Your card is running @ 16x on the 3.0 slot so no worries there. The monitors, looks like your standard 60Hz so no worries there.
As far as older drivers, exactly the same as if you were updating to newer drivers. Download the desired drivers, uninstall current, install desired. The latest drivers from NVIDIA seem to be causing random stability issues for different people, so it’s worth a shot at least. I’m going to say it doesn’t sound at all like the server/connection though if your videos came up clear.
When doing WvW have you dropped your character limit settings to Low? You may want to drop all your settings to Low just to test WvW with and see what happens to see if you still experience the same lag.
OP, would definitely recommend an i5/i7 for a build, but if you give us a budget we can help you with an overall build to see what may work and what may not.
That is actually rather perplexing if you recorded and your recording comes out clean….
Is your monitor higher than 60Hz? Is it overclockable for that matter? Your vid card ISN’T sitting at 1.0x when in-game right? Have you attempted to try older vid drivers?
I advise you to delete your posts so as to not add useless spam to this thread than what has already been added. I understand what I THINK you are trying to mention on Turbo Core ratios, but that is not what you mention… All we’ve gathered from your posts were that 2 core Intel = same score as 3 core AMD.
Every chip is different. I have a dud that needs extreme LLC to boot 4.5 with crappy voltage. It just depends on the lottery and the board. There have been many users experiencing system lag lately, myself included. I get the feeling it is the devs messing with stuff
Preaching to the wrong person :P Little Devil CPU pot and a dewer of Liquid Nitrogen are my friend.
Could be a majority of things but often related to vsync buffering and the such. If you have vsync enabled, try disabling it and see if you regain responsiveness.
IF you are able, take your tower to his place to test, that way you can rule out your own hardware at any possible fault. That way you can determine if it runs fine on his pc it could be somewhere in your own network.
If your LLC is set to Medium/50% for your current overclock, I would say just leave it. Just as an example, if I move my LLC below 75% my overclock will become unstable when under load xD
For VMware you can grab a free trial of VMware Workstation, which is what you would need. Keep in mind if you have another pc you can test the game with, that would be the easier/faster option.
As for OS power settings, unless you have it set to Balanced Power or Power Saving, you should be sitting at ‘High Performance’. As far as overclocking, LLC will only be needed if your OC becomes unstable due to load voltages. C1 state or any other cpu power-saving features can be on or off, personal preference for the most part unless your OC is unstable, in which you would more than likely just keep off.
1 Core per module modules 4C/4T 4 cores – may be faster than 2 cores per modules 2C/4T – 4 cores … You will be able higher OC because cores will be cooler
I see you are trying to take from what I said, but modules are AMD’s use, not Intel’s which is quite different…. And cooling has little to do with overall OC’ing…
Your hardware looks fine, but the thing I would look towards would be your connection directly to the server in question.
When you are ingame type “/ip” and jot that down, do a tracert of the IP and let’s see if there’s something that is screwing you on the way to the server.
Do you happen to have VMware? If you do, we could actually test the latency issue by installing GW2 on a virtual machine and running the vm with discrete hardware so no slowdowns, then if you get the same “lag” effect it should be a good indicator it’s something to do with your net connection to the server, be it your modem/router/switch, a substation on the way to the server, or the server.
I just want you to be aware the 2 links you posted don’t mean much as you were in a rush for FPS number differentiation that you disregarded 3 things, #1 the dates of the 2 reviews, #2 the different hardware used and #3 game settings. The dates are important because of driver maturity for the newer titles as well from both camps….
That said, just drop it lol. You should work on legitimate sources and actual reading of what you find. The tech community is seemingly aware that Tom’s is bias, but over the past few years they have gotten better.
Someone mentioned Sager and someone mentioned Lenovo, both would be safe bets in my book as far as companies go. For this game just make sure to look at Intel offerings, not AMD.
^ Please make your own thread and PLEASE post your pc specs. We don’t care how great or how bad your pc is, IF there is something we can solve with your specs to further help you, then it means faster solution times for the end-users.
I see you are a big intel fan. I dont care what CPU I use…… I just want it cheap and strong.
It is not the point which CPU is better.
It just make me sad that this game use only about 45-55% of my CPU.
Anyway like i said if i just lower detail my FPS are 45+ even really huge fight it does not go under 40FPS.
But I know there wont be any optimization for AMD CPUs…. i realized that long ago…
Only thing that i can do switch to win8.. that improves CPu perfromance
Hey, don’t take what I said the wrong way, AMD has a lot to offer in majority of their processors, as I’ve said, they are powerful, but running around telling everyone that a budget cpu tops out an i5 like the 3570 is misleading. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/699?vs=701
You can play around with that if you want. I do prefer Intel as this current time yes, Intel’s clock for clock beat AMD offerings (I am an AMD adopter back in the Duron/AthlonXP days when AMD was laughing at Pentium4’s Netburst architecture). If AMD makes a comeback like they did back in their Athlon glory days, I’ll switch to them in a heartbeat for my main rig and my test bench! But I actually hate seeing so many people on this forum complaining because they have an AMD setup, quite frankly it’s unfair…. Fact of the matter is not everyone wants to spend the extra money associated with an Intel setup, and that’s what makes it discerning that people would have to basically BE FORCED into the Intel camp based on the poorly implemented threading capabilities, even with one thread. The engine needs more integer based calculations so AMD can step it up a little, but as I don’t have much experience with game engines…. I don’t even know if that’s particularly possible for just “adding”.
I’ll say it again, if anyone is ballsy enough to attempt to get an interview with a lead tech, see where that road leads.
Anyway this game could (should?) be more optimized.
I love this game… with or without optimization
lol, look, we could go all day with this, especially as far as TekSyndicate as this was discussed and re-tested over at Anandtech that showed the flaws, mistakes, and lack of information in his videos along with his bogus results(This isn’t the first time Tek did this…). For streaming x264, it has 4 modules with 2 cores per module = 8 cores which is where AMD gets its “8 cores”. Each modules has a 256bit FPU that can split to 2 128bit FPU which is where it offers the better performance over Intel for the streaming.
We aren’t talking about the 1 thing AMD managed to do extremely well within their modules, you brought up Crysis 3 and the like…. Your friend can have his i3 and do whatever he wants, but unless you have a your own test bench to test the numerous hardware in the same conditions, it’s essentially null for useful information.
As I told you already, if you really want to see optimization, give A-Net an email with your concern and ask about possibility of setting up an interview(via phone maybe) with one of their lead techs over the phone to determine if it would be feasible through large donation amounts to work on the engine with a backing such as Kickstarter. I personally probably wouldn’t mind pitching in $50 or so myself if it were to come about.
WILL anything come of talking to them? No idea…. But it’s your best bet IMO to get direct confirmation or information related.
All good, just misinformation in my post which I shouldn’t have assumed others would have known, that’s all.
We can talk about game optimization all day, but in the end, unless someone essentially offers a game company money, I don’t really see any company optimizing a current engine to such a large extent aside from starting from scratch. That’s my opinion on it at least, thus my previous mention of Kickstarter and talking to ANet’s higher ups.
You’re comparing Civics to Mustangs sobe. At least XFlyingBeeX is comparing similarly priced CPUs.
That’s the thing, I compared the same price segment for Crysis 3, an FX 8350 going for $200 vs an i5 3550 going for $220, and the i5 had it’s way with the 8350 and 6400. And if quality were concerned I certainly hope neither would be the mustang xD
Not to be a stickler but you said. Bolded the part in question.
You choosing an budget AMD cpu like the 6300 will perform much poorer than an i5 even in Crysis 3, so that is your own fault for budgeting yourself so much that you have to complain about a product. FYI, I run a 3770k and don’t lag in GW2, even @ stock clocks… But since it’s MY cpu, I will push it for what I can for 24/7 daily use.
If you had said 8350 I wouldn’t have called it out.
All good Behe, I said 6300 because obviously it performs poorer than the 8350… Which what I linked already showed the 8350 performing worse than an i5. I5 even topping over an 6400, which is a slightly better chip than the 6300. So I only concluded that readers would figure that out from the graphs I posted and Bee talking about a 6300 doing better than i5 and i7 in games.
In short i5 that Bee said was worse, outperformed both 6400 and 8350 which are better chips than what he has. Sorry, I figured it was evident when I said 6300.
loseridoit
u have that right to.. But some MMORPGs runs smoother than GW2 for ME
Fixed that for you. As it stands GW2 is smooth as butter on my systems including laptop…. If you want better performance, stop chasticing and get a better setup, an modern i5 or i7 will be an improvement over your 6300 in any game you play.
If you want better game optimizations, talk to someone higher up in ANet about costs associated and see about starting a Kickastarter to raise required funds to do so. Otherwise, you are just whining to whine.
May also want to disable System Restore and get rid of any restore points you have taking up unneeded space. I advise anyone to disable System Restore as it can cause more problems due to it’s implementation. If you need a “restore point”, you should have a system image placed on either a disk or USB stick.
My system is basically the same as yours except the Video card may be a but lower then yours and I have all my in game setting to high or medium and on average I get 60fps, rarely dropping below 30fps in big groups anywhere in the game. I think the difference is I have not over clocked my system and I run the game in a clean install of Windows7 64 bit. With nothing running in the background except vent or ts3 . For some reason this game does not run well on an overclocked system.
I’m sorry but merely the fact that its overclocked alone cannot cause a game to run poorly. a truely stable overclock(one that remains stable under maximum stress for prolonged periods of time with 0 errors) cannot slow down any game. No matter how its coded. You’re giving arenanet an out they don’t deserve by allowing myths to propagate. Whats happening with games that display “unusual sensitivity to overclocking” is unstable overclocks that formerly behaved themselves are cracking under pressure they’ve never been tested at before. This means they either need to lower their overclock to where it can survive under max stress or increase the voltage to provide extra stability at the clock speed they desire given they haven’t already reached the voltage and temperature limitations of the chip. When a cpu is becomes unstable it halts, freezes, and spits out errors which in turn result in terrible FPS. The solution isn’t give up your 500mhz entirely and blame it all on the overclock. You dial it back till the system no longer cracks under stress.
^ Good write-up
Plux, if your cpu was throttling and you have to use speedfan at all times to check things… I would be weary already. What cooling do you use for that Phenom?
You’re comparing Civics to Mustangs sobe. At least XFlyingBeeX is comparing similarly priced CPUs.
That’s the thing, I compared the same price segment for Crysis 3, an FX 8350 going for $200 vs an i5 3550 going for $220, and the i5 had it’s way with the 8350 and 6400. And if quality were concerned I certainly hope neither would be the mustang xD
think i’m ready to throw in the towel. Was going to get my gf the game but finding that pretty much everything there is to do at end game.(dungeons, world events, zergs, wvw) performs terribly, this shouldn’t be the case when i’m running around the same game with 100+ most of the time and then crash land to 8fps when more than 8 people come on screen, regardless of settings.
…….
And this is the predicament really that it comes down to, you have 2 choices as far as the game is concerned (Unless of course they somehow get something working better for the red camp), you can upgrade to Intel which would be much better but at a higher cost, or wait out your current in hopes of an update somewhere down the line. Moral issues with Intel? All these businesses do shady practices here and there, that does not exclude AMD.
Single thread…. still?
I bought FX6300 instead of i3 3240.
WHY?
I want to play BF4, i want to play Crysis3… THIS CPU destroy i3 or even i5 while streaming BF3 on max setting 720P.
For those games is 3,5Ghz turbo off (1.75-1.875Vcore) to much! My PC in gaming use like 190-230W…
Everyone says “AMD CPU use a lot of power” – thats true on stock vcore (turbo) …
GW2 is a great game but poor optimization… Poor optimization makes game terrible….
So that mean if i dont buy i5 i cant get playable (40+)framerates in Crysis 3 or BF4 and GW2…. Thats sucks… Poor optimization discourages me of playing this game…
Please OPTIMIZE THIS GAME!
MY bro own i7 3770 and his FPS in battles also falls under 30.
You choosing an budget AMD cpu like the 6300 will perform much poorer than an i5 even in Crysis 3, so that is your own fault for budgeting yourself so much that you have to complain about a product. FYI, I run a 3770k and don’t lag in GW2, even @ stock clocks… But since it’s MY cpu, I will push it for what I can for 24/7 daily use.
How fast your Mb/s is does not affect game performance. For example, 1Mbit down and 1Mbit up are plenty to play any game online. Your latency will play a large role. But what are your pc specs?
FX-6300, great cpu…. Dunno on that one, but good for the price, perhaps. The issue with GW2 seems to be that it focuses more performance on single-thread performance, something that AMD simply cannot handle well, much less on a more budget-minded AMD cpu.
OP needs to post his computer specs and verify that his video and audio drivers are up to date. This is an issue that was commonly solved by updating drivers for many people.
It’s not that it’s bad by any means, it’s just there isn’t an improvement unless running multi-GPU setups beyond 2 GPUs. Now, if there were more modern games that effectively used all cores, then YES, I can see an actual improvement to coincide with getting for gaming, but 2011 socket (despite what Crawford stated in another thread….) just is not meant for gaming in this current generation. Hopefully soon we will see better implementation of multi-threading.
But if you are doing AutoCAD, 3D Studio Max, Handbrake, etc. stuff that would make use of the extra, then yea the 4930k would definitely be the better choice over say a 4770k.
I’ve seen the post you keep referencing, but that’s the thing, I’m positive he would be getting the same FPS if he were running a Z87 board with those 2 780s with a 4770k(I mean, look at the pics I posted already running a single GTX 680… I get near his fps on a 680, and a little more than his non-sli fps on my 780 HoF). It’s obvious that if you run 2 vid cards, it should be faster than if you were running a single, regardless what socket you use. But his fps differences from nonsli to sli were so minuscule that he would need another game such as Metro Last Light, Bioshock Infinite, or similar modern AAA title to really show the 2 cards that they can stretch their legs from a single card to SLI.
For gaming you will see 0 difference between a 4930k 2011 setup and a 4770k 1150 setup. On the flip side, if you do a lot of software-based video CONVERSION and video editing, then the extra cores and threads on the 4930k would be the clear choice as you would see a ~25% difference in total time. The money saved from getting a 4770k instead of the 4930k could be put into a better vid card or other areas. It all depends on YOUR needs.
It’s been tested that it will offer no actual improvement, and when it does its about 2%-5% and thats assuming you run triple cards or more and at a high resolution(eyefinity/surround resolutions on triple monitor setups). 2011 cpus are good if you run triple or quad cards, but just running 1 or 2 cards there is no increase over say a 4770k that could be worth the extra cost. IF you are looking at a triple gpu setup or more then I would say get 2011 as it will benefit you more.
As far as ASUS, they make great product they really do, I just wish their cs/rma dept was better.
the Asus hero has everything the extreme has minus a few things I dont care about.
it’s only around 200 bucks. Asus makes good products and I love that they understand what their customers want and try to offer it at a good price. The asus 24 inch, 144mhz, 1ms response time monitor for under 300 is another good example of this.
I dint care to much about bragging rights, but a few years down the road the Asus hero will have a better resale value than some generic x87 motherboard.
another reason the hero is a good choice is because it supports insainly fast ram. where those others don’t.
Sorry, I was more aiming at the MVE (Extreme) owners running on air cooling with that. For $200 it is a fine board for sure, and I don’t think you will be disappointed. Just keep in mind for the $200 range there are many others that accept even higher RAM speeds such as the MSI MPower, etc. And be FULLY aware (I love ASUS products but this is something to acknowledge) that ASUS has an F rating at the Better Business Bureau concerning their RMA department.
The BBB has been in contact with ASUS several times, at which ASUS has said over the years that it will change things with their RMA dept, but they never actually do anything and the BBB keeps contacting them and yet ASUS still does nothing….. Just… Be aware of that bit of information. (The F rating was seemingly taken down @ BBB and I don’t know whats up with that yet, but the warning the BBB gives ASUS is clearly plastered on the page).
EDIT: Once u go custom water loop level cooling, then heat isnt the limiting point anymore and ur limited by the actual capabilities of the CPU, at which point ur looking at around the 5ghz mark on all the CPU’s so the 4770k at 5ghz will obviosly do better than a 2700k/3770k at 5ghz.
This ^ If that doesn’t make sense, a 4770k clocked @ 4GHz will be about the same speed as a 3770k clocked @ 4.2GHz which will be about the same speed as a 2600k clocked @ 4.4GHz. These numbers aren’t accurate, but just to give an easy-to-read example of the newer gen being faster per clock speed.
NeedCoffee, from a technological standpoint the 4770k improves performance over the 3770k and even more-so of the 2600k, the diff between Ivy being closer to 3% – 5% though where a lot of those user don’t want to upgrade due to the small improvements not being worth the cost of a new socket. Basically, if you are upgrading 1155 socket, grab a 3770k, if you are doing a full-on upgrade to a new socket, grab the 4770k as it is the current gen. No reason at all to get an 1155 socket board if you are doing a new build, unless of course you are looking to buy used from somewhere like [H] to get a 3770k for $200~ or so.
For the motherboards, realistically any $200 motherboard will overclock on air/water just as well as a $300 – $500 board, BUT, BUT…. I don’t know if any users on this forum mess around with liquid nitrogen like myself, but if you run liquid nitrogen, having an ASUS RoG board can surely show benefit under sub-zero temps. Of course, some people just get RoG boards for “bragging rights” because they overpaid for a board wherein a $180 – $200 board could hit the same clocks.
I’m waiting for the G-Sync release, already have $175 ready for the DIY kit for my VG248QE, but as far as G-Sync and other monitors, I can see it on trending 120Hz/144Hz panels since other companies have partnered up for G-Sync, but I’m not sure we’ll see it on 4K displays anytime soon, of course this is just speculation so who knows.
All I know is, there is talk about Lightboost working alongside G-Sync over at Blurbusters blog, I don’t think I could be happier about that news lol.
What exactly do you want to know about it? The order of succession from the 2600k has kept the i7 mainstream series as a definite sought after proc. Is there anything in particular you want info on?
I’d have to get back to you on ZvZ as I didn’t have Afterburner up in the background to monitor last time I did WvW, I’ve been stuck in Battlefield 4 lol.
As far as Lightboost + 120Hz is concerned over 144Hz, I DO enjoy Lightboost via ToastyX when playing FPS games, but I switch to the standard 144Hz when playing other games such as GW2.
High FPS in PvE like that isnt exactly hard, but it is indeed still nice to see for GW2
That said i personaly cant stand screen tearing so always have V-Sync on.
Im gunan be water cooling my own rig somtime in Q1 next year along with a Second GTX 780 and Asus’s 4k 39" Monitor ……sympathy for my wallet :P
I don’t run vsync on this 144Hz panel(ASUS VG248QE), I don’t see a need. I DO run vsync on my Yamakasi Catleap 2560×1440 IPS panel though, I didn’t care to spend $800 – $1,000 for the 2B panel just for an overclock I’m not guaranteed.
Oh and yes, can’t wait to see where 4K tech ends up, especially after ASUS brought out their 60Hz panel over the standard 30Hz we were seeing!
3770k is Ivy not Sandy, and if you see my sig I run an XSPC Raystorm waterblock, XSPC RX360 rad, and Boxgodz Monsoon Series 2 reservior. I did not delid, was tempted but after binning 5 3770ks I found one I liked as far as voltage @ 4.5 and 5GHz., majority of 3770k should hit 4.5 though regardless.
Sadly sig limits limited my ability for more details on my cooling XSPC is a watercooling company though
op
have you tried any core unparking?
I don’t recommend the regedit tweak.
core parking is useful, just not while you’re gaming.
this program: http://bitsum.com/about_cpu_core_parking.php
it’s free and allows you to set core parking how you want without a reset.
I have it set to unpark all cores only during “high” power scheme is used.
to the amd vs Intel argument.
there is a post floating around here with a guy that has a six core Intel processor and is getting insane fps.
The FPS he gets should be about the norm assuming you are running modern hardware….. Especially his PvE area fps, if you don’t get 100+ at the least with noone around as he mentioned where he got his numbers from, something is wrong with your setup imo…
……sympathy for my wallet :P
XSPC is a watercooling company though
