GTX 1070 or 1080 for WoW @ 3440x1440?

[simonlvschal]

Can you please provide more details on how you are getting the WoW client to use multiple cores on your CPU? Did you adjust the processAffinityMask CVAR by hand?

Admittedly it has been quite awhile since I tried playing with processAffinityMask but I could never get the WoW client to use more than a single core in any meaningful capacity. If you are getting WoW to actually use 4 or 6 cores that would be a huge improvement.

Please share details!

no wow is multicore if u got 4 cores it will use 4 cores..

[elmoe420]

no wow is multicore if u got 4 cores it will use 4 cores..

Just because an application is multi threaded doesn't mean that all of the threads do enough work to meaningfully utilize multiple cores.

When you run WoW and you look at the CPU utilization per core are you actually seeing 4 cores at 100%? In my experience the WoW client will run only a single core at 100% and the other cores are basically idle (0-10% utilization).

Compare this to others modern games and you will see the game maxing out all of your cores at close to 100% utilization.

[Zoneseek]

both of those cards would be so wasted on wow lol the game looks old no matter what res you're playing at...don't waste your money on either if this is the only thing you're playing

[Klingers]

nope the engine isnt a problem.. please dont give out false information.. wow is one the few games that optimize and change engines all the time.. last modified with cataclysme to run Dx11 and i am seeing a Dx12 change next expansion.

it doesnt matter how old a engine is if they can make it better..

As somebody who works with older codebases all the time, I suspect I know what I'm talking about here a bit more than you. But that's fine. You're correct, and I in fact mentioned, that yes you can iterate and update a lot as Blizzard has done over the years. New particle and lighting effects, new rendering techniques, higher resolution texturing, things like liquid effects and all kinds of other cosmetic stuff etc etc.

But some things, well... There are limits on how far you can take something. Sometimes you'll be limited in what you can milk out of very core engine functionality in something like WoW, which was a heavily modified version of the Warcraft 3 engine. The guts of the thing are over 15 years old. They're upgraded it for 64 bit, there's some amazing new tech in there, but there are limits. I's heavily CPU bound. As mentioned that's partially because of the amount of pure stuff it needs to keep track of in raids or battlegrounds, but partially a limitation of established turn-of-the-millenium coding practice. For one thing the game doesn't multi-thread very well.

A really good example of what doesis the new ID Tech 6 engine running under Doom. That thing is a beast but it makes really good use of hyperthreading accross multiple CPU cores. Also feature-wise, games like Overwatch are built from the ground upon modern engines for things like spectating. WoW's solution will always be a bolt-on.

I'll end this by saying it's not a bad thing how WoW performs now. I think serious credit needs to go to the Dev Team for how far they've stretched the engine and I'm sure they can stretch it further. But don't discount what I'm saying about the limitations of old code. There is an overhead.

[Mikah]

I'm running a Dell U3415w at 3440x1440 with an EVGA SC GTX 1070, an i5 2500k OCed to 4.5 Ghz and 16 Gb of Ram.

I wanted to try everything on ultra and maxed out and I sit in the garrison at around 110 fps.

Went in to kill archi for ring upgrade today, ended up in a 21 man pug on heroic. While waiting in front of him, fps dropped to around 70-80.

Once the fight started, I noticed I was averaging around 50-55 fps. After the fight, my performance addon said that the lowest point was 32 fps, but on average it was higher than that.

That's certainly not that bad, and considering I could lower a couple of minor things to improved, and I have not even touched the overclock on the GPU yet.

Legion will be more demanding, but again, these cards are new and the drivers should improve.

I am not sure if anything lower would be sufficient for 3440x1440. I upgraded from a GTX 570, and I was sitting in the garrison at 4 fps at that resolution.

[Schizoide]

Well, you can always drop graphics options enough to make the game look like a potato. But it sounds like your 1070 is the minimum spec to hit minimum 30fps at the graphical fidelity you prefer, yes.

[moremana]

If all you play is wow and you spend $400+ for a video card even at that resolution your getting really bad advice.

Get a AIB RX 480 or wait a few days when the GTX 1060 comes out. WoW does require more of the GPU than it used to, but a 1070 is overkill.

- - - Updated - - -

on ultra with minimum shadow i have 200 fps in not populated zone like elwynn, around 120 in stromwind, around 50-70 fps in garison zone, same in raid, man when you dont know what you talking about, you should not say anything

You sir are full of shit. A HD7770 isnt getting those frame rates..just stop.

[simonlvschal]

I'm running a Dell U3415w at 3440x1440 with an EVGA SC GTX 1070, an i5 2500k OCed to 4.5 Ghz and 16 Gb of Ram.

I wanted to try everything on ultra and maxed out and I sit in the garrison at around 110 fps.

Went in to kill archi for ring upgrade today, ended up in a 21 man pug on heroic. While waiting in front of him, fps dropped to around 70-80.

Once the fight started, I noticed I was averaging around 50-55 fps. After the fight, my performance addon said that the lowest point was 32 fps, but on average it was higher than that.

That's certainly not that bad, and considering I could lower a couple of minor things to improved, and I have not even touched the overclock on the GPU yet.

Legion will be more demanding, but again, these cards are new and the drivers should improve.

I am not sure if anything lower would be sufficient for 3440x1440. I upgraded from a GTX 570, and I was sitting in the garrison at 4 fps at that resolution.

exactly dude. 32 fps is very good for a 4k lol
or 3k

- - - Updated - - -

As somebody who works with older codebases all the time, I suspect I know what I'm talking about here a bit more than you. But that's fine. You're correct, and I in fact mentioned, that yes you can iterate and update a lot as Blizzard has done over the years. New particle and lighting effects, new rendering techniques, higher resolution texturing, things like liquid effects and all kinds of other cosmetic stuff etc etc.

But some things, well... There are limits on how far you can take something. Sometimes you'll be limited in what you can milk out of very core engine functionality in something like WoW, which was a heavily modified version of the Warcraft 3 engine. The guts of the thing are over 15 years old. They're upgraded it for 64 bit, there's some amazing new tech in there, but there are limits. I's heavily CPU bound. As mentioned that's partially because of the amount of pure stuff it needs to keep track of in raids or battlegrounds, but partially a limitation of established turn-of-the-millenium coding practice. For one thing the game doesn't multi-thread very well.

A really good example of what doesis the new ID Tech 6 engine running under Doom. That thing is a beast but it makes really good use of hyperthreading accross multiple CPU cores. Also feature-wise, games like Overwatch are built from the ground upon modern engines for things like spectating. WoW's solution will always be a bolt-on.

I'll end this by saying it's not a bad thing how WoW performs now. I think serious credit needs to go to the Dev Team for how far they've stretched the engine and I'm sure they can stretch it further. But don't discount what I'm saying about the limitations of old code. There is an overhead.

i dont think u know more then me sadly i worked with programming,engines and so on for as long as i can remember. and it doesn't matter how old a engine gets as long as u can reform and restructur the engine aka a total flat out deleting old code and replace with new better optimized code. it's a fact

[Deleted]

I am currently running a GTX 970, and was hoping to upgrade to a 1440p 27" Monitor for legion in September.

Kinda scared to see people running a 1070 or even 1080 for that. Am I wrong in thinking a 970 can support a 1440p setting?

[bewsh]

1440p isn't 1440p UW, you will probably be fine most of the time.

This thread was about 3440x1440 gaming, all you other 1080p kids should pipe down and let the adults talk.

1080 will have drops at this res esp in Val, azsuna, and suramar.. that's just the start.

Source: tested with EVGA 1080sc

[phuzy]

GTX 1070, i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5ghz

Resolution;3840x2160 which is more than OP
FPS in most laggiest of locations: 60-70fps. In desserted locations and instances like 100+

[Roadblock]

I am currently running a GTX 970, and was hoping to upgrade to a 1440p 27" Monitor for legion in September.

Kinda scared to see people running a 1070 or even 1080 for that. Am I wrong in thinking a 970 can support a 1440p setting?

You're not wrong. A 970 is ok for 2k monitor (WQHD).
Source: My brother has a 970 and plays on a Samsung S27D850T.

[uaestar]

Stay out of GTX 1080, t'll they fix the drivers

Game Crash all the time

Display drivers constantly crash.

[Sansnom]

WoW is more based on CPU than it is GFX. I currently have the G1 gaming 1070 only at 1080 but will be upgrading shortly and my GFX util in WoW with everything max is about 60% so i imagine even with a bigger resolution a 1070 should still be able to handle it well.

True to an extend. But I seriously doubt the CPU is doing 4x more work rendering at 4x the resolutions. This is where the GPU is critical.

[Schizoide]

Stay out of GTX 1080, t'll they fix the drivers

Game Crash all the time

Display drivers constantly crash.

Works fine for me. Must be something specific to your configuration.

[Istaria]

I'm playing Wow in 4K with a GTX 970.

I think the game recommends me the graphics quality level 7, but it's fine at max level too.

[Aeriedk]

1070 is fine. 1080 if you have money to waste.

[bewsh]

Stay out of GTX 1080, t'll they fix the drivers

Game Crash all the time

Display drivers constantly crash.

It's the same driver...

[Kelsierx]

Just got a Gigabyte GTX 1070 G1 and I'm not getting great results so far, not sure what the problem is.

System:

Intel i5-4670k
Asus Z87 Sabertooth
16GB Corsair DDR3
Samsung 840 Pro 240GB
Gigabyte GTX 1070 G1
XFX 750W PSU Bronze

Running this game at 4k 60hz. What performance should I expect? I was just running 4k 60hz on the same setup with a Gigabyte GTX 970 G1, settings at a "7" with 0 AA and I was running at 60FPS in most areas with V sync on.

With the GTX 1070 G1 at setting "10" with 0 AA I am getting 39-45 FPS in busy zones and 45-60 FPS in not busy zones.

My Fire Strike score was 18,552 on the graphics end, so I'm not sure if my CPU is the problem here (all results posted above was stock speed on my CPU @ 3.4ghz). I did have it overclocked to 4.4Ghz at one point (before the 1070), but I was getting some weird errors and undid the OC.

I was expecting a solid 60 FPS on 4k with 0 AA with the GTX 1070. I don't think that is unreasonable.

[pucca]

Get a AIB RX 480 or wait a few days when the GTX 1060 comes out. WoW does require more of the GPU than it used to, but a 1070 is overkill.

my gtx 1060 works "okay" for only 2560x1440, are you sure it's enough enough for 3440x1440?

i only bought it because the last boss of maw of souls was completely unplayable on my gtx 760 (i guess it just couldn't handle all the particle effects) and even with everything maxed but MSAA wow still looks the same as before, can't tell any difference besides getting more fps