GPU makes a huge difference now

[Acelius]

980 ti overclocked to 1500/8000
i5 2500k overclocked to 5.0

Setting to 10 with no AA enabled on 1920x1080 results in ~25-30 FPS in warspear and ~15 in Hyjal near the firelands entrance. What am I doing wrong? 7 is the max comfortable setting for me (60+ fps everywhere, always)

That sounds weird. I don't understand why you would get such a drop in fps near the Firelands entrance.

Do you have any out-of-date addons running? I've heard that can tank your fps.

[lolpve]

Of course CPU isn't a bottleneck when you are running at 4K. It has very little to do with Legion. If you run Legion at 1080 then it will still be heavily CPU bottlenecked.

[Schizoide]

Every single thing on your screen (every spell particle, player, NPC, mount, etc) has to have a draw call issued by the CPU before the GPU can draw it. As a secure client-server MMO, the CPU often has to wait on updated info from the server, THEN has to work through all the draw calls, one at a time (as these must be processed in order and cannot be split into multiple threads), and THEN the GPU(s) draw them.

Nobody said the CPU isn't doing anything, just that it isn't the bottleneck past a certain point. At lower resolutions with a fast GPU, the CPU will be the bottleneck. At higher resolutions with a slower GPU, the GPU is the bottleneck. That's just how these things work.

[ImpTaimer]

Take any advice in this thread with a grain of salt.

4K is not a standard. The limitations of being able to play WoW at 4K depends on your VRAM and WoW's graphic engine. It is still a heavily CPU-based game that requires good RAM and HDD speeds (stable high-speed internet also helps). GPU makes the game look prettier, but not more playable outside high-player areas (world raids, AV choke points, etc).

Post Processing Filters are cancer to video game stability. You don't need them. Only turn them on if you know your computer can handle them. This includes supersampling which you NEVER do unless you're absolutely sure you can handle it.

Both Legion pre-patch and mods are not coded properly so any addition information placed on the game will cause side effects. Most modders just jerryrig their mod/addons to work on the latest patch and maybe optimize it if it bothers enough people.

[Doomislav]

I think WoW is not cpu or gpu dependent. I think the engine is an old inefficient beast and is dependent on BOTH. You cannot get by with an underpowered cpu or gpu and expect decent frames.

An interesting sidebar. I have a gtx 760 and upgraded my system from an amd phenom ii to an i5 6500 k and my frames in lfr went from 15ish to right at 85 to 100. SO it definitely likes the cpu.

[DarkBlade6]

Your GPU is the bottleneck in pretty much any games if you play at 4K or higher, because your CPU ask for hundred of frames to be rendered per second but your GPU can only deliver half of that if not less (depending on your cards) ... so you are somewhat right but not entirely. The main reason people say this game is CPU bound is because of raids, world event, world boss and large scale PvP battle (even, populated city). As soon as there's a shit ton of character on your screen, all doing spells and various melee animation, no matter what is your GPU or the resolution your play at, your CPU become the bottleneck. In those cases, One of your Core is getting hammered by the API/Engine, asking for ten of thousands of draw calls per second and that core (even a skylake core @ 4.5ghz+) simply can't keep up... at this point your FPS are limited by what your CPU can deliver not the GPU. This is mostly due to the engine and nothing else. Everything related to graphics is run on a single core and that's it.

[caervek]

This is false information

No it is not.

Every single thing on your screen (every spell particle, player, NPC, mount, etc) has to have a draw call issued by the CPU before the GPU can draw it. As a secure client-server MMO, the CPU often has to wait on updated info from the server, THEN has to work through all the draw calls, one at a time (as these must be processed in order and cannot be split into multiple threads), and THEN the GPU(s) draw them.

Correct, however as I said once you have enough CPU power to do all that then additional CPU power does nothing, and any decent Intel CPU made since 2011 (Sandy Bridge) is capable of reaching that limit. After that point it is the GPU that dictates your performance and what graphical settings you can use.

- - - Updated - - -

What are you talking about? Read the posts I'm responding to.

He did, that's why he's explaining your mistake to you.

[Krimzin]

Was the point of your OP to simply tell everyone you bought a Titan Pascal? Yes we know its very expensive, and...... congratulations for buying one?

For the money spent in your setup, you apply surprisingly little common sense in conveying your 'findings' here. As potis said, flying around Hyjal admiring the extensive grass, and flying around zones admiring the view... isnt what causes the much-touted cpu bottleneck status of WoW.

Pretty Much spot on. ePeen is ePeening I guess.
People think same thing about me though due to having my car in my sig.
Im just a gearhead and it sparks conversations.

[coprax]

With the new Legion graphics, I decided to upgrade because I run 4K (couldn't max many games anymore), and I was no longer getting a solid 60+ FPS on the 10 preset with no AA enabled.

My previous build was a 3770k @ 4.5GHz with 32GB of DDR3 1866. I upgraded that to a 6700k @ 4.6GHz and 32GB DDR4 3200. There was no difference in the game, I tested multiple zones and did the same flight path loops. Safe to say, if you have a decently overclocked processor it's probably not the bottleneck anymore, even if it's a few years old.

I then upgraded my Titan X (Maxwell edition) to the new Titan X (Pascal edition) that just came out yesterday. I overclocked it to +200/+500 just for giggles. The difference is huge. I went from seeing 45-50FPS in Hyjal due to that very thick grass, to around 98-114FPS. Every zone runs like butter again, even on the new 10 preset. I enabled 8x MSAA (overkill for 4K, but why not if you can?), and I am still maintaining 60+ FPS in every zone while flying around.

So can we put the "WoW is a CPU bottleneck" claims to rest? This is no longer the case, and honestly hasn't been the case since WoD launched. Your CPU will only be the bottleneck if you are running an old processor at stock clocks or a super low resolution.

Hope this helps someone that is planning to upgrade for Legion.

Congratulations for buying a ridiculously overpriced card


and btw: the higher the resolution, the more the gpu becomes the bottleneck.
It's always been that way. If you want to bottleneck a cpu you go for the lowest resolution possible.

[Queen of Hamsters]

That being said, what CPU should one then pair with a 1070 to avoid bottlenecks where they happen the most (raids)...?
I play @ 1080p (not gonna change), low shadows (can't stand anything else) and while it'll be nice to have higher settings out in the world, raid fps is the most important.

[Testaxc]

Jesus christ lol; using a card like that on WoW is like bringing a Ferrari to a school zone. What a waste.

[Droodid]

That being said, what CPU should one then pair with a 1070 to avoid bottlenecks where they happen the most (raids)...?
I play @ 1080p (not gonna change), low shadows (can't stand anything else) and while it'll be nice to have higher settings out in the world, raid fps is the most important.

If you're building new, go 6600k

[Zenfoldor]

Your assumptions about the game are correct in some ways. The engine upgrades allow the gpu to be utilized more more than it once did. The game is really beautiful running at a very high framerate, in 2k, in 4k, or any combination.

However, you'll also notice that most of those graphical improvements have to do with stacking detail into the environment and then expanding the visible environment you can interact with.

Raids/high pop areas have a different bottleneck.

I run a 980 TI classified on a i7 4790k @ 4.4 with a Dell 144hz 1440p gsync monitor. I'm going to upgrade the TI when and only when I can get at least 6gb of HBM.

My performance at 1440p is more like:
100fps garrison
48-60fps WoD main city
144fps World

I have tweeked the graphics settings to attain this fps. AA is set to the third one down(the one that doesn't really hurt performance on my rig) vsync is off of course. I have enviro detail and clutter down to about 7, but draw distance to 10.

I went in and adjusted my graphics settings to match my fps needs. You should do the same.

Furthermore, to people who say they will spend 500 on a graphics card but not 350 on a monitor and that 1080p "ain't gonna change." You really don't know what you are missing. WoW will look so much better on a GTX 950 running on a decent monitor, than on a Titan running on your old Samsung TV you bought in college. Monitor should be bought first, then build your rig around it. ALL you see and interact with is the monitor.

PS: My technique that I used recently to adjust my graphics:
I look at my max visible fps on the monitor, in my case 144.
My goal is to get the FPS in ideal conditions with nothing else going on to be just around that fps number.
I got into the world, preferably in a zone I will be in a lot.
I will turn AA off, I will turn draw distance to max, and vsync off, I match my resolution and refresh of course
Then I will go in and reduce terrain detail and ground clutter to around 7. I will slightly reduce each setting(starting at max) based on what I prefer, such as turning shadows down, particle detail down, ect, until I reach my frame rate target.
At this point, if I can't reach the target, I may also overclock my video card, to reduce the sacrafices.
Then I will turn on AA and notice how it affects my framerate.

*Remember, it is very important, to watch how each setting affects your framerate in perfect conditions

I will make my AA choice depending on the headroom I feel I can create by further reducing terrain detail and ground clutter.
Once I have selected AA(and remember these settings would be much different, if 60fps was my max visible) I would do one more pass at the other settings, watching each time how my fps is affected. I want to try and have my computer and monitor working together and never allow my card to be able to produce more fps than the refresh rate on my monitor, when the card is running at 100% in a non-cpu bottlenecked area.

In my experience, I find the nvidia settings to not be ideal for my preference.

PS: A smooth experience is much better in every way than a pretty experience. A bad FPS ruins a game for me, and is only good for screenshots. Don't run in bad fps if possible, because it's almost universal you will prefer a solid fps over a high AA or max ground clutter, lol.

[Acelius]

That being said, what CPU should one then pair with a 1070 to avoid bottlenecks where they happen the most (raids)...?
I play @ 1080p (not gonna change), low shadows (can't stand anything else) and while it'll be nice to have higher settings out in the world, raid fps is the most important.

The 1070 is a major overkill for 1080p though. Why even have a GPU like that with those settings?

OT though, get the 6600k or 6700k.

[caervek]

You're wrong, you're so fucking wrong. Even an i7-6700k overclocked to 5ghz is going to lack the single thread power to max WoW out

Ha,hahaha, hahahahahahahahaha

Seriously no, let me put this in perspective for you, I have a 4930K (that's Ivy Bridge) which I used to run at 4.5Ghz but I ended up dropping it back to stock last summer because I was having heat issues, I lost 0 FPS. I've kept it stock since because there isn't really anything out there ATM that needs the added performance, I only have a 60Hz monitor.

which means that NO a Sandy Bridge CPU is NOT providing the same performance as any CPU above it which is what you are stupidly trying to say.

Okay so you are saying that if I take the drive and GPU out of my main rig, take them to work, and put them in my i7-6700K rig that I will see a noticeable performance increase?

Hint: No I won't, just like I wouldn't see a noticeable decrease from putting them in my backup i5-2550K rig, because all these CPUs are enough to meet WoWs demands

Stop being an ignorant fool and giving out TERRIBLE advice.

Yes, you should.

[Kagthul]

Ha,hahaha, hahahahahahahahaha

Seriously no, let me put this in perspective for you, I have a 4930K (that's Ivy Bridge) which I used to run at 4.5Ghz but I ended up dropping it back to stock last summer because I was having heat issues, I lost 0 FPS. I've kept it stock since because there isn't really anything out there ATM that needs the added performance, I only have a 60Hz monitor.

... the stunning amount of anecdotal stupidity you're substituting for real fact is like watching a car wreck in slow motion. You're trying to say that you took a 35% cut in CPU performance and didn't lose any frames?

Ill just go ahead and say it: you're a liar, and a terrible one, at that. There are hundreds of benchmarks out there that show (in WoW, even) that there is a pretty substantial difference in (minimum, in particular) framerates between even CPUs of the same generation that are 500-600mhz apart. But somehow, the world works differently just for you

anecdotal evidence is not evidence.

Okay so you are saying that if I take the drive and GPU out of my main rig, take them to work, and put them in my i7-6700K rig that I will see a noticeable performance increase?

Hint: No I won't, just like I wouldn't see a noticeable decrease from putting them in my backup i5-2550K rig, because all these CPUs are enough to meet WoWs demands

No they aren't. There IS NO CPU that can "meet WoW's demands". None. Zero many. Even people with rigs clocked well over 5ghz on refrigerant-cooled custom cooling solutions cant produce a stable 60fps at Ultra - and that was the OLD Ultra - setting 7, now - much less setting 10, where the THREE new levels of Draw Distance (up to 3x further than before) can GEOMETRICALLY MULTIPLY the Draw Calls the CPU has to process.

Draw Calls MUST be processed by the main thread (only), in order, one at a time. The more draw calls, the more your framerate spikes downward as it bottlenecks. There is literally no CPU out there with enough single-thread performance to never bottleneck on draw calls at setting 10. They dont exist.

As an example (and one you can go watch others replicate on YouTube), i see ZERO performance difference going from 1080p/10 to 4k/10 - a steady 60fps in most places in the world and frequent spikes down into the 40s in crowded areas - on my GTX 1080 - because the performance is limited by the CPU (in this case, an overclocked 4790K) in those areas. The GPU is sitting idle so much that it can easily handle the upscale to 4k without batting an eye.

Educate yourself before you look even more foolish.

[caervek]

You're trying to say that you took a 35% cut in CPU performance and didn't lose any frames?

Correct, because the thing you and that other guy seem to be missing (despite myself and others saying it multiple times) is that maxing out WoW requires a set amount of CPU performance, exceeding that amount will not give nay additional benefit, after that it's purely GPU bond, and due to CPU development plateauing out over the last half decade most high end CPUs from 2011 onwards can hit that amount.

[Kagthul]

Correct, because the thing you and that other guy seem to be missing (despite myself and others saying it multiple times) is that maxing out WoW requires a set amount of CPU performance, exceeding that amount will not give nay additional benefit, after that it's purely GPU bond, and due to CPU development plateauing out over the last half decade most high end CPUs from 2011 onwards can hit that amount.

... except they cant. I literally just covered that.

And there is DEFINITELY a difference in WoW going from 3.4Ghz to 4.5 Ghz. If you believe otherwise, you're a fool incapable of reading.

A helpful example of why WoW is CPU bound:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASf9QW2TKJo

Not perfect because he doesn't drop ~1000mhz off (chops off more like 1.8 or so - he puts in the comments that he forgot that the % is based on the -base- clock and not the turbo) but it shows the impact of CPU vs GPU (as he downclocks the GPU and loses almost nothing.

THis is just the very first thing in Google. 10 minutes of research and you could educate yourself.

[Queen of Hamsters]

The 1070 is a major overkill for 1080p though. Why even have a GPU like that with those settings?

OT though, get the 6600k or 6700k.

... why not? It's time I upgraded, I have the funds, why not upgrade so that it'll last for a while? Would be nice to be ahead of things at least once in terms of my comp.

- - - Updated - - -

If you're building new, go 6600k

Thanks, I'll be sure to put it on the list! I'm building entirely new, from the bottom up and all the way out to the casing.

[Aleksej89]

Look at it like this:

If your GPU is too weak, you can lower the graphic quality or even the resolution.
A game on Ultra with 20 FPS can run as fast as 100+ FPS on the lower graphic settings.

If your CPU is too weak, there is nothing you can do about it.
You can't reduce the number of players in a battleground or the number of mobs in a raid.
You can't reduce the number of various calculations done by the CPU when in an outdoor raid/zone...

As far as 1080p resolution goes GPU is lovely to have but for a lot of titles (like wow) even the shitty Intel HD will do on lowest.
If you go over 1080p then a strong GPU is a must.