Do you think that i am die hard amd fanboys – do you know why i i went with FX. I wanted i5 K but my budget… actually this is first AMD CPU that i bought
So why is FX 4300 on same lvl as i3 4330 in other games? I am asking because i want to know
here you have benchmarks- you need 1GHz more with 4100 to get same or little better performance.
Not good enough, only covers a very small footprint of CPUs/APUs for their tests.
FX 8150 is faster than llano quad core – we know that game use only 2-3 cores .. so why difference between FX 8150 and FX 4100?
Because this game will use every second core (1 per CU) – piledriver is better and faster
It is up to you… but i have both.
The point is that DX9 is bottleneck for every new CPU. And yes FX at 5.0-5.1Ghz will beat i7 3.9Ghz. I guest that if if you hawe haswell at 4.5Ghz you need FX at least at 5.5 Ghz or higher
http://gamegpu.ru/rpg/rollevye/wasteland-2-test-gpu.html
interesting right? I am not saying that FX is better buy than i5, i wanted to buy broadwell for this game, but i wont because like i said DX9 is to big bottleneck here.
Bit-tech is intel fanboys site
Believe me FX 6300 OC-ed higher that 4.5GHzs will be as fast as i7 at 3.5Ghz. But i3 – lower power consumption, better upgrade also DX12 migh help a lot!
It is up to him if you go FX 6300 you will need to OC it to at least 3.9-4.0Ghz . If you go i3 you may upgrade to i5. But FX 6300 is better CPU
KillScale
I reccomend you FX 6300 if you will OC, but if you dont want to OC and you might upgrade to better CPU then i3 is good solution to.
DX12 is comming – more future proff is 6300 also easy OC even with stock cooler for this game (you just need rigth modo that can disable 1 core per CU) then T wont be a problem
“FX8350 would cap at 65FPS on lowest settings using a R7-260×”
If that’s true, then something was wrong with your system. My FX-60 (yep – socket 939) and 8800GT can beat that. If you need proof you’ll have to wait until tomorrow so I can grab the screenshots from my other laptop (not hooked up at the moment).
As far as I’m concerned, XFlyingBeeX, Please DO NOT respond to a topic unless you aim to keep the thread ON TOPIC and about GUILD WARS 2, because Holy sweet merciful mother, Arche Age is so amazing, so advanced wow, such AMD FX with it’s Cry Engine platform. What’s that going to do for Guild Wars 2? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. This game started it’s journey in development way back in 2007 when DirectX 10 was only accessible via Windows Vista and we all know how THAT went down. Direct X 11 wasn’t anymore than a drawing board concept as well, let alone 11.1 or 11.2 or DX12 which will probably be just the same as 11.2 which we probably won’t even need.
Ahem.
first i never siad that AMD is faster! I said :“it is that bad”! Yeas intel is faster or let we let about 30-50% faster
Cryengine is better for all CPU not only AMD FX…
Difference between directX 11 and directX 11.2 is HUGE – look at BF4.
What does ArchAge to do with GW2? More than you think… (it is still beta). Why do you have to buy i5 K and oc it as far as possible to get “good FPS”?
Yes many of users will try new MMOs…. archage is one of the first that use cryengine and support 4 cores. Every year their is a lot of new MMOs!
If you think that performance is not something that users care about your wrong…
Yep directX 9 is a crap.
No they should do directX 11.2 or even wait for DirectX 12. But then i5 wont be so great choise why? becuse there wont be so big difference between FX 4300 and i5 4670K
At start GW2 was crap for fx cpu but right now i can say that OC-ed FX (4.5Ghz+) is on lvl of i3 4340 3.5Ghz
i have i7 3770K(gave it to my bro) 3.8Ghz and FX 6300 when i OCed it to 4.7Ghz sometimes FX was faster in single thread games (TLII,LoL,…) sometimes i with 5.2 OC couldnt get close to intel at 3.8Ghz
I also benchmarked FX 4300 3.4Ghz vs i7 mimic – i3 3.4Ghz in BF4 MP performance was almost the same…
AZA check it yourself – go windowed mode in LA + taskmanager and check CPU usage!
sirsquishy – thats not totaly true
Intel is not 150% faster than AMD FX in single threaded tasks – i mean not in every game( single threaded).
I will say it like this sometimes it is like 125% sometimes 160% – huge difference
game use 3 thread 70-75% or 2 threads 100%. Intel has stronger single thread. SO that why you see so much improvement. According to Tomshardware i5 2500 4.0ghz vs Fx 4100 4.0Ghz is only about 27% improvement.
weedaw dont listen to him. Your CPu is bottlenecking
cinebench r15 – 270 cb – i5 3230m – mine FX 6300 score with 3 threads about the same at 3.5Ghz – but this is Cinebench… while normal i5 scores with 3 cores around 370-400
i7-3840QM 4cores/8threads – CB R15 – 510
will the performance boost be worth of investing?
I dont know (depends on you), if you want more performance get i7, but it is not worth it. If you have money and you play this game a lot then buy it!
YOur CPU is like i3 on desktop
2T+2C = 2C/4T understand?
Your CPu is bottleneck.
Game use up to 3 thread… yes i7 would give you better experience but is it worth it? Even with i7 Oced to 5.0Ghz you will still lagg in large WvW …
Man , you are extreme overclocker!
I3 530 is easy to oc – i had one. All you need to do is raise voltage and BCLK. With stock cooling i had 3.5Ghz with cheap air cooler i had 4.2ghz i could go even higher but it wasnt worth it
