Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Warchief skannerz22's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bunnings Warehouse
    Posts
    2,050
    Quote Originally Posted by lactosefree View Post
    WoW is single thread optimized game with an engine based on 10+ old technology, and is very dependent on the processor itself. As others have said, top of the line cards do not have as much impact as you would expect. This is why people can run wow still on lower level processors.
    i forgot/didn't know about it being cpu heavy
    i knew it was bad with multicores
    -Proffesional Necromancer-

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    i'm planning to get threadripper
    i currently got i7 4930k doing 4.25ghz cinebench scores in a computer group on facebook shows my cpu was doing better than stock 7700k's

    some people attacked me for my score and called me names and stuff they were just salty

    i know wow is bad at multicores that's probably the reason
    Hyper-threading or threads in general don't affect gaming performance strictly speaking, hence getting Threadripper won't really help you much on that front.
    "There is no end to education. It is not that you read a book, pass an examination, and finish with education. The whole of life, from the moment you are born to the moment you die, is a process of learning." by Jiddu Krishnamurti, Philosopher and Educator

  3. #23
    Dreadlord Enfilade's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    953
    I hope you didn't buy a 1080Ti and just play WoW. If so... LOL.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    i'm planning to get threadripper
    i currently got i7 4930k doing 4.25ghz cinebench scores in a computer group on facebook shows my cpu was doing better than stock 7700k's

    some people attacked me for my score and called me names and stuff they were just salty

    i know wow is bad at multicores that's probably the reason
    there may still be console commands to adjust them though

  5. #25
    Warchief skannerz22's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bunnings Warehouse
    Posts
    2,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Heffladin View Post
    Its just that TR is freakin terrible price/performance for gaming. So unless it's for proffessional use I really fail to see the point.
    it's how many years you get out of threadripper before it becomes obsolete is what matters

    i9 being older than threadripper it's better to get threadripper when it has identical performance
    i9 is slightly better for games depending on the game and it's fully optimised
    tr is better for non-gaming like launching chrome the tiny percentage below i9 for games is merely due to it's new and not optimised

    my plan is that tr can be optimised better in the future to remove i9 being a tiny bit better
    -Proffesional Necromancer-

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    i forgot/didn't know about it being cpu heavy
    i knew it was bad with multicores
    I had gtx980 at like 20% load on raid settings, 1080ti is asleep with nothing to do while waiting on the fastest CPU's out there

  7. #27
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    17,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Nasuuna View Post
    there may still be console commands to adjust them though
    While not untrue, people have been saying that for years, and it never happened.

    It might happen still, but again.. If it does, it'll happen years from now where another upgrade will be warranted anyway.

    Buying based off console architecture is always a bad idea.
    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

  8. #28
    Warchief skannerz22's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bunnings Warehouse
    Posts
    2,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Enfilade View Post
    I hope you didn't buy a 1080Ti and just play WoW. If so... LOL.
    no........................

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Svisalith View Post
    I had gtx980 at like 20% load on raid settings, 1080ti is asleep with nothing to do while waiting on the fastest CPU's out there
    my 770 gtx was doing close to or sometimes better than the 970 in wow
    some people complained of only 40-60 fps on wow in dalaran while others said about 120 so..
    770 gtx was doing 60-90
    1080ti is doing like 90 average in dalaran
    so they're right about the cpu thing
    my cpu must of been better than theirs when they had the 970
    -Proffesional Necromancer-

  9. #29
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    i'm planning to get threadripper
    i currently got i7 4930k doing 4.25ghz cinebench scores in a computer group on facebook shows my cpu was doing better than stock 7700k's

    some people attacked me for my score and called me names and stuff they were just salty

    i know wow is bad at multicores that's probably the reason
    Threadripper won't help. AMD CPUs are pretty bad in WoW - and WoW supports only 4c.

    If you want to maximize WoW performance, go for 4c/8t maxed single core power. Which is delivered by Intel.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    no........................

    - - - Updated - - -



    my 770 gtx was doing close to or sometimes better than the 970 in wow
    some people complained of only 40-60 fps on wow in dalaran
    770 gtx was doing 60-90

    so they're right about the cpu thing
    my cpu must of been better than theirs when they had the 970
    It's very easy to make WoW run at 100+fps with some graphics settings down (shadows) even with very weak GPU's but the CPU will stop it from happening in high stress areas

    And yeah, all talking about threadripper/i9.. if you're upgrading with WoW as a focus then it's kaby lake or wait for coffee lake (next month?) all the way.

  11. #31
    Warchief skannerz22's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bunnings Warehouse
    Posts
    2,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Nasuuna View Post
    there may still be console commands to adjust them though
    i wouldn't bother my cpu is 4 years old
    it was second best (3% under 4940k) back then but not anymore
    you can't even find 4940k anymore i probably should of bought it when it was available but it had costed like $200 more than the 4930k
    -Proffesional Necromancer-

  12. #32
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    i'm planning to get threadripper
    not worth it for wow alone....

  13. #33
    Warchief skannerz22's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bunnings Warehouse
    Posts
    2,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Svisalith View Post
    It's very easy to make WoW run at 100+fps with some graphics settings down (shadows) even with very weak GPU's but the CPU will stop it from happening in high stress areas

    And yeah, all talking about threadripper/i9.. if you're upgrading with WoW as a focus then it's kaby lake or wait for coffee lake (next month?) all the way.
    coffee is garbage

    i'm getting TR and wait for optimisation
    -Proffesional Necromancer-

  14. #34
    Please wait Temp name's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Under construction
    Posts
    14,631
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    it's how many years you get out of threadripper before it becomes obsolete is what matters

    i9 being older than threadripper it's better to get threadripper when it has identical performance
    i9 is slightly better for games depending on the game and it's fully optimised
    tr is better for non-gaming like launching chrome the tiny percentage below i9 for games is merely due to it's new and not optimised

    my plan is that tr can be optimised better in the future to remove i9 being a tiny bit better
    Don't buy i9's either. They're a poorly thought out response to Threadripper. Stick with i5-i7 or Ryzen5-7 if you want good ST performance

  15. #35
    Warchief skannerz22's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bunnings Warehouse
    Posts
    2,050
    EVERYTHING MAXED ON ULTRA all settings max
    it peaked to 94 fps with average of 70-80 ish with a low of 64

    everything low and VSYC IS NOT ON
    it seems to of hit an FPS cap of 100 wow fuck you blizzard it refuses to go lower or higher than 100

    in stormwind harbour flying around

    this is not what it used to be

    i remember low settings getting as high as 280 in arena and 420 in a spot in dalaran tower with 770 gtx

    blizzard has officially throttled the game

    everything ultra shadows turned off view distance 7

    mage tower is showing 94-100 never going above 100

    blizzard has clearly throttled the game
    -Proffesional Necromancer-

  16. #36
    Please wait Temp name's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Under construction
    Posts
    14,631
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    EVERYTHING MAXED ON ULTRA all settings max
    it peaked to 94 fps with average of 70-80 ish with a low of 64

    everything low and VSYC IS NOT ON
    it seems to of hit an FPS cap of 100 wow fuck you blizzard it refuses to go lower or higher than 100

    in stormwind harbour flying around

    this is not what it used to be

    i remember low settings getting as high as 280 in arena and 420 in a spot in dalaran tower with 770 gtx

    blizzard has officially throttled the game

    everything ultra shadows turned off view distance 7

    mage tower is showing 94-100 never going above 100

    blizzard has clearly throttled the game
    Nah, it's just heavier on CPU now than it was before for whatever reason.

  17. #37
    Bloodsail Admiral Animalhouse's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Champagne Supernova
    Posts
    1,042
    Personally I have 4690k i5 OC'ed to 4.4gz air-cooled with an evo 212.
    16 gb RAM at 1866mhz using 2x8gb, (using 2 DIMM is better than 4) with cas10 latency.
    MSI GTX 970 4gb (3.5 >.<) with no OC atm.

    I play on ultra and only drop to low 40's in 25 man raids and certain areas (I attribute this to a variety of factors as it is not always obvious why FPS drops).

    I think the best thing you can do at this time is OC and evaluate your RAM choice and configuration.
    “We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams.”

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    coffee is garbage

    i'm getting TR and wait for optimisation
    Why would a faster 7700k with two extra cores be garbage?

    You'll be waiting a very long time for the WoW engine to meaningfully scale to 14+ threads.

  19. #39
    Warchief skannerz22's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bunnings Warehouse
    Posts
    2,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Mehman View Post
    Nah, it's just heavier on CPU now than it was before for whatever reason.
    you're not understand what i said
    it did not go over 100
    meaning there was not even a 101 at low/off
    it's been capped at 100 internally

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Svisalith View Post
    Why would a faster 7700k with two extra cores be garbage?

    You'll be waiting a very long time for the WoW engine to meaningfully scale to 14+ threads.
    i'm just saying what my cinebench score was showing compared to 7700 and 7700k users had with cinebench in a facebook group

    theirs were around 900
    mine was 1207

    if mine wasn't overclocked it would be like 700-800 stock on cinebench

  20. #40
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    17,222
    Im just saying, it doesn't really matter what games you play, wow or not.. Threadripper is going to be a waste of money over what you have now,. Just about anything will be, for several years yet
    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

Posting Permissions

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