Star Wars: The Old Republic: PC Performance, Benchmarked

[Headspin_69]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Once again Headspin, I never said the 955 is useless or a bad budget choice. I said it's bottlenecked compared to the 2500K in many newer game titles at high detail settings, in actual real-world scenarios (not synthetic ones) for which I provided benchmarks which you are unable to acknowledge due to your prejudices.You're too stubborn to understand or acknowledge that, stubbornness doesn't make you right. It just makes you pitiable.[/citation]
Intel = business class/professional/Servers/work productivity like 3DCad, AutoCad, CGI rendering etc, AMD is solid for playing games/entertainment and only you seem to think that it cant LOL or does a very poor job at it and once again if you want to play games be loyal to your wallet and choose AMD/Radeon and spend all the savings on games etc. Once again show me some actual real world game plays besides the three Cherry picked games that played terrible on Intel platform. Games that actually work like they are supposed to use very little CPU power and 100% GPU power when they were coded proper however the broken console ports tend to tax the CPU. Notice how MMOS in general and SWTOR plays decent on even modest PC hardware LOL that's because MMOs are mostly PC exclusive and do not have the pitfalls and coding logistical bugs that come with porting for consoles so blame consoles for making you think you need a $1000 INTEL cpu to play a game LOL.

 

[cleeve]

Intel = business class/professional/Servers/work productivity like 3DCad, AutoCad, CGI rendering etc, AMD is solid for playing games/entertainment and only you seem to think that it cant.

I never said it can't, except in modern titles at high settings.

You can rant without evidence ad infinitum, but that doesn't make the 955 any faster in the games it can't handle. :lol:

you think you need a $1000 INTEL cpu to play a game

Actually, the i5-2500K is about $220, and you only *need* it to play a game if you want smooth frame rates where the Phenom II chokes... Hahaha.

 

[Headspin_69]

I never said it can't, except in modern titles at high settings.

You can rant without evidence ad infinitum, but that doesn't make the 955 any faster in the games it can't handle. :lol:



Actually, the i5-2500K is about $220, and you only *need* it to play a game if you want smooth frame rates where the Phenom II chokes... Hahaha.

DeusX Human revo plays perfectly on a light OCed 955 and the was one of your cherry picked games and another game that plays well on AMD platform that is Brand new which you say AMD cant play well and is very demanding is BF3 I will send you a link for real time game play and on 100% AMD/RADEON platform. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCIWsc9ZoWY

 

[cleeve]

one of your cherry picked games

Of course I picked the games that the Phenom II can't hack, I picked them on purpose because they show that in certain instances the Phenom II can't bring smooth frame rates to the table.

If you want to call that cherry picking be my guest, but it doesn't help phenom II owners who want to play those games.

An i5-2500K will help them, though. And as you pointed out, $1000 is too much... it's only $220! :lol:

I appreciate your patronage.

 

[Headspin_69]

Of course I picked the games that the Phenom II can't hack, I picked them on purpose because they show that in certain instances the Phenom II can't bring smooth frame rates to the table.

If you want to call that cherry picking be my guest, but it doesn't help phenom II owners who want to play those games.

An i5-2500K will help them, though. And as you pointed out, $1000 is too much... it's only $220! :lol:

I appreciate your patronage.

"Of course I picked the games that the Phenom II can't hack, I picked them on purpose because they show that in certain instances the Phenom II can't bring smooth frame rates to the table." Then your point is moot because even INTEL could not hack it and under 30fps is considered not hackin it and INTEL was most defiantly not hackin it in any of the games you presented DeusX being the exception for both AMD and INTEL.


"If you want to call that cherry picking be my guest, but it doesn't help phenom II owners who want to play those games." touche to INTEL players that want to play those games.

 

[cleeve]

Then your point is moot because even INTEL could not hack it and under 30fps... something something Deus Ex

I'm not sure why you're trying as hard as you can to make yourself look ridiculous, but OK. I'll play along.

Let's look at Deus Ex:

try to recall that I supplied that link when you were telling people that "The C2DUO E8400 still maxes out any game today" (you seem to have backed off that claim, I wonder why? Oh yeah, it's completely ludicrous).

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/deus-ex-human-revolution-performance-benchmark,3012-7.html

Core i5-2500K at 3 GHz: 75 FPS min
Phenom II X4 @ 3 GHz: 55 FPS min
Phenom II X4 @ 3 GHz: 25 FPS min

In this, obviously a dual core *does* cause a bottleneck. I never said the Phenom II X4 is bad in this game, although the i5-2500K is quite obviously superior and plays much, much smoother.

Now if you're saying that in every game the Phenom II X4 can't hack, the i5-2500K can't hack it either? Let's check out that dubious claim!

StarCraft 2:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/best-gaming-cpu-core-i3-2100-phenom-ii-x6-1075t,review-32128-8.html

The Phenom II X4 955 gets 10 min FPS and 28.5 average, not even breaking 30 FPS.
The i5-2400 gets 23 min/44.9 avg. That's not even the 2500K, and it absolutely humiliates the 955 in a very real, obvious way during gameplay when there are a significant number of units. Your argument falls apart.

When the going gets tough, the Phenom II has a tough time, and the i5-2500K keeps on going. :lol:

 

[Headspin_69]

I'm not sure why you're trying as hard as you can to make yourself look ridiculous, but OK. I'll play along.

Let's look at Deus Ex:

try to recall that I supplied that link when you were telling people that "The C2DUO E8400 still maxes out any game today" (you seem to have backed off that claim, I wonder why? Oh yeah, it's completely ludicrous).

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/deus-ex-human-revolution-performance-benchmark,3012-7.html

Core i5-2500K at 3 GHz: 75 FPS min
Phenom II X4 @ 3 GHz: 55 FPS min
Phenom II X4 @ 3 GHz: 25 FPS min

In this, obviously a dual core *does* cause a bottleneck. I never said the Phenom II X4 is bad in this game, although the i5-2500K is quite obviously superior and plays much, much smoother.

Now if you're saying that in every game the Phenom II X4 can't hack, the i5-2500K can't hack it either? Let's check out that dubious claim!

StarCraft 2:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/best-gaming-cpu-core-i3-2100-phenom-ii-x6-1075t,review-32128-8.html

The Phenom II X4 955 gets 10 min FPS and 28.5 average, not even breaking 30 FPS.
The i5-2400 gets 23 min/44.9 avg. That's not even the 2500K, and it absolutely humiliates the 955 in a very real, obvious way during gameplay when there are a significant number of units. Your argument falls apart.

When the going gets tough, the Phenom II has a tough time, and the i5-2500K keeps on going. :lol:

I have over 80hrs in Skyrim with tons of mods and it plays great well as great as it gets for a crappy console ported game like AKA terribly coded Skyrim and DeusX Revo I played at 60fps and it never dropped on my overclocked x4 B55 @ 3.6ghz so you can scratch you list down to two games that don't play well and last I checked there are over 1000 games on Steam and Phenom II plays them all just great.You my want to lighten up on what can be played and what cant be played because I own a Phenom II x4 and x2 and they play any game and most they play like a champ GPU pending of course lol.

 

[Headspin_69]

I'm not sure why you're trying as hard as you can to make yourself look ridiculous, but OK. I'll play along.

Let's look at Deus Ex:

try to recall that I supplied that link when you were telling people that "The C2DUO E8400 still maxes out any game today" (you seem to have backed off that claim, I wonder why? Oh yeah, it's completely ludicrous).

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/deus-ex-human-revolution-performance-benchmark,3012-7.html

Core i5-2500K at 3 GHz: 75 FPS min
Phenom II X4 @ 3 GHz: 55 FPS min
Phenom II X4 @ 3 GHz: 25 FPS min

In this, obviously a dual core *does* cause a bottleneck. I never said the Phenom II X4 is bad in this game, although the i5-2500K is quite obviously superior and plays much, much smoother.

Now if you're saying that in every game the Phenom II X4 can't hack, the i5-2500K can't hack it either? Let's check out that dubious claim!

StarCraft 2:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/best-gaming-cpu-core-i3-2100-phenom-ii-x6-1075t,review-32128-8.html

The Phenom II X4 955 gets 10 min FPS and 28.5 average, not even breaking 30 FPS.
The i5-2400 gets 23 min/44.9 avg. That's not even the 2500K, and it absolutely humiliates the 955 in a very real, obvious way during gameplay when there are a significant number of units. Your argument falls apart.

When the going gets tough, the Phenom II has a tough time, and the i5-2500K keeps on going. :lol:

Plus how many Phenom II x4 chips are stock 3.0ghz oh ya thats right the AM2+ Phenom II x4 940 3.0ghz when the Phenom II 955 3.2ghz is the better revision and why it is what most AMD gamers choose cause it can be clocked to same level as Phenom II x4 980 3.7ghz stock clocked performance.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]Headspin_69[/nom]Plus how many Phenom II x4 chips are stock 3.0ghz oh ya thats right the AM2+ Phenom II x4 940 3.0ghz when the Phenom II 955 3.2ghz is the better revision and why it is what most AMD gamers choose cause it can be clocked to same level as Phenom II x4 980 3.7ghz stock clocked performance.[/citation]

heheh, You just shot yourself in the foot. The i5-2500K was also benched at 3.0 GHz, but it's 3.3 GHz nominal, and usually runs close to 3.7 GHz turbo during use.

At stock clocks, the i5-2500K destroys the Phenom II X4 980. :lol:

The only difference is, the i5 can be pushed past 4 GHz easy... the 955, or even 980 have a real hard time even getting to 4.0.

 

[Headspin_69]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]heheh, You just shot yourself in the foot. The i5-2500K is 3.3 GHz nominal, and usually runs close to 3.7 GHz turbo during use. At stock clocks, the i5-2500K destroys the Phenom II X4 980.[/citation]
AMD/RADEON can max out Crysis 1 and 2 and BF3 so what gives is a bunch of Nvidia/INTEL elitist fanbouys that paid to much for there hardware to run games on and surf the net on and now they have to justify there ignorance with synthetic benchmark numbers like a badge of honor when I am off to have fun playing Skyrim on AMD/RADEON. Your Propaganda will not fool me Nazi and Merry Christmas.

 

[cleeve]

Your Propaganda will not fool me Nazi

Hard evidence and in-game data is propaganda and synthetic to you? You need to look up some dictionary terms, Headster.

By the way, there's a time honored forum rule that states the first person to compare their adversary to Hitler or the Nazis automatically loses the debate.

Sorry! it was fun while it lasted.

Merry Christmas to you, too!

 

[Headspin_69]

Hard evidence and in-game data is propaganda and synthetic to you? You need to look up some dictionary terms, Headster.

By the way, there's a time honored forum rule that states the first person to compare their adversary to Hitler or the Nazis automatically loses the debate.

Sorry! it was fun while it lasted.

Merry Christmas to you, too!

I am the only one whom provided in game Video capture evidence that AMD/RADEON plays todays most demanding game no problem LOL you provided number spread sheets when I showed you that AMD/RADEON games just fine.

 

[cleeve]

I am the only one whom provided in game Video capture evidence that AMD/RADEON plays todays most demanding game no problem LOL you provided number spread sheets when I showed you that AMD/RADEON games just fine.

That's cool, I'll take hard data over your 'impression' any day of the week.

 

[Headspin_69]

That's cool, I'll take hard data over your 'impression' any day of the week.

I suppose it is a big conspiracy of the 1000s of YT uploads showing AMD/RADEON playing all of today's most demanding games on max settings very playable and many at or over 60fps.

 

[cleeve]

I suppose it is a big conspiracy of the 1000s of YT uploads showing AMD/RADEON playing all of today's most demanding games on max settings very playable and many at or over 60fps.

It's probably a bigger conspiracy that anyone would consider a YouTube video 'proof' of frame rate performance. :lol:

 

[Headspin_69]

It's probably a bigger conspiracy that anyone would consider a YouTube video 'proof' of frame rate performance. :lol:

Well I would take FRAPS word over anyone's LOL and YT can show fraps and when it does you can take that to the bank lol.

 

[cleeve]

Well I would take FRAPS word over anyone's LOL and YT can show fraps and when it does you can take that to the bank lol.

that's funny, you usually claim that FRAPS benchmarks are useless synthetic propaganda.

Which is it, chief?

 

[Headspin_69]

that's funny, you usually claim that FRAPS benchmarks are useless synthetic propaganda.

Which is it, chief?

I never claimed that and fraps is in game while you are playing that why is it representative of actual gaming system performance LOL do I need to walk you thru PC gaming 101.

 

[cleeve]

I never claimed that and fraps is in game while you are playing that why is it representative of actual gaming system performance LOL do I need to walk you thru PC gaming 101.

Well, the benches I've posted were taken with FRAPS, so... looks like you put your foot in your mouth again.

If you want to walk through something you might want to consider you previous posts. It looks like you've forgotten your stories and can't keep them straight anymore.

 

[Headspin_69]

Well, the benches I've posted were taken with FRAPS, so... looks like you put your foot in your mouth again.

If you want to walk through something you might want to consider you previous posts. It looks like you've forgotten your stories and can't keep them straight anymore.

It still stands that AMD/Radeon make for competent gaming rigs and OCed C2Duo can still play games.

 

[cleeve]

It still stands that AMD/Radeon make for competent gaming rigs and OCed C2Duo can still play games.

Yep, it does.

It also stands that in many newer games they'll choke at high detail settings, with minimum frame rates that get a little skippy when things get tough.

But the i5-2500K won't choke, though.

 

[Headspin_69]

Yep, it does.

It also stands that in many newer games they'll choke at high detail settings, with minimum frame rates that get a little skippy when things get tough.

But the i5-2500K won't choke, though.

in one game LOL

 

[lothdk]

*DING* *DING* *DING*
Contestants to the corners

Round two will begin shortly

 

[cleeve]

in one game LOL

I think that's the lamest retort I've seen on a forum debate. Ever.

There's not even a valid point to address. I just feel kind of sad for you.

 

[kerman19]

I can't beleive this debate is still going! I'm still baffled as to how anyone can think a dual core, with todays games can muster up 'smooth' frame rates. I guess my definition of smooth has a higher demand, because to me I can feel sub 60FPS, and it feels horrible.

I think that is the shortfall for my 955, even at 4.0 it fails to deliver acceptable upper end frame rates, and when it does, it appears to have an overall poor average due to chewing on certain CPU intensive segments of the game.

SWOTR is a good example of this, it does play with acceptable frame rates most of the time, but certain areas of the game demand a bit more CPU horsepower than it can generate and it falls flat on it's face. I've not noticed this with an i5 2500k (stock) based system with the same GFX card.

RIFT also shows this CPU up badly!

My only decision now is to jump ship (I can still get hold of a guarenteed 4.8 i5) or wait it out and see what Ivt Bridge has to offer next year!?