Originally posted by jusomdude
Doesn't look like they tested WvW which is where the biggest issues will arise. I've gotten as low as 10 fps in stonemist castle fights which is completely unplayable.

The trouble with testing WvWvW is that it's not repeatable.  If there are 20 players in the scene when you test one card, and then 30 when you test another, the numbers aren't comparable.  Given the choice between measuring things that are easy to measure, and measuring what you actually want to know, they're likely to choose the former.

Runs fine for me in the triple monitor EyeFinity portrait resolution of 3240x1920.  (how's that for a fun string of buzzwords)

Also, Tom's Hardware therefore Intel.  They have a history of Intel coming out on top irrespective of the rest of the "review".  I actually stopped using their website around two years ago or so, and I'm not surprised by the pot-shot that they take at the AMD hardware on the linked page.

edit: DxDiag: http://pastebin.com/HNkR63PX

So they test a 220€ intel CPI against AMD's 150€ CPU. Seems legit.

By the way a year and a half back when I bought this machine I chose AMD's 1055T over i5. It outperformed it in practicaly all the tests and it was cheaper. And I'm also not sorry for making that choice, since all the games ran great. I'm runing GW2 with 60fps on average... 1055T and 1090T were great CPUs. However, I don't know about these latest models. And for now, I don't really care much :)

Not sure what all the fuss is about. I'm running on a quad core 965 BE OC'd to 3.8 gHz with crossfired 6870's OCd to 975 (proc) & 1250 (Memory).

Three monitor Eyefinity setup 5965X1080 and getting ~65-70 FPS in open world and ~ 45 FPS in WvWvW... not the smoothest, but a far cry better performance than I was getting in SW:TOR.

Right now I have everything set to max (except reflections... kills framerates) and am perfectly happy with the performance.

Originally posted by alilsneaky

Originally posted by Robsolf

 

That's wierd... it's been the smoothest running game I've played in recent history.

I'm running a 9850 (2.5x4) at stock clock

8 gigs at 800 mhz

ATI  5770  OC'd quite a bit, can't remember the numbers, though.

1080P all settings cranked, but no AA

I'm getting solid FPS; wouldn't be surprised if it never dipped below 15, and hovers +30.

 

What the what?

So under 30 fps (as low as 15 holy cow) is smooth to you?

 

Thank god you added some numbers to your statement.

You misunderstand. Majority of the time its at 30+ fps.

Those specs are similar to my laptops.  Mine is at 30-50 fps and dips at around 15 fps when too much loading happens (no ssd).  Its a 5870m overclocked to desktop 5770 specs and i7 720 (1.8-2.4 ghz) and its running pretty smooth.

---

Originally posted by Z3R01
 

AMD Phenom IIx6 1100t Black (4.0 OC'd), AMD HD6970 2gig, 16gb Ram, 120g SSD+ 2tb HDDx2, Win7 Pro.

GW2 60fps Lock with Vsync on all the time except in massive WvWvW zerg where i can see a drop to 40-45.

 

---

I'm running a similar system but with a Nvidia GTX 560 TI and only 8gb of Ram and I am seeing the same performance.

The game will make use of as many cores as you can toss at it. Across all 6 corse its averaging between 50-75% cpu load with each core being actively used.

At that point I imagine its more of other factors that are causing cpu loss other then the cpu. Graphics Card Bandwidth, SSD / HD access, ect.

AMD Athlon X2 5600+, Radeon HD 5770, WinXP 32 bit, 4GB DDR2

Crusing on 15 FPS in open space, it jump up to 35-40 when in a cave, or a place where you can't look far away into distance. That's on auto-detect settings (medium shader, low shadows, low LoD, low animations... that's all I remember), 1920x1080, game looks great.

The fun part is I can change settings to lowest, disable everything, lower resolution, and I won't gain a single FPS. Obvious bottleneck is obvious :P

I didn't try the WvW yet, I don't know if I dare...

Anyway, AMD has better price/performance ratio than Intel.

---

Originally posted by alilsneaky
What the what?

So under 30 fps (as low as 15 holy cow) is smooth to you?

 Thank god you added some numbers to your statement.

---

Most people don't complain that TV and Movies aren't smooth - they run around 30/24FPS. It's not so much about the actual frame rate as it is that most people just perceive when/how often the frame rate changes. It's especially bad with VSync On, as you get the 50% penalty (but for some people, like me, playing with VSync off isn't an option because tearing is more distracting)

Just to give my experience with this, I have:

Phenom II x6 1100T

(2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600

MSI N460GTX CYCLONE 1GD5/OC

In Lion's Arch, I get about 27-30 fps on high settings, as compared to 60 in outdoor areas most of the time.  Watching my cpu core usage, combined usage of all 6 cores it doesn't go over 50%.  At the same time my gpu usage is at about 40% with half of it's ram used.  So I'm not real sure what's going on with only getting 27-30 fps.  Doesn't make alot of sense.

Originally posted by mistafist

In Lion's Arch, I get about 27-30 fps on high settings, as compared to 60 in outdoor areas most of the time.  Watching my cpu core usage, combined usage of all 6 cores it doesn't go over 50%.  At the same time my gpu usage is at about 40% with half of it's ram used.  So I'm not real sure what's going on with only getting 27-30 fps.  Doesn't make alot of sense.

You're processor bound, which is why the video card is only at 40% usage, but the game isn't able to put more than three cores to good use, which is why the processor usage stays below 50%.

Originally posted by Quizzical

But it is starting to look like GW2 has a rather bad case of badly-coded syndrome.  If an FX-8150 or a Phenom II X6 1100T can't really run the game that well even at minimum settings, the problem isn't the processors.  The problem is the game.

AFAIK the issue is that GW2 (and certain other recent MMO releases *cough SWTOR cough*) are DX9 based.  I think arenanet have mentioned they may build a DX11 renderer which should allow them to offload more work from the CPU onto the GPU.

I am currenty running an FX-8120 with 8 GB RAM, an SSD, and an old ATI 6670 video card and I have no issues at all.  The game loads within seconds, I get no lag or slowdown at all even in extremely populated areas with effects going off everywhere.  I haven't checked my framerates yet because it has been so smooth that I haven't even thought about it.

I'm managing a cybercafe where we have:

Intel I5 2400

AMD Phenom II x4 965BE

AMD FX-6100

Some examples of the games I play and have tested:

League of Legends has the highest FPS (in benchmark mode) on FX-6100, then I5 2400, and finally Phenom II

War Thunder Closed Beta (brilliant game, I must add) works the best on Phenom II and NVIDIA GTX460! (the rest of them have Radeon 6870)

Some other games, like Blur, also work better on AMD.

But other than that, yes, majority of games work better on Intel. Still, I would rather buy AMD when on limited budget (and I'm always on a limited budget :P)

Originally posted by dumbo11

Originally posted by Quizzical

But it is starting to look like GW2 has a rather bad case of badly-coded syndrome.  If an FX-8150 or a Phenom II X6 1100T can't really run the game that well even at minimum settings, the problem isn't the processors.  The problem is the game.

AFAIK the issue is that GW2 (and certain other recent MMO releases *cough SWTOR cough*) are DX9 based.  I think arenanet have mentioned they may build a DX11 renderer which should allow them to offload more work from the CPU onto the GPU.

It's not that simple.  Yes, DirectX 11 does let you offload some work to the GPU that DirectX 9.0c would have forced you to do on the processor.  But it only helps if you use the DirectX 11 features that do this, and that would mean recoding much of the game from scratch, not just changing a few API calls.  Yes, on an infinite budget, ArenaNet would do this.  But if they were going to, it's much easier to do so when you're writing your game engine in the first place than to try to make very fundamental changes that you know are going to break a ton of things after release.

I have my i5 2500k set to exactly 4.0Ghz...and a GTX 670 2GB Video Card.

I am loving it!! :)