Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Claw of Jormag - R5 1600X & RX 470


Recommended Posts

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:(Which, incidentally, is where the meltdown and specter vulnerabilities came from: Intel, and AMD, gave up security for performance, cutting some corners to be able to deal with the fact that memory is slooow, to deliver better performance per cycle.)I disabled Spectre and Meltdown fixes, I do not care about these security flaws at all. Performance > Security

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@Malediktus.9250 said:Interesting, you get roughly 1/3rd of the FPS I have with my Intel build. You could download a program like GPU-Z or MSI afterburner to monitor the GPU useage.But of course FX was junk, Ryzen can do about 50% more instructions per cycle than it.For reference: I am using i7-8700k@5GHz @ 4.8GHz Cache, 4266-17-17-17-28 RAM with hand tuned subtimings and a 1080ti@2GHz and 6200 MHz effective memory speedI wonder how the new generation of Ryzen compares to this. Benchmarks show that AMD managed to improve the memory and cache latencies by quite a good margin for a refresh.

The 8700K does score 28% higher on single core functions. As for the Ryzen 2600X and the X470 MBs they fixed many issues with RAM speeds and chip OCing. My CPU tends to fail if I try to OC it, which I think is in part due to the Gen1 drawbacks. The Gen2s also OC across all cores with Turbo vs only 2 threads as the Gen1s do.

Which is irrelevant for gw2. No desktop processor made in the last two years lacks the single core performance necessary for gw2. It's also worth noting that the 28% number requires some seriously unrealistic workloads, on any typical workload gw2 included the 2700X and the 8700k are going to be trading blows. A 8700k can pull ahead due to having higher overlocking headroom, but getting that headroom requires investing some $$$$ on cooling and pricy motherboards. (pretty much every value priced z370 motherboards have VRMs made out of potatoes, and it's debatable if any z370 motherboard qualifies as "value" anyways.)

O_o I'm ... going to have to disagree with you there, but that's OK, because so do the ANet developers. Nothing has a shortfall of CPU power to be able to
play
GW2, yes, but ... none of 'em gonna deliver a nice, steady 144 FPS, right?

The heck do you want 144 FPS in a mmorpg for? This isn't a twitch shooter where there is a gain to pushing 100+ FPS.

@Malediktus.9250 said:

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:(Which, incidentally, is where the meltdown and specter vulnerabilities came from: Intel, and AMD, gave up security for performance, cutting some corners to be able to deal with the fact that memory is slooow, to deliver better performance per cycle.)I disabled Spectre and Meltdown fixes, I do not care about these security flaws at all. Performance > Security

Unless your computer happens to double as a server that runs lots of VMs, the performance hit of the meltdown/spectre fixes is negligible to the point of being undetectable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Crinn.7864 said:

@Malediktus.9250 said:Interesting, you get roughly 1/3rd of the FPS I have with my Intel build. You could download a program like GPU-Z or MSI afterburner to monitor the GPU useage.But of course FX was junk, Ryzen can do about 50% more instructions per cycle than it.For reference: I am using i7-8700k@5GHz @ 4.8GHz Cache, 4266-17-17-17-28 RAM with hand tuned subtimings and a 1080ti@2GHz and 6200 MHz effective memory speedI wonder how the new generation of Ryzen compares to this. Benchmarks show that AMD managed to improve the memory and cache latencies by quite a good margin for a refresh.

The 8700K does score 28% higher on single core functions. As for the Ryzen 2600X and the X470 MBs they fixed many issues with RAM speeds and chip OCing. My CPU tends to fail if I try to OC it, which I think is in part due to the Gen1 drawbacks. The Gen2s also OC across all cores with Turbo vs only 2 threads as the Gen1s do.

Which is irrelevant for gw2. No desktop processor made in the last two years lacks the single core performance necessary for gw2. It's also worth noting that the 28% number requires some seriously unrealistic workloads, on any typical workload gw2 included the 2700X and the 8700k are going to be trading blows. A 8700k can pull ahead due to having higher overlocking headroom, but getting that headroom requires investing some $$$$ on cooling and pricy motherboards. (pretty much every value priced z370 motherboards have VRMs made out of potatoes, and it's debatable if any z370 motherboard qualifies as "value" anyways.)

O_o I'm ... going to have to disagree with you there, but that's OK, because so do the ANet developers. Nothing has a shortfall of CPU power to be able to
play
GW2, yes, but ... none of 'em gonna deliver a nice, steady 144 FPS, right?

The heck do you want 144 FPS in a mmorpg for? This isn't a twitch shooter where there is a gain to pushing 100+ FPS.

OK. I'll accept that for the sake of the argument. Which CPU and GPU combination will deliver a stable 100 FPS in GW2? Heck, which will deliver 60 FPS?

Point being this: you are arguing that I'm wrong, when we are talking about entirely different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Crinn.7864 said:

@Malediktus.9250 said:Interesting, you get roughly 1/3rd of the FPS I have with my Intel build. You could download a program like GPU-Z or MSI afterburner to monitor the GPU useage.But of course FX was junk, Ryzen can do about 50% more instructions per cycle than it.For reference: I am using i7-8700k@5GHz @ 4.8GHz Cache, 4266-17-17-17-28 RAM with hand tuned subtimings and a 1080ti@2GHz and 6200 MHz effective memory speedI wonder how the new generation of Ryzen compares to this. Benchmarks show that AMD managed to improve the memory and cache latencies by quite a good margin for a refresh.

The 8700K does score 28% higher on single core functions. As for the Ryzen 2600X and the X470 MBs they fixed many issues with RAM speeds and chip OCing. My CPU tends to fail if I try to OC it, which I think is in part due to the Gen1 drawbacks. The Gen2s also OC across all cores with Turbo vs only 2 threads as the Gen1s do.

Which is irrelevant for gw2. No desktop processor made in the last two years lacks the single core performance necessary for gw2. It's also worth noting that the 28% number requires some seriously unrealistic workloads, on any typical workload gw2 included the 2700X and the 8700k are going to be trading blows. A 8700k can pull ahead due to having higher overlocking headroom, but getting that headroom requires investing some $$$$ on cooling and pricy motherboards. (pretty much every value priced z370 motherboards have VRMs made out of potatoes, and it's debatable if any z370 motherboard qualifies as "value" anyways.)

O_o I'm ... going to have to disagree with you there, but that's OK, because so do the ANet developers. Nothing has a shortfall of CPU power to be able to
play
GW2, yes, but ... none of 'em gonna deliver a nice, steady 144 FPS, right?

The heck do you want 144 FPS in a mmorpg for? This isn't a twitch shooter where there is a gain to pushing 100+ FPS.

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:(Which, incidentally, is where the meltdown and specter vulnerabilities came from: Intel, and AMD, gave up security for performance, cutting some corners to be able to deal with the fact that memory is slooow, to deliver better performance per cycle.)I disabled Spectre and Meltdown fixes, I do not care about these security flaws at all. Performance > Security

Unless your computer happens to double as a server that runs lots of VMs, the performance hit of the meltdown/spectre fixes is negligible to the point of being undetectable.

It has a measureable effect on the latencies in the benchmark, so it will definitely cause a fps loss. Benchmarking how much fps loss you get is the hard part since it is an online game.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@Malediktus.9250 said:Interesting, you get roughly 1/3rd of the FPS I have with my Intel build. You could download a program like GPU-Z or MSI afterburner to monitor the GPU useage.But of course FX was junk, Ryzen can do about 50% more instructions per cycle than it.For reference: I am using i7-8700k@5GHz @ 4.8GHz Cache, 4266-17-17-17-28 RAM with hand tuned subtimings and a 1080ti@2GHz and 6200 MHz effective memory speedI wonder how the new generation of Ryzen compares to this. Benchmarks show that AMD managed to improve the memory and cache latencies by quite a good margin for a refresh.

The 8700K does score 28% higher on single core functions. As for the Ryzen 2600X and the X470 MBs they fixed many issues with RAM speeds and chip OCing. My CPU tends to fail if I try to OC it, which I think is in part due to the Gen1 drawbacks. The Gen2s also OC across all cores with Turbo vs only 2 threads as the Gen1s do.

Which is irrelevant for gw2. No desktop processor made in the last two years lacks the single core performance necessary for gw2. It's also worth noting that the 28% number requires some seriously unrealistic workloads, on any typical workload gw2 included the 2700X and the 8700k are going to be trading blows. A 8700k can pull ahead due to having higher overlocking headroom, but getting that headroom requires investing some $$$$ on cooling and pricy motherboards. (pretty much every value priced z370 motherboards have VRMs made out of potatoes, and it's debatable if any z370 motherboard qualifies as "value" anyways.)

O_o I'm ... going to have to disagree with you there, but that's OK, because so do the ANet developers. Nothing has a shortfall of CPU power to be able to
play
GW2, yes, but ... none of 'em gonna deliver a nice, steady 144 FPS, right?

The heck do you want 144 FPS in a mmorpg for? This isn't a twitch shooter where there is a gain to pushing 100+ FPS.

OK. I'll accept that for the sake of the argument. Which CPU and GPU combination will deliver a stable 100 FPS in GW2? Heck, which will deliver 60 FPS?

Point being this: you are arguing that I'm wrong, when we are talking about entirely different things.

I get 90 to 100 fps in sPvP with a 7700k + 1060 6gb, with 2400 MHz ram at 14 CAS. I haven't done PvE or WvW since I built the rig 6 months ago, so I honestly have no idea what it would look like there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Crinn.7864 said:

@Malediktus.9250 said:Interesting, you get roughly 1/3rd of the FPS I have with my Intel build. You could download a program like GPU-Z or MSI afterburner to monitor the GPU useage.But of course FX was junk, Ryzen can do about 50% more instructions per cycle than it.For reference: I am using i7-8700k@5GHz @ 4.8GHz Cache, 4266-17-17-17-28 RAM with hand tuned subtimings and a 1080ti@2GHz and 6200 MHz effective memory speedI wonder how the new generation of Ryzen compares to this. Benchmarks show that AMD managed to improve the memory and cache latencies by quite a good margin for a refresh.

The 8700K does score 28% higher on single core functions. As for the Ryzen 2600X and the X470 MBs they fixed many issues with RAM speeds and chip OCing. My CPU tends to fail if I try to OC it, which I think is in part due to the Gen1 drawbacks. The Gen2s also OC across all cores with Turbo vs only 2 threads as the Gen1s do.

Which is irrelevant for gw2. No desktop processor made in the last two years lacks the single core performance necessary for gw2. It's also worth noting that the 28% number requires some seriously unrealistic workloads, on any typical workload gw2 included the 2700X and the 8700k are going to be trading blows. A 8700k can pull ahead due to having higher overlocking headroom, but getting that headroom requires investing some $$$$ on cooling and pricy motherboards. (pretty much every value priced z370 motherboards have VRMs made out of potatoes, and it's debatable if any z370 motherboard qualifies as "value" anyways.)

O_o I'm ... going to have to disagree with you there, but that's OK, because so do the ANet developers. Nothing has a shortfall of CPU power to be able to
play
GW2, yes, but ... none of 'em gonna deliver a nice, steady 144 FPS, right?

The heck do you want 144 FPS in a mmorpg for? This isn't a twitch shooter where there is a gain to pushing 100+ FPS.

That is easy to answer. 60 Hz looks like a slide show once you experienced 165Hz. Especially for fast moving scenes such as going super speed with a griffon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...