Guild Wars 2

Hello all! Right now i am in a hardcore WvW guild and when we fight other groups their are like 100 people using tons of skills. I thought i had a decent computer untill i went into WvW, On medium/high graphics i’m really laggy and when i would turn them down i still would be semi laggy. My friends told me to update my processor so i did. I’m not laggy on low graphics, but medium/high i still am. If i would update my graphics card would that help at all? right now i have an AMD FX-8350, and in WvW i’m running 15-20 FPS depending on the amount of people. The graphics card i have is a AMD Radeon HD 7700 Series. Would an SSD help at all? I’m not the smartest about computers, sorry. Please tell me anything i could do to increase my FPS, because i would love to play the game in higher quality and have fun, and maybe even record some of my battles! Thanks bbear!

AMD….guess you are screwed….

Why, is AMD bad? Do you think overclocking could help make the game less laggy in WvW? during PvE/Dungeons i’m fine on high, and during Meta events a tad laggy.

bbear.9140:

Why, is AMD bad? Do you think overclocking could help make the game less laggy in WvW? during PvE/Dungeons i’m fine on high, and during Meta events a tad laggy.

LMFAO! No, not all dude, AMD is great and not overpriced. Dont you worry.

But for your FPS, I myself have a fantastic Computer, but when it comes to zerging in WvW and world bosses, it still pummels my machine. try lowering the character model detail to the lowest, not like you’re going to stand their and look at them anyway ;P and playing on medium/ low settings isn’t all that bad right?

But if you must play on high, an SSD will only add a few FPS, its really only good for lowering loading times. I would recommend looking into the latest AMD 8 Core, GW2 is more CPU intensive that ive found.

Idk what you’re system is looking like, but also try looking for GFX cards with higher memory and processing speed. GW2 isn’t the most optimized game, so you’ll need alot of power :P

Kalaster.9014:

bbear.9140:

Why, is AMD bad? Do you think overclocking could help make the game less laggy in WvW? during PvE/Dungeons i’m fine on high, and during Meta events a tad laggy.

LMFAO! No, not all dude, AMD is great and not overpriced. Dont you worry.

But for your FPS, I myself have a fantastic Computer, but when it comes to zerging in WvW and world bosses, it still pummels my machine. try lowering the character model detail to the lowest, not like you’re going to stand their and look at them anyway ;P and playing on medium/ low settings isn’t all that bad right?

But if you must play on high, an SSD will only add a few FPS, its really only good for lowering loading times. I would recommend looking into the latest AMD 8 Core, GW2 is more CPU intensive that ive found.

Idk what you’re system is looking like, but also try looking for GFX cards with higher memory and processing speed. GW2 isn’t the most optimized game, so you’ll need alot of power :P

AMD makes some great CPUs yes, but not for GW2, Intel will far out do any AMD chip on the market right now, also LOL, SSD will not add ANY FPS, kitten is a storage device and has NOTHING to do with rendering and FPS, the only thing it will do is make switching maps faster.

First, what GPU? We need to know the model, not just the series, OCing will help if it is out of the question to buy a Intel CPU/mobo, OCing will be your best bet for extra FPS.

I have a HD 7700 Series GPU, And i just updated to an 8 core CPU about a month ago. Any other suggestions would be great! I think i may try and OC.

whats your motherboard?
If you have Gigabyte then go in bios enable 1 core per module OC it to 4.6-5.2Ghz depends on your cooler and CPU.

why 1 core per module… better stability,less heat,10%+ fps

When your friends told you to update your processor they should have specified Intel to get the best available fps. Since you already purchased the 8350 though, jumping Intel now is wasting more money, so I’d suggest giving what Bee mentioned a try, along with unparking cores. The fps you will be getting will probably be as good as it gets for you on an AMD chip.

oc your chip

lower cpu intensive settings shadows to low reflections to none character limit to low

also sound processing takes up quite a bit of cpu load so using the -nosound command line will disable sound and do more fps, but only if you want to play with no ingame sound.

I’d return that processor and just buy a mobo with i5.

As been suggested in numerous other tuning threads, reducing both shadows and reflections in the game settings helps a bit as these additionally load down the CPU more than one would think.

Making sure that cores are unparked or your energy profile is set to performance and if you are running Win 7 then the two FX CPU patches to the OS might help slightly.

Also in events or WvW, adjusting the character (other character) model quality to lowest will make everyone else generic models which also helps.

As for why AMD is bad. GW2 doesn’t need more than 3 to 4 cores, often somewhere 2-3 cores of “work”. Coupled with each FX core (Phenom as well) has relatively low performance when compared with a non-HT Intel core.

Now games that aren’t CPU bound but rather GPU bound like BF4, AMD FX is fine and dandy.

LoL, BF4 is not CPu bound? Thats why we run BF4 on mantle… Like you said DX9 is teh biggest problem here. Also soon MMOs will come to conzoles and we will see optimization

Not comparatively.

http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchmarks/page6.html

Mantle does help on lower core performance CPUs, like AMD’s APUs, but is of limited effectiveness on higher end CPUs.

http://www.techspot.com/review/793-thief-battlefield-4-mantle-performance/page2.html

Let’s not turn this into another one of your Mantle thread de-rails Bee.

really? I am making “Mantle” thread here? I only said that they might change it to DX12, because many MMOs will.

You dont have a clue. BF4 MP is very CPU bound. Also SP in some cases. i5 is usually bottlenecking a R9 280X on DX11.1 while CPu usage is around 95%.

Ofcourse you cannot compare BF4 (60 fps teady) to GW2 (30FPS steady) all i want to say that this isnt time to change your CPU.

OP;

The only things you can do, currently, to maximize your FPS;

1. Drop the AMD CPU in favor of an Intel i5 or better (Clocked at 3.2Ghz or more)
2. if you cannot/will not upgrade to Intel, Disable the 2nd core per module in your BIOS, then OC your FX to 4.9-5.0 Ghz (and buy the required CPU Cooling fan to do so)
3. Disable all Shadows, Reflections, Post Processing Effects, and lower your Character Limit to Low.
4. When you plan to do WvW run the game with -nosound, as if you do not have a hardware sound card, sound processing will take 18-20% CPU depending on how many players are around you.

Your HD7770 is a bit on the low end, IMHO, for any games that you play at 1600×900 or greater. I suggest a HD7790/R7 260X(2GB versions!!), R7 270/HD7850, or Nvidia 750TI for that 109-159 price range right now. If you opt in for the 260x or 7790 be sure to set their Clocks in afterburner to 1200core/1600Memory to get a free 18% increase in over all performance.

so yea, thats about the only options you have with out doing a complete rip and replace of your entire system to just Play GW2 at adequate settings.

BF4 MP dx11 is pretty hard to cpu cap mainly because it is so graphically intensive and can max out most modern cards. Turning down your graphics from ultra will give a few cpu limited situations, but really has no effect because your fps is so high already, especially if you like to use vsync

Also as a note, BF4 is really weird on cpus. apparently it really only uses 4 threads/cores which is why you see a huge cpu load drop going from a fx-4xxx/i5/i3HT to fx6xxx/8xxx/i7HT. Also it hates windows 7. Loads/fps/sli performance are much better in windows 8.1.

Actually you really feel the difference between 4-6-8cores in BF4… Offtopic.

If arena.net want to make this game playable they will need to change API. Thats why newer games dont use DX9 (image BF4,Crysis 3 on DX9).

We all know that a lot of users us windows XP, but they will need to change. I know that many people dont want to upgrade their PC but this is the time to get new PC and at least win7 or 8.1. You can get used/new athlon x4 + GCN/kepler really cheap.

You have people who spend about 300$ more just to get 1-5 fps more in WvW. If gamemakers would use better sofware we would not need to spend extra $ also running low power CPU….

Look at this
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/General-Tech/AMD-AM1-Platform-and-Athlon-5350-GTX-750-Ti-1080p-under-450
Running this games on API like Mantle = no difference with entry GPU

Thats why i want mantle or DX12.

Better start getting signatures for a new API because as far as anyone can see, it’s not going to happen. And those games are optimized to work with AMD FX. And you know what’s funny? The i7 4770K I have still did better in both of those games than my FX-8350.

Avelos i7 4770k is very good .. you will notice that CPU load in Bf4 doesnt go over 60-65% with 8 core CPU

Of course it’s very good. It’s designed around what people want at this point in time. Performance from just using the computer to games. I list i7 and FX8350 because both have 8 threads.

Avelos.6798:

Of course it’s very good. It’s designed around what people want at this point in time. Performance from just using the computer to games. I list i7 and FX8350 because both have 8 threads.

comparing CMT and SMT should be when they are both 100% and when that happens FX 8350 = i7 4770K but in games that wont happen.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

You dont have a clue. BF4 MP is very CPU bound. Also SP in some cases. i5 is usually bottlenecking a R9 280X on DX11.1 while CPu usage is around 95%

Since we’re offtopic and back to one of those famous and pointless API/CPU discussions, an i5 bottlenecking a 7970/280x? LOLOLOLOL, it’s funny because an i5-4670k easily runs a 290x or 780 Ti without bottlenecking.

Let’s go through this again though, an MMO on DX9 has such a low chance of being updated in this day and time that you have a better chance of winning $1million or more in the lottery than seeing the game’s framework updated.

You so so naive … just stop being naive. Many poeple dont realize that with i5 on win 7 your CPu will bottleneck R9 280X and higher… i think that in some cases even r9 270X can be bottlenecked.

7870×2 is slower than R9 290X
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3-hH_iGbIk

i7 4770K 4.2Ghz using Dx11 will be huge bottleneck .. using mantle totally different

Obviously you’re quite uneducated, Bee. Tell my two R9 290Xs that they’re being bottlenecked by an i7 4770K at 3.9 GHz in a DX 11 title while they crank out at least 200 FPS in the better situations but otherwise there’s no bottleneck unless I were using an AMD FX-8350.

I enabled Mantle in BF4 and there was literally no difference for me. Now stop changing the topic. Go make your own thread. This is not another stupid API thread.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

You so so naive … just stop being naive. Many poeple dont realize that with i5 on win 7 your CPu will bottleneck R9 280X and higher… i think that in some cases even r9 270X can be bottlenecked.

7870×2 is slower than R9 290X
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3-hH_iGbIk

i7 4770K 4.2Ghz using Dx11 will be huge bottleneck .. using mantle totally different

You seem very naive, and I understand you want to make a name for yourself with knowledge here, which is fine, but spreading misinformation is not fine.

You keep spouting random information and numbers that are false, of which I have not contested because Google is useful… But to help you with your ignorance as this is posed twice a day,

http://www.overclock.net/t/1450877/would-an-intel-i5-4670k-bottleneck-two-r9-290s

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/will-my-4670k-bottleneck-my-r9-290.200603/

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1791353

Those are just a few from a long list of the posed question will an i5 4670k bottleneck a gpu, and according to you EVERYONE is wrong except you. The answer is a resounding NO. A 4670k is capable enough to handle crossfire 290x and SLI 780 Ti.

Please please get off the AMD v Intel high horse attempting to down Intel and praise AMD, both camps have their uses in each respective price range.

Oh, and because you’ve been shouting Win7 vs Win8 lately, no, Win7 does not bottleneck an 4670k lololol.

I am naive?! really? I am here that actually have both CPu at home i7 3770 and FX 6300. I wont argue with you guys buy your self a BF4 and try it out. Some maps GPu will be bottleneck but in some maps you GPu will fall to 60-70% of usage.

And no i dont use i7 to play GW2…

You know what is the biggest problem? Everyone will show that FX CPus bottleneck GPUs while nobody will show that Intel bottleneck GPU.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

I am naive?! really? I am here that actually have both CPu at home i7 3770 and FX 6300. I wont argue with you guys buy your self a BF4 and try it out. Some maps GPu will be bottleneck but in some maps you GPu will fall to 60-70% of usage.

And no i dont use i7 to play GW2…

dude, please stop.

No one on this forum is going to listen to you. You have nothing useful to contribute to the forum anymore (if you ever did).

and you have an i7, but don’t use it to play GW2? Thats either the stupidest thing I have ever heard, or your just lying about everything now.

I think you might need another forum vacation….

You said i5, then went on to say 4770k, then you jump to BF4 then Mantle. Stop bringing up cpus + Mantle, Mantle does more than just alleviate cpu use…

Also, do you think you are the only one with more than a single cpu or pc? I have chips in my workshop and home ranging from AMD APU, Intel Pentium G series, AMD Opteron, Intel Xeon, Intel i3, i5, i7, FX 8320, FX 8350, FX 9370, and so on. Does that make me some sort of supreme knowledge? Hell no, it means next to nothing aside from I have too much tech and too many random projects, builds, htpcs, etc.

Also, already have BF4, had it since release, means nothing since this is about Guild Wars 2. Just because YOU think it is bottlenecked, does not make it so. Judging by all your posts, it sounds like you really don’t have an i7 or i5 for that matter, just the 6300, and you hate seeing it outperformed or the fact the 6300 can bottleneck even mid range cards like the 770.

Btw, once again, Mantle doesn’t just alleviate cpu use, since you are an AMD fanboy stuck on Mantle like a fly on flypaper, you have to account for the “metal” that Mantle actually does and is used for, not saying “zomg guyz mantle gives gaaaainzzzz vtec yo!!!”

I dont hate that… i hate people who lie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUVGd3LG89g

Your calling me navie why i am not lying. And actually no MY FX 6300 doesnt bottleneck R9 270X. While on win7 it was huge bottleneck deep under 40 FPS shame.

XFlyingBeeX.2836:

YOu ARE big intle fanboy. Yes you are right intel is supperior to gaming and if you want bets gaming PC get intel. But just dont lie about numbers, we are not stupid. Poeple lies about their “performance”. Blah…

“hello i have my i5 2500k runing at 4.2 ghz ,Catalyst Version 12.1 no cap ,all ultra settings ,aa off, motion blurr off
vsync off ambient oculassion off
on 1080p 120 hz monitor
my cpu usage is 90-99% and both gpus around 60%
i tried a lot of drivers but not much results”

Intel Core i7-3970x Extreme, 12 logical cores @ 3.5 GHz bottleneck CF R9 290X in BF4 MP actually gain with mantle is 58%….

GTX 780 SLI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUVGd3LG89g
Also CPU bottleneck with no players!

Yes, I am a fan of Intel now. Before I was in favor AMD more then Intel. GW2 (in fact all DX9 based games) really changed my mind on that aspect. Proof is in my experience with a FX8350 vs a i5-4670K, and how I got over 70% performance by only changing out the CPU.

AMD took a major step backwards with their Piledriver/bulldozer model. And, since then, have been 50% behind Intel on a core vs core performance. Anyone who can read will tell you that.

And its not that AMD cant do well to play GW2, or any gaming title, its that AMD is 50%-70% Slower then Intel when it comes down to DX9 titles.

AMD HAD to develop Mantle in order to stand ground with Intel. They were losing sells, and face, in the world of gaming. Other then AMD’s APU line, their FX line was dropping sales in favor of Intel. Because of their poor single core performance. And they knew it. So came out mantle to help boost AMD’s Rep, in time for the DX12 release (which is what is going to replace Mantle, Mantle was just a ‘demo’ to be used before DX12 was ready for production)

But Ill digress. Since im just a intel fanboi and have no love for AMD (though I sill run AMD GPUs’!) Ill step out of this convo and let ‘Mr Bee – Expert of everything’ have what he wants here.

But I do suggest that no one takes his advice, as its completely miss informed and 99% of the time wrong.

edit
I just wanted to add one last thing. if AMD could hold a 10% candle to Intel, I would favor AMD over Intel due to price and their history. Thats 10% below/above Intel, not this 50%-70% crap we are seeing today.

Sorry to tell ya little fella, YOUR FX 6300 is quite the bottleneck on even mid range gpus like the 280x or GTX 770, you have to overclock it to 4.5GHz to minimize the bottleneck.

As for your “noone shows Intel bottlenecks, only FX”, maybe because you haven’t educated yourself with Intel then. Intel chips used to bottleneck gpus, not horribly, but they still did and it was all over the web. With Conroe, Intel moved into better position, then we started seeing the wonderful quad Yorkfields and the great Wolfdale chips that still needed to be oc’d to reduce bottleneck. Nehalem i7 comes out and guess what, still need to oc a little. Intel at this time made a crazy period with the 2nd gen i7 chips alongside the i5 with such an improvement the bottlenecking was minimal, and each advancement and generation with ~10% improvement has pushed that bottleneck away.

AMD on the other hand, while they have improved, are not quite as competitive in the cpu territory as they were in the Duron and AthlonXP days, the AMD “glory days” as I like to call them, and as someone who used ONLY AMD, I loved their Palaminos, Thoroughbred, and of course the great Barton! But at least right now, they aren’t trying to be neck and neck anymore, they are trying a new architecture out to get what they can from it. Their lower end chips like the FX 6300 are NOT bad at all, but, they do bottleneck current gpus.

As sirsquishy said though, don’t take Bee’s advice, it’s simply wrong. I too am moving away from this convo, the AMD fanboy rage will soon take hold of him.

I decided to try overclocking and it work, i barely overclocked it and i’m running High in WvW with no lag in 60v60 groups. Thank you for all the tips everyone!

You also have to remember a few years back AMD stating that they were no longer going to push for “enthusiast” level CPUs and gaming. This can be seen with the new line of CPUs, which are targeted at more multitasking every day use, and the APU line for multimedia and casual gaming as well as a big push for mobile and consoles, it is just now that we are starting to see this statement catch up and the gap from Intel to AMD will probably only get bigger with the direction AMD has chosen to take.

Recently news was made public that they were going to try for new high performance CPU.

Avelos.6798:

Recently news was made public that they were going to try for new high performance CPU.

There will be updates to the FX line, but it will be on the back burner, the current AMD roadmap shows nothing major new coming out till after 2015, as they will still be with FX chips on the AM3+ socket, with all the major updates and refreshes happening on the APU side of things. We have not even seen anything on the big core server front either, in a time when AMD is still trying to get back to being profitable, trying to take on Intel who already has a large lead for a small market that is highend CPUs, just does not make sense.

It’s not a good sign that AMD marketing starts counting GNC units as “cores” in the lastest APUs. The A10-7850K’s 4 color glossy says it has 12 “compute cores”, 4 CPU and 8 GPU. Stuff like that gets AMD in trouble with people who don’t read/understand what AMD is trying to do. GPU compute hasn’t taken off the way AMD would like.

AMD marketing also glosses over the whole module/core concept. The CPU designers for Bulldozer and it’s siblings were tasked to match performance of an Intel HT core running two threads. They came up with the two thread core module found in the FX. Now they didn’t do a half bad job at it, when running two threads. But when running one thread per AMD FX Module Vs Intel’ kitten core, it loses badly.

AMD bet on a future with heavily multithreaded programs and with APUs, GPU compute threads. That hasn’t come to pass. On top of that at one time they had a performance/watt lead on Intel, important for massive servers but not anymore.

They’ve also seemed to be marketing their processors as something they’re simply not.