Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Noctifer616 View Post
    What if someone doesn't care about IQ and just wants more FPS. Can you show me the game running in 25 man raids with 60-120 FPS no matter the graphics settings?
    If I had a 1080p monitor and reduced almost every setting, then yeah I think its doable though it would be ugly as sin and some settings (particle effects below 'Good') are hazardous as you cannot clearly see some mechanics (Aftershock on HC Nazgrim, for instance).

    Ultimately though all anyone wants is something that is playable. I spend 90% of my WoW time above 100fps, that to me is overkill. In raids I typically enjoy 45fps, that is also enjoyable. I see dips down to 30fps during extreme busy periods, maybe even 25fps on the Malkorok pull (anyone know why that fight is so bad?). But that is a momentary thing and is still more than playable.

    Also bare in mind that I have extreme settings. Every setting is maxed, 1440p display and I force AA higher than WoW permits in my nVidia control panel, as I detest jagged edges.

    I think the quest for constant 60fps is silly, ultimately all we want is something that is playable, enjoyable. Don't we?

  2. #42
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Kezotar View Post
    2nd generation CPU that rocks every game by todays standards. Who cares?

    Problem is - People think their CPUs, if it is a intel that it will hit 60 FPS ULTRA MAIMUM in 25Man -NO FPS drop, flawless..
    Think again, you get 18-25 FPS from the AMD, you get 25-28 from the intel. (Price difference can be up to 200EUR-300USD)
    Thing is I expected an average between 30-45 in 25 mans on settings I play. Im not even playing full ultra and im running 25-30fps in 25 mans

    Also the thing with malkorok is that all the outgoing numbers (healing, shield rack up) alongside the orbs, usual spell effects etc is a killer
    Last edited by mmoc3ae06b81b9; 2014-06-12 at 02:20 PM.

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarien View Post
    I think the quest for constant 60fps is silly, ultimately all we want is something that is playable, enjoyable. Don't we?
    That depends from person to person. Some are ok with 30 FPS, some want 120 FPS atr 1440p even if it means to get more than one GPU with high overclock.

    You have to keep in mind that Ultra settings taxes GPU, not CPU.

    In D3 standing around and doing nothing I get 110 FPS at 1080p with everything maxed. Do you know how much I get with everything disabled, low FX enabled and 720p? Only 210 FPS.

    With high framerates you run into a CPU bottleneck and no matter what you do you can't fix that.

    I actually think it's impossible right now to get 120 FPS in 25 man heroic raids due to the CPU bottleneck.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdumb View Post
    Thing is I expected an average between 30-45 in 25 mans on settings I play. Im not even playing full ultra and im running 25-30fps in 25 mans
    Play around and see what Ultra gives you. If your GPU is not at 100% in raids right now then there is room to increase visual quality without decreasing your FPS.

  4. #44
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarien View Post
    Only raid screenshot I have, it can go a little lower on the pull, 30fps maybe, but only for the opening 15s or so. Definitely still playable.



    Here you go. Bare in mind that I am running 1440p also, which is pretty much twice the pixels of a 1080p screen.
    That's more like it. On the first screenshot you are standing completely still facing the ground. I can bet that if you face all the clutter (ashen walls, toxic mists, iron tombs spawning), your fps will temporarily drop to below 20.
    This again proves my point. Unless you have a ridiculously high overclocked CPU, you are going to get a huge CPU bottleneck due to WoW's lack of a multicore optimization.
    I can bet that these two 780s are running at 25-30% each at most. Please don't tell me that you've got this amazing machine just to play WoW.
    And yeah, this is my definition of "barely runs". This is an issue in virtually all MMOs so perhaps it won't be possible to "fix" the issue.


    PS: Unless you have a 120/144Hz monitor (with a 1440p resolution?!), everything above 60 fps is a waste of GPU and CPU resources as the monitor itself outputs 60 fps.

  5. #45
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    17,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarien View Post
    I think the quest for constant 60fps is silly, ultimately all we want is something that is playable, enjoyable. Don't we?
    How are these two not a single idea? If FPS drops below a certain point, the game becomes less enjoyable. Sure, some people are happy with 20-30 fps. Personally (and many others) notice anything below 40fps, and it actually can become headache inducing. So getting the most out of it (and specifically, increasing minimum frames, not max) is important.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  6. #46
    Try turning down the AA filters and such, and also shadows - those two things will affect your FPS the most.

  7. #47
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    3,745
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdumb View Post
    Thing is I expected an average between 30-45 in 25 mans on settings I play. Im not even playing full ultra and im running 25-30fps in 25 mans

    Also the thing with malkorok is that all the outgoing numbers (healing, shield rack up) alongside the orbs, usual spell effects etc is a killer
    Sadly, that's how it is. Has always been like this.

    I remember the rumors at the begining - i5 2500k with a 560 ti and they had like 60 FPS at ULTRA. Some of them even said 100 FPS...
    But it's all a lie. Same goes for Intel CPUS. People expect so much better results than a AMD but fact is there's little FPS difference, and I'm not sure if I'd pay 200 EUR for a Intel CPU instead of a AMD when the gain in WoW is like 5-8 FPS: Even in Crysis I've heard AMD perform similiar to a i7 and a even much even result at higher resolution where the GPU actually necks. Same goes for BF..

    Intel is a superior CPU, no question. But that superior doesn't impact in many played games, however in some games it atually beats the AMD by 20-30 FPS, but that's probably games that are made for a Intel CPUs.

    I have myself a 4930K - My previous CPU was a I7 2700k. Want to know the difference in FPS? None to 2-3.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by nitrobg View Post
    This is an issue in virtually all MMOs so perhaps it won't be possible to "fix" the issue.
    It's not an issue for MMO's only. Any game that has a high number of players or objects on screen will run into a CPU bottleneck (like SC2 or Rome for example).

    Till we see the switch to DirectX 12 in the industry there isn't much that can be done on PC.

  9. #49
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    3,745
    Quote Originally Posted by MyndZero View Post
    Try turning down the AA filters and such, and also shadows - those two things will affect your FPS the most.
    How can one play with AA filters off?

  10. #50
    Basically the answer is that WoW is CPU bound and not graphics bound. It is totally dependent on CPU speed regardless of cores. More cores will be better in general because some of the processing can be offloaded....but the majority of the processing will still be on 1 single core. I personally have a 2500k OC'ed to 4.5 Ghz and while I don't have everything set to ultra I do have it on a pretty high setting @ 1080 and get fantastic framerates.

  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Noctifer616 View Post
    That depends from person to person. Some are ok with 30 FPS, some want 120 FPS atr 1440p even if it means to get more than one GPU with high overclock.
    Well this is where things become either subjective or pedantic.

    Subjectively we all view playable as a different thing. For me it's maxing out the graphical settings while maintaining a frame rate where I am not going to notice any stuttering or tearing. For others it's a constant 60fps.

    But then there are pedants who even if you have 4k at 120fps will whinge that it's impossible to get 8k at 144fps or 200fps. They're out to win internet arguments and they may even be in this thread... *dun dun DUUUHH!*

    Quote Originally Posted by Noctifer616 View Post
    You have to keep in mind that Ultra settings taxes GPU, not CPU.
    Not true at all. Sure the load is more on the GPU but anything extra still requires more CPU time. Say that my fireball explodes in a shower of sparks on impact on ultra, those sparks trajectories still need computing by the CPU before the GPU renders them (this is just an example I made up).

    Quote Originally Posted by Noctifer616 View Post
    I actually think it's impossible right now to get 120 FPS in 25 man heroic raids due to the CPU bottleneck.
    The gate seems to have shifted. Only a moment ago we were looking for 60fps...

    Quote Originally Posted by nitrobg View Post
    That's more like it. On the first screenshot you are standing completely still facing the ground. I can bet that if you face all the clutter (ashen walls, toxic mists, iron tombs spawning), your fps will temporarily drop to below 20.
    No it's quite solid actually, that just happens to be the only screenshot with an ongoing raid in HC SoO that I have taken. Not going to get into debates about whats going on on screen because before long I will be taking screenshots facing the boss from a 45 degree angle while everyone in the raid is popping all cool downs, standing on one leg doing the chicken dance and it has to be a sunny day in Orgrimmar...

    Quote Originally Posted by nitrobg View Post
    This again proves my point. Unless you have a ridiculously high overclocked CPU, you are going to get a huge CPU bottleneck due to WoW's lack of a multicore optimization.
    TBH there are way more players on screen in that SS than there are in a raid, and its player models and spell effects that are most taxing.

    People can whinge on about lack of multicore optimization but in reality I can't think of a single game that is, let alone a massively open world game built on an engine designed 10+ years ago.

    If you don't have the FPS you want, either upgrade, lower your settings, or unsubscribe because multicore optimisation is a long way off from being industry standard and sitting about wringing your hands about it really isn't constructive.

    Quote Originally Posted by nitrobg View Post
    I can bet that these two 780s are running at 25-30% each at most. Please don't tell me that you've got this amazing machine just to play WoW.
    And yeah, this is my definition of "barely runs". This is an issue in virtually all MMOs so perhaps it won't be possible to "fix" the issue.
    About 50-60% on a single card. I recently enabled SLI on them but it made no difference, I have reached the CPU bottleneck - though on settings above ultra at 1440p I am not unhappy with this.

    Barely runs my ass. If I turned off my FPS meter and you played on my PC you'd have zero complaints about the FPS.


    Quote Originally Posted by nitrobg View Post
    PS: Unless you have a 120/144Hz monitor (with a 1440p resolution?!), everything above 60 fps is a waste of GPU and CPU resources as the monitor itself outputs 60 fps.
    I know but I like big numbers and the epeen value. Also for some reason turning on V-sync in WoW disables the AA, so I force V-sync through the nvidia panel (which then doesn't actually do anything) so that AA continues to work. It's weird, I don't get it, but fuck it my WoW looks awesome.

    Quote Originally Posted by chazus View Post
    How are these two not a single idea? If FPS drops below a certain point, the game becomes less enjoyable. Sure, some people are happy with 20-30 fps. Personally (and many others) notice anything below 40fps, and it actually can become headache inducing. So getting the most out of it (and specifically, increasing minimum frames, not max) is important.
    Well as I said above, this is where it becomes subjective. I generally in raids have 40fps, I sometimes for short periods (measured in seconds) have less but I would say considering my settings that is pretty good and definitely playable and enjoyable.
    Last edited by Tarien; 2014-06-12 at 03:17 PM.

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarien View Post
    Not true at all. Sure the load is more on the GPU but anything extra still requires more CPU time. Say that my fireball explodes in a shower of sparks on impact on ultra, those sparks trajectories still need computing by the CPU before the GPU renders them (this is just an example I made up).
    Compute work like that is better done on the GPU. In fact, according to some devs Asynchronous Compute can manage to use idle time and unused resources on the GPU so that compute work can be done for practically free. That feature doesn't work in DirectX though.

    Good example of this is shadow map rendering. It is bound by fixed function hardware (ROPs and primitive engines) and uses very small amount of ALUs (simple vertex shader) and very small amount of bandwidth (compressed depth buffer output only, reads size optimized vertices that don't have UVs or tangents). This means that all TMUs and huge majority of the ALUs and bandwidth is just idling around while shadows get rendered. If you for example execute your compute shader based lighting simultaneously to shadow map rendering, you get it practically for free. Funny thing is that if this gets common, we will see games that are throttling more than Furmark, since the current GPU cooling designs just haven't been designed for constant near 100% GPU usage (all units doing productive work all the time).
    Also, how much can you do to reduce visual clutter of spells and effects in WoW? I know they are making changes for WoD, but I remember my old machine running terrible FPS no matter what graphics settings I used.

  13. #53
    Would an i7 really make a big difference in WoW compared to a same clocked i5? Would the performance gain even justify the higher price?

    And yes, with less visual clutter in WoD, raid performance on weaker CPU should increase.
    i7 or i5. For some reason I thought the 2500k was an i7. My bad.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •