AMD questions

[Warrax]

FX CPUs only excel in highly threaded applications, some games can use all threads as mentioned above but most don't. The FX is awesome value if you can use all the threads most of the time (which is rarely the case). Benchmarks tend to use all cores which make the FX look exceptional on paper only.

For your information, www.cpubenchmark.net also display a Single Thread Rating below the main rating, take a look here: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?...t-Core&id=1780
CPU Rating: 8993
Single Thread Rating: 1507

About that link: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/62
The Pentium G850 (2.9ghz) released in 2011 is right below the FX 8350 (4ghz) in WoW and both have a 1.1ghz difference, here's what it tells you:

1. WoW is not heavily threaded
2. The Intel CPU has stronger architecture and has better performance per Core. In other words, it doesn't need as much MHZ to achieve the same single thread performance as the 8350.

The Pentium G850 performance is why people recommend the Pentium G3258 which is a 2014 version of that old G850 (stronger architecture since then), the G3258 is also unlocked which make it a powerful and valuable dual core CPU perfect for low threaded games like WoW.

If you want more proof that WoW is low threaded, download a software that display usage of each core and take a look while playing WoW, use a second monitor for that or if you're only using one monitor, use the program called Afterburner to see these info in-game.

BTW your GeForce 650 is OK but don't expect to play in Ultra.

[Pyrophobia]

thank you guys for all the responces.

The questions at hand were never what to buy. I was mostly trying to evaluate my decisions for purchasing the 8350 prior to WoD and after WoD. I will try to get a software to monitor how the game loads the procesor. And have it show me what is the difference during raiding ( i am using a M5A99FX Pro r2.0)

I did add some extra casth when i was making the purchase in order to get the 8350 instead of the 8320 as to get higher clock speeds for WoW at the time. I should have made this forum post a lot prior to my decision. And i should also saved the prices for comparison. If i am not mistaken the intel option i had was i5-3470 and since it was 3.2 i thought the AMD's 4.0+ should be better for WoW.

Maybe those blizz guys will optimize the game to properly utilize the multicore processors that are taking the entire market anyway. And soon everyone will get much more performance from i5 i7 and the AMD's ... For a game that is so haevy dependant on the CPU it seems from the above answers that it doesn't use all the processor abilities. (I want to test this more maybe WoD has changed things)

And since my next ugprade will be the GPU and not the CPU maybe by the time i do this blizz will move even more load from the CPU to the GPU. I can afford about 300$ for a GPU right now but don't think it's rly worth to spend them now and instead wait to save more and spend them later.

[Lathais]

Maybe those blizz guys will optimize the game to properly utilize the multicore processors that are taking the entire market anyway. And soon everyone will get much more performance from i5 i7 and the AMD's ... For a game that is so haevy dependant on the CPU it seems from the above answers that it doesn't use all the processor abilities. (I want to test this more maybe WoD has changed things)

They really can not do this. There have been multiple discussions on this forum explaining it. Future games, maybe. Recoding an entire old game, not likely. Also, this is the reason WHY they are so CPU dependent. It's not that you need a better processor just because it's CPU dependent. It's CPU dependent because the main thread has to run on a single core. Single player games do not have this issue because they are not having to load player data in real time. They can pre-load a lot more as they know exactly what to load.

[Sturmbringe]

Why the hell are you comparing 5 year old cpus with a 2 year old one?

By doing that you are also proving what we are saying. For wow and single thread even a 5 year old cpu is better than amd-trash.

Potis, that is a good observation.

OP, you were comparing First Generation Core Processors known as "NEHALEM" from 2008 to your AMD 8350 from 2013. Like you yourself noted, the i7-880 (a 2008) CPU, is equal to the 8350 (an Oct 2012 CPU).

This is just sad.

In addition, as other posters have mentioned, for gaming you should be looking at the benchmark below to understand just how good your CPU is.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Your 8350 scores 1503 Pass Marks whereas a 4670k scores 2,211 Pass Marks. The difference in performance is huge and results in situations like the one shown below when one tries to play a CPU intensive game:



FPS counter and recording provided by EVGA Precision X.

[Xs]

Just to add some pretty images, thats what processor usage looks like in EVERY game that doesn't support proper multi-threading, ~75% split onto one core with light load on all the others from background processes and some small bleed from the game's processes (the drops are tabbing out). That specifically is WoW in the Garrison, but it really doesn't go higher than 25% load on every other core and 100% on the main, rarely.

[Aberrict]

=Pyrophobia;32310395

I did add some extra casth when i was making the purchase in order to get the 8350 instead of the 8320 as to get higher clock speeds for WoW at the time. I should have made this forum post a lot prior to my decision. And i should also saved the prices for comparison. If i am not mistaken the intel option i had was i5-3470 and since it was 3.2 i thought the AMD's 4.0+ should be better for WoW.

This is a common misconception. GHz is not a direct comparison outside the same family of CPUs (i5 3.0 GHz Haswell vs i5 4.0 GHz Haswell) The design architecture and fabrication improve with each generation (Intel's Tick-Tock process). This is why a Pentium D with 60nm running at 3.2 GHz is much much slower and uses more power than a 22nm Haswell at 3.0. The smaller the node the more efficient the power usage and the more transistors you can fit on the chip die.

[Pyrophobia]

Aberrict as you commented: "outside from the same family" on me saying that i got 8350 instead of 8320 wich are the same family... i


Anyway just as i had time tonight when i got home from work i pushed everything to ultra and went to do LFR seems like the 650 can run everything on ultra thou not as smooth as one would want.

used Core Temp to monitor the cores on a 2-nd screen
1680x1050 main screen res
The highest drop rate was Brackenspore where my fps dropped to 26.
Imperator lowest was 36 and Koragh lowst was 48

The highest CPU load was on Brackenspore and it was according to the log 55%

Interesting enough the 4 physical cores did work quite close with #1 usualy holding on top or #2 taking lead but mostly they were equal and neither was more than 20-ish % above the other 3 quite equaly spread.
The 4 logical cores however never did go higher than 5-6-7% loads

The only difference i had to get 1 core to do more job was when i was playing the walking dead on the other screen ... that's when #1 core started taking the lead a bit but NOT 75% of all the load

Seems like my GPU can't push the CPU to higher limits or is it just the max WoD needs and the 8350 can provide i can't tell.

Even more i went to ashran after the LFR with the "Ultra" settings but it went down to 25 fps on events so i lowerds some stuff to make stuff faster (lowered the shadows, liquid details, vew distances 1 notch and the texture filterings to x4. Went back to 100 fps and lowest it got was 60-70 fps with a 40% to 50% cpu load.

I am more than sure that with this GPU i can't get much better results even if i jump to i5 4960

Then a new AMD question arises Radeon VS GeForce.
I've always used GeForce as WoW was being optimized for GeForce according to some old posts and blizz statements. But runing an AMD processor might compliment the Radeon GPU's
And most ppl into PC hardware lean towards Radeon (they all used to push me to intel CPUs before so they are not AMD fans)

*should i move this to a different post or leave it here ?

[Deleted]

It might actually be the other way around, cpu isn't fast enough to send instructions to the gpu
Also lfr aint the best measurement but is fine. What is keeping you there is the low resolution you got.

[Aberrict]

Aberrict as you commented: "outside from the same family" on me saying that i got 8350 instead of 8320 wich are the same family...

But the part of your post I highlighted said, "the intel option i had was i5-3470 and since it was 3.2 i thought the AMD's 4.0+ should be better for WoW "

Which are different families of cpus.

[Pyrophobia]

@Xs
Wow seems to be running quite equaly on all 4 cores :


@Kostattoo 1680x1050 is the highest resolution wow gives me for my 22 inch 16:10 monitor. And it is native for the monitor so anything more will make the game look worse. Anyway it's not a matter of the number of FPS i get but that the game works on all 4 physical cores equaly as oposed to what ppl suggest it runs on 1 mostly. It also runs on ultra loading the CPU 4 cores equaly up to 50 ish %
*** maybe for the test i could plug the PC to the TV and push it to full HD to increase the load of the GPU and CPU but as i said the question is not towards my performance and my personal output. The above picture clearly statest the oposite of what Xs pointed out.

I should be monitoring the GPU load to to see wich of the 2 gets to the limits and see if the 50% CPU is it's limit. .... stupid of me
When i bought it i've seen it run at 90% on all 8 cores when i was riping a movie. But maybe WoW can't push it there.
Or maybe it doesn't need more than what it gets now.

[Kagthul]

And most ppl into PC hardware lean towards Radeon (they all used to push me to intel CPUs before so they are not AMD fans)

Ah... wut?

I know literally no one other than a very few people on this forum that lean towards Radeons. They have been rather systematically outclassed at almost every price point for about three hardware generations, if not on price/performance (which they sometimes manage to close the gap on), then in other areas (the R9 290X is a solid performer, but is a huge power hog, with almost double the TDP of an equivalent nVidia solution).

I haven't been able to, in good conscience, suggest a Radeon part for anything other than an integrated solution (for an HTPC, the APUs aren't... terrible) or at the very low end of what i'd consider "mainstream" (there are some Radeon cards that outperform the 750Ti for around the same price).

That's about it though. Any other bracket, and barring sales, ill always point someone to an nVidia part. Better price/performance, more performance/watt, and better integrated features (Shadowplay is pretty damn amazing).

[Vash The Stampede]

That's about it though. Any other bracket, and barring sales, ill always point someone to an nVidia part. Better price/performance, more performance/watt, and better integrated features (Shadowplay is pretty damn amazing).

Nvidia hasn't always been better price performance or performance per watt. Only until recently. The only reason to be concerned with heat is because it shortens the life of the device. In terms of power usage it's pointless as you'll pay a bit more electricity per year. This matters more on laptops. Also AMD has free alternatives to shadowplay and other Nvidia features.

[Remilia]

@Xs
Wow seems to be running quite equaly on all 4 cores :
http://i.imgur.com/u4Sy2I7.jpg

That's cause the OS is spreading it apart. Park all but one core you'll get the same FPS (provided literally nothing else is running).

[Deleted]

Ah... wut?

I know literally no one other than a very few people on this forum that lean towards Radeons. They have been rather systematically outclassed at almost every price point for about three hardware generations, if not on price/performance (which they sometimes manage to close the gap on), then in other areas (the R9 290X is a solid performer, but is a huge power hog, with almost double the TDP of an equivalent nVidia solution).

I haven't been able to, in good conscience, suggest a Radeon part for anything other than an integrated solution (for an HTPC, the APUs aren't... terrible) or at the very low end of what i'd consider "mainstream" (there are some Radeon cards that outperform the 750Ti for around the same price).

That's about it though. Any other bracket, and barring sales, ill always point someone to an nVidia part. Better price/performance, more performance/watt, and better integrated features (Shadowplay is pretty damn amazing).

A while back the only Nvidia card to get was the 970, at every other price bracket you had a better AMD counterpart. ( I don't consider the 980 a good price/performance card).

It probably changed a bit with the launch of the 960, and I think the 750ti came down in price. But still, for a 20 bucks over a 750ti you can get a 270 which will perform quite a bit better. And the 960 still sits in the 280(x) price range, and the 280x performs better than a 960 (this is pure performance). And the 290 sits at a good place as well.

[Aori]

Sadly, I used to make a lot of budget AMD rigs because they dominated that price point and even more with the APU's. Now I've started building a lot of G3258 based systems with bundled motherboards for $100 or less. Depending on whomevers needs the 750 GTX cards have been in been in the $80-100. The power efficiency and price/performance of these systems is just so much better than any AMD offering at the moment.

[Pyrophobia]

My apologies i meant to say "And most of ppl i know irl and are into PC hardware lean towards Radeon"

I am not rly into AMD vs Radeon business i am more interested if there is still any prefference from WoW towards the either of the 2.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_15691.html
Quote directly from it "NVIDIA and Blizzard are working together to ready the game for play on NVIDIA graphics processing units (GPUs), the preferred graphics hardware platform for World of Warcraft."

It is however a 2004 post and i am not sure if this is stil valid. I hope it is not so i can pick the best performance card i can afford at the given moment and not be limited to have of the options.


So the 2 GPU questions i have are:
1. Does WoW preffer Nvidia or AMD GPUs
2. Will an AMD CPU compliment an AMD GPU vs an Nvidia one or does it have no effect.

http://community.amd.com/community/a...md-gaming/blog
This post suggests that an AMD APU can be paired with an AMD GPU for a gain. Sadly the 8350 has no APU on it

[Noctifer616]

This post suggests that an AMD APU can be paired with an AMD GPU for a gain. Sadly the 8350 has no APU on it

An APU is an AMD chip that has both CPU and GPU on a single die (same goes for Intel chips, but they don't have stuff like HSA yet). A 8350 is a regular CPU, it doesn't have a GPU on the chip. There is no benefit from the GPU on the APU when you are running on a dedicated graphics cards (at least not yet, Mantle/DirectX 12 might change that).

[fixx]

1. Does WoW preffer Nvidia or AMD GPUs

Certain things used to be more buggy on AMD GPUs few years ago like crossfire could actually lower WoW framerates compared to single card while SLI would give slight boost but currently there isn't much bias in Blizzard games towards any GPU manufacturer.

2. Will an AMD CPU compliment an AMD GPU vs an Nvidia one or does it have no effect.

This post suggests that an AMD APU can be paired with an AMD GPU for a gain. Sadly the 8350 has no APU on it

At very low end of products its possible to use AMD APU in crossfire pair with AMD graphics card, but the performance benefit from that gets lost once you get to midrange of graphics cards. With the higher end AMD processors meant for AM3+ sockets there's no difference wether you use discrete GPU made by AMD or Nvidia.

[Pyrophobia]

The only thing i am finding is that there are some isues between nvidia GPU runining on AMD cpu systems. But everything else suggests that there are no benefits from pairing AMD CPU (non APU) with an AMD GPU.

The second thing i am finding is that some games do not utilise properly the Nvidia CUDA cores. I am wondering what is the situation with WoW and those Cuda cores.
That can potentialy mean AMD CPU is better for WoW alone

a forum post on here says wow doesn't support Cuda cores
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...th-Nvidia-CUDA
but it is 4 years old

[Noctifer616]

Does runing on 8 cores still mean it's single tread? No realy? I will get screens when i get at home and have the time to.

Next guy that says wow runs on single tread, please prove it, thanks.

WoW is running on more than one core, most modern games are. However, not all threads (tasks) are equally demanding on the CPU. The sound thread requires a lot less resources than the render thread. And that is the problem. You can split your game into as many thread you want and run them on as many cores you want, but if you can't split individual tasks into separate threads, demanding tasks will hit the cap of a single core.

AMD CPU's have more cores than Intel CPU's, but a single Intel core is a lot more powerful than an AMD core. This is where the problem starts for AMD CPU's in games. In games the most demanding tasks for the CPU is telling the GPU what to draw, this is called a draw call. The problem with draw calls in modern PC graphics API like DirectX and OpenGL is that they cannot be executed on multiple cores and the overhead for each draw call is massive. This means that in games like WoW, that are very heavy on draw calls (a ton of unique things on screen, characters, spells etc.) the CPU will hit that limit very fast. What then happens is that your CPU will max out that one core that executes draw calls and your GPU will have to wait on the CPU, resulting in GPU load way below 100%. This isn't a lot better on Intel either, I am running a i5 at 4.2Ghz and my 7970 is sitting at 60% load in Mythic raids.

When people say that a game requires a ton of single threaded performance, they don't mean that the game isn't using more than a single core, but that is maxing out a single core running the most demanding task and thus causing a CPU bottleneck.

Unfortunately the only way to fix this issue is by adding Mantle/DirectX 12 to the game, those two graphics API allow draw calls to be executed on multiple cores at once and the overhead on a single draw call is lower, resulting in CPU load being spread evenly across all cores and actually being lower. The problem is though that Mantle only runs on modern AMD GPU's and the first DirectX 12 games are supposed to come out by the end of the year. When WoW will implement either API is something we don't know.

Here are two articles talking about DX 12 and some CPU performance scaling running Star Swarm (a very draw call heavy stress test).

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8962/t...dia-star-swarm

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8968/s...pu-performance

The first article has Intel CPU's and the second has Intel and AMD CPU's.