Of Jormag world boss battle, it was epikittenil I watched my FPS drop to below 10. It was epic. But then it was awful on an epic scale. And then I saw a video of someone doing the fight and on their specs they had an i5 3570K and a GTX 670. FPS was rich and smooth. and I was like “I want that.” So I saved a bit of money every now and then from work and got a new board and processor and this time I made sure the board was good at overclocking.

Avelos.6798:

I’d take the 16 FPS over 12 FPS. But there’s a key thing here. I don’t do World Versus World so big fight problems that wvw’ers have don’t effect me except for when tequatl happens when I feel like I want to do that. Other than that I don’t have problems.

So you would spend more than 100-200$ (i5-i7) to get that performance? nice
Skylake is comming AVX3.2 – 512bit FPU – that may help

Still i would rather see better API in this game

Indeed I would rather spend money on better performance. If I can achieve better performance without the need for an overclock, it makes things easier.

Like I said, I have used an AMD FX-8350. I was not satisfied with the performance. I won’t have a problem buying Intel next time for a high end system.

I also doubt I’ll upgrade to skylake unless there is some major improvement to the cpu that will benefit me.

I just started playing GW2 again because of the new update but was less than impressed with the performance.

I have an i7 4770k @ 4.8Ghz paired with SLI 780s and 32gb 2000mhz ram.

I put the game on ramdisk to ensure max bandwidth access and still the frame rate dips into the low teens (even single digits) during the battles at Lion’s Arch.

No other game gets this bad. I should be maxing this game out. I’m able to max everything else I throw at my PC. Tera, Battlefield 4, Planetside 2 all of them never drop below 30-40fps in large fights. Guild Wars 2 has no excuse.

I believe Planetside 2 was heavily single threaded as well when it came out but now it’s very much improved. How come this game hasn’t seen such improvements?

heh
FX 8350 has great multitasking. Future is on multicore. Man why not? Why not scale all 8 threads?

Finally i will see jaguar cores in action!
http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/11/27/free-for-all-mmorpgs-for-your-new-console/

want to compare scaling in elder scrolls online

I feel as if there’s a lack of resources right now as to why there’s no such major improvements to guild Wars 2 yet. In fact, World Of Warcraft had such improvements made with even DX11 and it changed nothing with large fights, proof has been shown earlier in the thread.

All of those games can be compared to a degree except for Battlefield 4, in my opinion. Those games, FPS games are designed to get the best FPS on beater specs or whatever. MMOs are a different story entirely.

Like I usually say, it just needs that optimization to come around…

Also I’m quite jealous of your 4.8 GHz overclock. Like, mad jealous. Mad. That must perform amazing compared to 3.5GHz 4770K setting.

Then how PS4 run MMO like elders crolls online with 8 jaguar cores 1.6Ghz?

Optimization. Coding to specifically take advantage of the architecture and it’s features. There isn’t any game on the consoles using Mantle. Not yet.

Avelos.6798:

Optimization. Coding to specifically take advantage of the architecture and it’s features. There isn’t any game on the consoles using Mantle. Not yet.

XboX One is kinda PC
DDR3 2133
APU with esdram
some differences… but nothing big..

GW2 should try out MANTLE – just for comparison

…Spend god knows how much money to make a game engine on a brand new API that, and I wouldn’t blame them if this is true, they may not know anything about, just for a comparison?

Your right
I will have to wait first how well will elder scrolls online do on PS4/XboX One.
I saw on youtube that i7 920 3.4Ghz (with R9 260X on max settings) already bottlenecking GPU.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHeMh47rgz0

Bee, just stop.

Consoles are different beasts from PCs. They have a streamline OS, APIs that talk directly to the hardware and hardware is a known, fixed feature. This allows software to be written for maximum performance because all of the abstraction to support varying hardware, eliminate the need of performance settings because of variable hardware, designing code that scales to hardware, etc. are gone. That’s why consoles can perform as well or better than gaming PCs that cost twice as much.

Of course they have their limitations too. Primarily limits to art assets which are the bulk of any modern game.

But that’s neither here nor there. This game, in it’s current state, what matters is the maximum performance of a single core. The last few generations of AMD CPUs will lose to the last few generations of Intel CPUs every time. Yes, AMD CPUs are cheaper BECAUSE they lose to Intel every time. It’s the way AMD can still sell CPUs since Intel chooses not to compete in that price space. While you are talking about spending an extra $100-200 on an Intel CPU/Motherboard over an AMD pairing, once you include everything else that’s required, it’s not as big of a deal as you may think.

Mantle is not an issue with this game, I wish you would stop changing the subject every time you lose. The game currently doesn’t support a thread safe/multithreaded API for graphics such as Dx11. And while Mantle’s reduced CPU overhead by use of a streamline API and minimal driver, no games company would saddle nVidia with just Dx9 while giving AMD graphic cards Mantle support. Nobody wants to PO either of the two video card GPU manufacturers, just as they don’t want to PO either of the two CPU manufacturers by pulling CPU specific instruction mix optimizations.

This game wasn’t written to support trends in software design that weren’t prevalent in 2007. Quad cores and beyond were not common. Gamers clung on to Dx9 and 32 bit XP because of hate for Vista and poor Dx10 ports. MMOs weren’t about matching FPS frame rates but about looks, style and story.

Nothing that you have suggested will help the OP. He wanted to know why his OC FX-8320 with a high end GPU wasn’t doing well in this game. We told him the facts. You can’t change the facts. This game does not scale based on the number of cores you have. This game does not generate enough work for more than a few cores. The three threads that represent the bulk of work, are limited by a core’s performance. All together it’s bad news for the AMD FX based CPUs and as for the Athlon and Phenom IIs, Intel left them in the dust performance wise when Sandy Bridge CPUs came out.

For this game, in parts when numerous other players are active, CPU single core performance is everything. Period.

I am sorry, because some people cant afford same rig as you!
Reducing CPU overhead – better single core performance.

I know that it easy to say that and i am not expecting it.
They already did a great game!

If we compare optimization …
http://gamegpu.ru/mmorpg-/-onlayn-igry/archeage-test-gpu.html

this game has far better CPU optimization

I have a $500 HP running an A8-3820 (2.5GHz K10 based quad core APU). Yes that means I get 6FPS when doing Maw with the culling settings at minimum. But I understand and accept the limitation. Sure I could have gotten an HP with an Intel dual core with HT but that would have saddled me with an Intel HD Graphics 2000 instead of an HD 6550D and since I knew I would be gaming, that was the deciding factor.

I’ve looked at the overall thread usage by the game with Process Explorer. I can see that the primary threads are close to maximizing out a pair of cores.

I can watch disk IO spike until players avatars are built when I zone/WP into a player rich area when my culling settings are not at minimum and how it’s different from when you first enter the game.

I know if I swap out the PSU for something “real” I could at least get a basic video card like the GTX 750Ti or an R7 265 and possibly squeeze out a bit more performance while doing my daily. But I do know that it’s likely even with these lower end GPUs the gains will be limited in GW2 due to the CPU.

But I can accept the fact that seeing how the game is performing, how CPU usage is spread among all the threads, observing how that changes depending what I’m doing or where I am, that CPU core performance trumps number of cores. And if core performance is the key, then I know that you can only get so far with AMD and then you have to go with Intel.

You know what’s sad? TechReport has abandoned AMD CPUs in their current DIY system guide. Their only complaint about Intel, their prices rarely move because there’s no competition from AMD!

Right now AMD is the Coyote and Intel is the Roadrunner. Just when AMD thinks they’ve caught up … BEEP! BEEP!

Behellagh stop!
Why AMD vs INTEL?
If you buy i3 4130 you will have same performance as FX 4300/6300/8320

Game in 2014 should utilize 4 cores.

Dont compare CPU – create build for 400-500$ and try to play this game at 1080p

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

I am sorry, because some people cant afford same rig as you!
Reducing CPU overhead – better single core performance.

I know that it easy to say that and i am not expecting it.
They already did a great game!

If we compare optimization …
http://gamegpu.ru/mmorpg-/-onlayn-igry/archeage-test-gpu.html

this game has far better CPU optimization

Of course it does, it’s built on the CryEngine 3 platform for crying out loud. CryTek license their engine to other developers so it has to embrace modern convention and have high frame rates to compete in the game engine marketplace. ANet created their own with their priorities and preferences. People don’t buy MMOs solely on FPS performance.

This keeps going back to the fact that the game’s development started in 2007. Sure they could have tried the Source or UE3 from the FPS world or BigWorld from the MMO world. They instead took the engine they had from GW and rewrote it to require 2 cores and Dx9. They thought it was good enough. They likely didn’t foresee the scaling issues when lots of players are nearby. Oops.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

Behellagh stop!
Why AMD vs INTEL?
If you buy i3 4130 you will have same performance as FX 4300/6300/8320

Game in 2014 should utilize 4 cores.

Dont compare CPU – create build for 400-500$ and try to play this game at 1080p

I’m smart enough to know you can’t spend $400-500 on a build, even excluding a legal copy of Windows, and expect to play at 1080p at 30fps minimum. I don’t play at 1080p now but at 1600×900 at 25-30fps soloing in the wilderness with high settings. But I’m not willing to sacrifice pretty just for fps. I don’t even turn off reflections.

Why recommend Intel? Because with an Intel platform I can swap out an i3-4130 for an i5-4570 and get an immediate performance boost in this game and most others for $200. And while an FX-8350 can constantly beat an i5-4570 in apps the scale well as number of cores increase, I simply don’t use that many that often to matter or care. I enjoy playing games and most of the games I play simply don’t scale across more than one or two cores. GW2 is the only exception in my gaming library. And while I expect in the future that 4 cores may be required one day, I’m already set for that.

I have 5 years old Phenom II 550 that runs most other games well at 1920×1200, so my solution was just to play those other games that are better optimized

Behellagh, what are you talking about?
Tell which CPU i need to buy to get minimum 45-50FPS in large battles?

Multi-core is better.
And also HSA may come usefull in games.
If we compare Dual core vs quad core – E8500 vs Q6600 in games from 2005-2008 – E8500 wins
New games scales up to 4-6 or even 8 cores – BF4/ Crysis 3/ BF3/BF:BC 2/Dragon Age and so on… Q6600 wins

Interesting is amd new “puma cores” – 24% faster than jaguar and jaguar was already 15% faster clock per clock over piledriver. So AMD already has answer in single core performance.

Look at consoles – why did they use 8 cores instead of 4 cores with higher clock.

Flyingbee – You really need to just stop. Right now, you are just being a fool. And you really don’t have a good clear grasp on what you are talking about anymore. You ARE comparing apples and oranges and using mantle as the differing factor. You just CANNOT do that.

This is why this forum needs a ignore feature, so I can block these idiots like XFlyingBeeX.

It is pointless.
Until better optimization intel is the best choise for this game.

All i said better API better framerate. I mentioned MANTLE because it is low level API on PC.

Avelos.6798:

I feel as if there’s a lack of resources right now as to why there’s no such major improvements to guild Wars 2 yet. In fact, World Of Warcraft had such improvements made with even DX11 and it changed nothing with large fights, proof has been shown earlier in the thread.

All of those games can be compared to a degree except for Battlefield 4, in my opinion. Those games, FPS games are designed to get the best FPS on beater specs or whatever. MMOs are a different story entirely.

Like I usually say, it just needs that optimization to come around…

Also I’m quite jealous of your 4.8 GHz overclock. Like, mad jealous. Mad. That must perform amazing compared to 3.5GHz 4770K setting.

Are you cooling on air? I bought an H100i cooler and overclocking was a breeze. I’ve been overclocking for a long time and going over 80 degrees on load and none of my cpus have burned out so I dont mind slightly higher temparatures. I’m prepared to replace it if it burns out but as of now, 4.8 at 70 degrees on load is doing great except for gw2 so I dont think pushing it any more would help.

Avelos.6798:

In fact, World Of Warcraft had such improvements made with even DX11 and it changed nothing with large fights, proof has been shown earlier in the thread.

It’s not that there weren’t improvements, I’m sure it ran better than before, but it’s not noticeable in situations where another (eg. physics) engine component requires more CPU time than the drawing component. And that’s the big bold text of Mantle – 9x more draw calls per unit of time than D3D.

But FlyingBee just can’t seem to grasp the concept of there being more than graphics to a game engine. He seems to be under the impression that “if X used Mantle instead of D3D/openGL, the framerate will be significantly better at all times” which is just false. Improvements for GW2 (and WoW) will come from redesigns to how the game ‘handles’ large amounts of players, not how they’re drawn.

Here’s a mathematical way of trying to explain it since my other two attempts have clearly failed for him;
Let’s assume the zerg calculation (locations, projectiles, everything) time is 40ms per frame, and draw queue time is 8ms. This means the entire frame time is 48ms for a total of 20FPS.
Let’s say we now introduce Mantle which cuts the draw queue time to 0ms. There is still 40ms of calculations to or else the drawing commands will not have up-to-date vertex/coordinate lists. This puts us at 25FPS.

Why did it run so well in Star Swarm? Because there’s nothing else going on. The pre-calcs consist of only simple AI, and the rest is draw time. Instead of reducing the 1 in a 1:5 ratio, it’s now reducing the 5.

@deltaconnected.4859
You didnt totally understand me
that why i want to see MMOs like elder scrolls online on consoles

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

Behellagh, what are you talking about?
Tell which CPU i need to buy to get minimum 45-50FPS in large battles?

None of them save for an i7 4960X or other Extreme Edition (3970X) clocked at 6.5 GHz.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

Multi-core is better.

Maybe in games that actually take advantage of it. Behellagh already explained that GW2 started development in 2007 for dual cores which were the most common.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

And also HSA may come usefull in games.

Well it’s certainly not being useful here, or even used for that matter. It’ll probably be even three years before that happens. I’m sorry dude but your argument points in this discussion do not belong because of the amount of time needed to formulate and even implement them are quite long.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

If we compare Dual core vs quad core – E8500 vs Q6600 in games from 2005-2008 – E8500 wins

Not if the Quad core unit’s speed is the same or faster.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

New games scales up to 4-6 or even 8 cores – BF4/ Crysis 3/ BF3/BF:BC 2/Dragon Age and so on… Q6600 wins

Now you’re just talking about games that were designed to run on AMD FX. Because that will really help your argument in a discussion on a game where single core performance is everything.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

Interesting is amd new “puma cores” – 24% faster than jaguar and jaguar was already 15% faster clock per clock over piledriver. So AMD already has answer in single core performance.

Those won’t be out for a while.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

Look at consoles – why did they use 8 cores instead of 4 cores with higher clock.

And this argument point. Once again. No matter how many times it is said, the answer will always be, because AMD paid the most to be there.

Since you’re obviously here to change the topic now, stop talking. This thread is about OP getting crap FPS on an AMD FX-8320 with a good GPU I can’t remember which and here you are talking about things that even if they were implemented will probably be when OP’s not playing the game anymore because he got bored of it like any individual can get bored of a game. So you are not helping at all.

SmaKkYoFacE.5980:

Avelos.6798:

I feel as if there’s a lack of resources right now as to why there’s no such major improvements to guild Wars 2 yet. In fact, World Of Warcraft had such improvements made with even DX11 and it changed nothing with large fights, proof has been shown earlier in the thread.

All of those games can be compared to a degree except for Battlefield 4, in my opinion. Those games, FPS games are designed to get the best FPS on beater specs or whatever. MMOs are a different story entirely.

Like I usually say, it just needs that optimization to come around…

Also I’m quite jealous of your 4.8 GHz overclock. Like, mad jealous. Mad. That must perform amazing compared to 3.5GHz 4770K setting.

Are you cooling on air? I bought an H100i cooler and overclocking was a breeze. I’ve been overclocking for a long time and going over 80 degrees on load and none of my cpus have burned out so I dont mind slightly higher temparatures. I’m prepared to replace it if it burns out but as of now, 4.8 at 70 degrees on load is doing great except for gw2 so I dont think pushing it any more would help.

H100 so just a step below yours. I don’t think my i7 will go past 4.4 GHz.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

It is pointless.
Until better optimization intel is the best choise for this game.

All i said better API better framerate. I mentioned MANTLE because it is low level API on PC.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

@deltaconnected.4859
You didnt totally understand me
that why i want to see MMOs like elder scrolls online on consoles

deltaconnected.4859:

… it’s not noticeable in situations where another (eg. physics) engine component requires more CPU time than the drawing component. And that’s the big bold text of Mantle – 9x more draw calls per unit of time than D3D.

When the bottleneck is not draws, Mantle won’t speed anything up. Please read up on what Mantle is and where it fits in to game design. Doesn’t matter if this is on PC’s or consoles.

Since everyone says game is optimized for 2007 CPUs, I guess it works nicely on CPUs from 2007, both AMD and Intel?

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/guild-wars-2-performance-benchmark,3268-7.html
As you can see game utilize 3 cores
GW2 was already optimized for new CPUs

You can see that Pentium is a good deal here. Then i reccomend FX/athlon x4 or I5 (K). OC i5 as high as possible
- pentium G3220 will be faster than E8500 4.0Ghz

Nikola.3841:

Since everyone says game is optimized for 2007 CPUs, I guess it works nicely on CPUs from 2007, both AMD and Intel?

game is not optimized period.

It was built using the available API of 2007, then they threw 2012-2103 effects and features on that 2007 API overloading it.

that is why this game fails so hard in the performance category.

I read from numerous little bits and pieces here and there on some other websites and from people in game that less than a month ago there was a bit of a boost in performance for AMD CPU. Granted that was after I had already switched to the i7 so I can’t confirm it.

I’m rather displeased that no in-depth details were revealed about it. Just “Optimizations have been made!”

Yes they optimized it.
They did a lot from beta
http://gamegpu.ru/mmorpg-/-onlayn-igry/guild-wars-2-beta-test-gpu.html
-
http://gamegpu.ru/mmorpg-/-onlayn-igry/guild-wars-2-test-gpu.html

and now it is even better