What is your power consumption when running WoW at Ultra settings?

[Cyanotical]

@Synthaxx

I just asked what is your power consumption at ultra settings, and you are giving me the story of your life and then you are telling me that I suck, because my $1k CPU is able to play a 7 year-old game underclocked.

I really don't care what is the model and make of your CPU and sorry, I am quite happy with my QX 9650 which is able to run WoW at ultra settings underclocked.

the problem is not power consumption, is that you are making outrages claims, you are making the CPU equivalent to arguing that the earth is flat

the fact that your CPU is an extreme model, or cost $1k has little bearing on its performance, a $189 2500k or 3570k will match a 3960x in WoW, the $1k price tag is meant for esoteric value, not performance value

and WoW is not exactly a 7 year old game, the core engine is still around from warcraft3, but the rest is fairly modern, getting both a massive update 2 years ago and again today

yes core series CPU's can still run wow, but not on ultra, and nowhere near as good as a 2000 or 3000 I series CPU, as Synthaxx was trying to point out, you are not the first person to try and make this argument, if you are happy with your CPU, then that is fine, but don't try and convince others that it can match a latest gen CPU

[Milkshake86]

the problem is not power consumption, is that you are making outrages claims, you are making the CPU equivalent to arguing that the earth is flat

the fact that your CPU is an extreme model, or cost $1k has little bearing on its performance, a $189 2500k or 3570k will match a 3960x in WoW, the $1k price tag is meant for esoteric value, not performance value

and WoW is not exactly a 7 year old game, the core engine is still around from warcraft3, but the rest is fairly modern, getting both a massive update 2 years ago and again today

yes core series CPU's can still run wow, but not on ultra, and nowhere near as good as a 2000 or 3000 I series CPU, as Synthaxx was trying to point out, you are not the first person to try and make this argument, if you are happy with your CPU, then that is fine, but don't try and convince others that it can match a latest gen CPU

1024x768? W/ a 580?

[Cyanotical]

1024x768? W/ a 580?

the CPU still has to sift through the combat data, shadows and particle effects, the GPU pretty much only handles rendering, filtering and multisampling

turn off all the graphical effects handled by the cpu and yeah, a core2 can run at 60, but thats not really ultra is it?

[Vargur]

Software that analyzes the correct wattage doesn't exist.

You need specialized EXTERNAL equipment for that.

/thread moot

[Milkshake86]

the CPU still has to sift through the combat data, shadows and particle effects, the GPU pretty much only handles rendering, filtering and multisampling

turn off all the graphical effects handled by the cpu and yeah, a core2 can run at 60, but thats not really ultra is it?

I was grasping straws

[Deleted]

the problem is not power consumption, is that you are making outrages claims, you are making the CPU equivalent to arguing that the earth is flat

the fact that your CPU is an extreme model, or cost $1k has little bearing on its performance, a $189 2500k or 3570k will match a 3960x in WoW, the $1k price tag is meant for esoteric value, not performance value

and WoW is not exactly a 7 year old game, the core engine is still around from warcraft3, but the rest is fairly modern, getting both a massive update 2 years ago and again today

yes core series CPU's can still run wow, but not on ultra, and nowhere near as good as a 2000 or 3000 I series CPU, as Synthaxx was trying to point out, you are not the first person to try and make this argument, if you are happy with your CPU, then that is fine, but don't try and convince others that it can match a latest gen CPU

Sorry but that's not true. They can run WoW on ultra. I have a Yorkfield myself and just took two screenshots to prove it. Everything on Ultra except for shadow quality (high) at 1680x1050, 8x AA, 16x AF. First screenshot is Orgrimmar at 71 FPS, second screenshot is LFR Spine at 64 FPS.

http://i.imgur.com/zfpuR.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/oVQfg.jpg

Don't get me wrong, I'm not on OP's side. No way his system draws that little power under load. And a current gen CPU is certainly more capable in many applications. However, it is possible to run WoW on ultra with reliable fps with a Yorkfield processor.

[Ghâzh]

Sorry but that's not true. They can run WoW on ultra. I have a Yorkfield myself and just took two screenshots to prove it. Everything on Ultra except for shadow quality (high) at 1680x1050, 8x AA, 16x AF. First screenshot is Orgrimmar at 71 FPS, second screenshot is LFR Spine at 64 FPS.

http://i.imgur.com/zfpuR.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/oVQfg.jpg

Don't get me wrong, I'm not on OP's side. No way his system draws that little power under load. And a current gen CPU is certainly more capable in many applications. However, it is possible to run WoW on ultra with reliable fps with a Yorkfield processor.

You failed to grasp the concept of 'Ultra'.

Plus there's no way to tell how stressing your example of orgrimmar is as the population varies between servers. And the spine isn't the most taxing fight.

And seriously, are you trying to imply that a screenshot proves anything? (tip; your fps is a constantly moving number)

[Cyanotical]

Sorry but that's not true. They can run WoW on ultra. I have a Yorkfield myself and just took two screenshots to prove it. Everything on Ultra except for shadow quality (high) at 1680x1050, 8x AA, 16x AF. First screenshot is Orgrimmar at 71 FPS, second screenshot is LFR Spine at 64 FPS.

http://i.imgur.com/zfpuR.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/oVQfg.jpg

Don't get me wrong, I'm not on OP's side. No way his system draws that little power under load. And a current gen CPU is certainly more capable in many applications. However, it is possible to run WoW on ultra with reliable fps with a Yorkfield processor.

i bolded that part, because that seems to be the one thing everyone turns down, which means it's not "true ultra" personally i don't really see a big difference between ultra and high shadows, but if we are trying to compare, everyone needs to be on the same page, a good example is how i run my heaven benchmarks, i run it on the default settings with a res of 1920x1080, 2560x1440 is more accurate to my system, but that doesn't help someone trying to compare their benchmark to mine

when we talk about ultra, it's generally all settings at max with a resolution of 1920x1080, because it is the most common resolution, 1680x1050 is now considered low, along with that are repeatable situations, right now that is Ultrax25, because anyone can queue up for LFR Ultrax easily, it's very difficult to judge performance based on other factors such as being in a city, pvp, or taxi rides across twilight highlands, those are bad benchmarks for WoW

even ultrax has issues, was your raid full of human/orc DKs who have almost no spell animations and low polygons, or was it full of flashy worgen/goblin locks and priests, those will affect your performance, but until we get an artificial benchmark from blizz, LFR is about the best we can get

regardless, because with the new graphics updates today, we have to relearn most of what we know about how certain parts perform in WoW


but looking at the core2 series, it's not just a matter of being able to push to the higher framerates, but how well it runs everything as a whole

[Fierae]

I'm really sorry I have no idea how you are measuring that but it's completely wrong. I mean, it's not even close to being correct.

I don't even know where to being to be honest, but it seems most of it has been reiterated several times by people in the thread so it hardly seems worth going over it, you just aren't seeing what's being put right in front of you.