Anyone playing WoW on a i7600k/i7700k?

[kidstechno]

Was wondering about upgrading from a 3570k. I know WoW is CPU intensive, but some reason with a GTX 1070 I still can't max out settings (on about a 6-7 with some tweaks) without dropping in certain zones (ie Surumar). Have my 3570k overclocked to 4.2ghz as well. Getting the itch to upgrade and there's a lot of newer benefits to recently released motherboard plus upgrading to DDR4 ram. That and Kaby Lake seems to bring some good optimizations. Thoughts?

[Deleted]

In Suramar City you will have FPS drops with every setup possible

[Barael]

Not directly related but having a fairly similar setup to yours (980Ti instead of 1070), I've noticed it's the draw distance slider that absolutely kills FPS on the higher settings. I can get fairly steady 1440p@60 with 10-settings if I just drop draw distance to 6 or so. Above 7 draw distance I won't get 60 fps on dog vomit settings. A new CPU might help raid fps but I'd be surprised if it'd solve the draw distance issue.

[Triggered Fridgekin]

Salty Lake is the perfect example of what happens when a company stops trying. Even with only being like 20$ more expensive than Skylake I'd be hard pressed to say that it's worth it even then.

If I were you, I'd hang on to your current setup since it's still fine and see what AMD brings with Ryzen in the next couple of months.

[Lathais]

WoW is CPU Intensive in a sense. It's primary thread runs on a single core and can not be split. So you need a CPU with good IPC to run the game as best as possible. However, the current CPUs are not really much better than yours. If you were to upgrade, you may see about a 5% increase in performance, if you are lucky. What you are running in to are limitations of the WoW Engine. No matter the CPU you will have those issues in certain areas of the game.

[kidstechno]

Not directly related but having a fairly similar setup to yours (980Ti instead of 1070), I've noticed it's the draw distance slider that absolutely kills FPS on the higher settings. I can get fairly steady 1440p@60 with 10-settings if I just drop draw distance to 6 or so. Above 7 draw distance I won't get 60 fps on dog vomit settings. A new CPU might help raid fps but I'd be surprised if it'd solve the draw distance issue.

Hmmm I might have to try that. I'm running at 1440p as well. I think I have a fairly large draw distance currently but I'll mess with it.

[Blackmist]

Not on Render Scale = 200% is it? Because that fucks framerates like nothing else.

[the boar]

Hmmm I might have to try that. I'm running at 1440p as well. I think I have a fairly large draw distance currently but I'll mess with it.

i'm also on 1440p but running a r9 290. perhaps it is just an amd thing, draw distance 7-10 doesn't change too much, but environment detail 8+ is the fps killer for me so that lives on 7! (100% unsure if it is an nvidia/amd thing, but thought it worth a try if draw distance doesn't help ya)

other than that i can only echo everyone else's words, your cpu is not worth upgrading right now!

[Arbiter]

i'm also on 1440p but running a r9 290. perhaps it is just an amd thing, draw distance 7-10 doesn't change too much, but environment detail 8+ is the fps killer for me so that lives on 7! (100% unsure if it is an nvidia/amd thing, but thought it worth a try if draw distance doesn't help ya)

other than that i can only echo everyone else's words, your cpu is not worth upgrading right now!

GPU performance for draw distance isn't really the problem to be honest. GPUs can handle the added textures being rendered. The issue is the much greater amount of draw calls required to process when increasing the draw distance that much which kills CPU performance. GPU would only be affected if it was already at its max to begin with due to graphics settings or resolution.

[kidstechno]

Not on Render Scale = 200% is it? Because that fucks framerates like nothing else.

Really? I found no real difference between the two if iirc. Not even sure what it does.

[Lathais]

Really? I found no real difference between the two if iirc. Not even sure what it does.

200% render scale means that is is rendering the image at double your current resolution and then scaling it it down. Can help to get rid of some rough edges and whatnot. That's why I said if you are running at 1080p on a GTX980, 200% render scale won't really slow you down as that card is easily capable of handling 4k which is basically a 400% 1080p render scale. Someone running at 1440p though, who tries to do a 200% render scale will likely choke their system, as that's going to be more work than 4k, since 1440p is already 2.5x 1080p, you are looking at basically rendering more than someone running at 4k with 100% render scale does. People who are running 4k and then turn on render scale, well that's just asking to destroy your FPS.

[Blackmist]

It's 200% in each direction, so 200% is 4 times the work. 1080p at 200% is the same as 4K.

1440p would be the same as 2880p, that's 77% more work than just 4K. Seriously, the AA the game has is fine without render scale.

[kidstechno]

200% render scale means that is is rendering the image at double your current resolution and then scaling it it down. Can help to get rid of some rough edges and whatnot. That's why I said if you are running at 1080p on a GTX980, 200% render scale won't really slow you down as that card is easily capable of handling 4k which is basically a 400% 1080p render scale. Someone running at 1440p though, who tries to do a 200% render scale will likely choke their system, as that's going to be more work than 4k, since 1440p is already 2.5x 1080p, you are looking at basically rendering more than someone running at 4k with 100% render scale does. People who are running 4k and then turn on render scale, well that's just asking to destroy your FPS.

Well then. That makes a ton of sense. I was actually on 200%, bumped it down to 100% and cranked up settings to 10 and everything was working well. Also turned draw distance down to 6 and definitely made a difference as well. Sometimes I wish they'd put better explanations on these settings. At the end of the day just have to mess around with it to see what works.

[Lathais]

Well then. That makes a ton of sense. I was actually on 200%, bumped it down to 100% and cranked up settings to 10 and everything was working well. Also turned draw distance down to 6 and definitely made a difference as well. Sometimes I wish they'd put better explanations on these settings. At the end of the day just have to mess around with it to see what works.

Well for draw distance, you have to think that it is increasing the load exponentially. As the radius of the circle around you that it has to draw increases, the area of the circle is increasing exponentially.

[Turismon]

Yes, Draw Distance is the number 1 thing to kill FPS other than Shadows. I wish wow could use 100% cpu instead of 1 thread split, it would make all the difference in the world for FPS and performance but alas it's an old engine so doubt it'll ever get updated to be a true multicore engine.