Star Wars: The Old Republic: PC Performance, Benchmarked

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]kerman19[/nom]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!?[/citation]
You need a better graphics card dude SWTOR runs great on AMD hardware.
 
I'm running dual 6950's (unlocked) - Although Crossfire doesn't seem to actually work properly with it yet. Still effectively a 6970 is easily enough for this, but you can see the weakness is the CPU purely when it starts chugging along a bit, the GPU usage takes a dip to around 50% while the CPU struggles to keep up.

The occurrence is of course rare, but it's quite annoying and the 955 is a weakness, it also does the same on a friends 1100T system.

I've actually had AMD systems most of my life because the disparity between AMD and Intel never 'really' justified the price hike for the Intel System. Times have changed quite substantially and SandyBridge seemed to change the game, and justifies it's current price tag.
 
[citation][nom]kerman19[/nom]I'm running dual 6950's (unlocked) - Although Crossfire doesn't seem to actually work properly with it yet. Still effectively a 6970 is easily enough for this, but you can see the weakness is the CPU purely when it starts chugging along a bit, the GPU usage takes a dip to around 50% while the CPU struggles to keep up.The occurrence is of course rare, but it's quite annoying and the 955 is a weakness, it also does the same on a friends 1100T system.I've actually had AMD systems most of my life because the disparity between AMD and Intel never 'really' justified the price hike for the Intel System. Times have changed quite substantially and SandyBridge seemed to change the game, and justifies it's current price tag.[/citation]
Funny cause my rig plays SWTOR just fine and I am only using 2 cores of the 955 @ 3.8ghz and a GTX 275 plus SWTOR is in no way a demanding title by even last years standards so me smells another fan boy.
 
You got me, I'm an Intel Fan Boy that uses AMD...

More accurately I'm able to decide what's best for me, regardless of who makes it, I really don't care.

I'm sure your system plays it 'fine', although it must mean you have pretty poor performance expectations. The 5770 is comparable to your card, probably has an edge in this game and it gets pretty poor FPS when you ramp the detail up. I'd like to see how well it chugs along in a space station.

In fact I'd like to see some proper benchmarks in the space station as it seems to hit performance the most.
 
[citation][nom]kerman19[/nom]You got me, I'm an Intel Fan Boy that uses AMD...More accurately I'm able to decide what's best for me, regardless of who makes it, I really don't care.I'm sure your system plays it 'fine', although it must mean you have pretty poor performance expectations. The 5770 is comparable to your card, probably has an edge in this game and it gets pretty poor FPS when you ramp the detail up. I'd like to see how well it chugs along in a space station.In fact I'd like to see some proper benchmarks in the space station as it seems to hit performance the most.[/citation]
Its playing at 60fps @ 4xAA and some setting turned down but it still looks great and the Radeon equivalent to my card is the 4890HD wear as the 5770 is about on par with the 4850HD I know because I have owned two 4890HDs and a single HD5750 Oced to same speeds as stock 5770
 


That's your body odor you're smelling. :lol:

Just because your performance expectations are so low that you ignore low minimum frame rates, that doesn't make other people fanboys.

It probably makes you one, though. And it implies that you're happy to ignore occasional choppy frame rates in order to maintain your delusion.

 

I dont know how 60fps is considered low framerates but by all means if you want to have a play toy to play games on go ahead waste money on Nvidia Intel to get the same outcome.
 


I agree, there's a lot you don't know.

Clearly the concept of 'minimum frame rate' eludes you... :sarcastic:



Nvidia? I don't think Nvidia makes an x86 CPU, chief.

I'm truly impressed at your ability to confuse yourself though, well done! :lol:




 


I am still not sure I guess I have to spell it out for you so you can't re spin my words a min of at leased 60fps when V-synch is engage is not low frame rate plus I never said Nvidia made Cpus you did.
 


Actually, I'm pretty sure you're the first person to mention Nvidia in a discussion that has, thus far, been exclusively about CPU bottlenecking. If I'm wrong please point out where I mentioned Nvidia, thanks! :pt1cable:




Wow... that's... well, I don't even know what that is.

You might want to learn English before engaging in an English internet debate sir. :na:
 


Exactly. It's the only valid response to your broken quasi-English failpost. :lol:

Hey, you forgot to point out how I brought Nvidia into a CPU thread. Unless you remembered it was you, and you were wrong, or forgot, or something else that makes no sense. Yawn.
 

you stated Nvidia made a CPU not me.
 


Must be forgot, then.

I can help: look up, you're the first one who mentioned Nvidia in a CPU bottlenecking discussion.

If you said Nvidia and simply didn't make any sense, make it easier on yourself and just say so. :na:
 

Cleeve says and I quote "Nvidia? I don't think Nvidia makes an x86 CPU" wow we can move along now that you understand that Nvidia does not make CPUs.
 


I've known all along that Nvidia doesn't make x86 CPUs, that's precisely why I asked you why *you* posted "go ahead waste money on Nvidia" in a CPU bottlenecking discussion.

What, do you have a 3-second memory span? I've mentioned this twice already.

Are you actually unaware of reality, or are you pretending you didn't say it because it's difficult for you to explain?

Hint: 9 posts above. Catch it quick before people vote it down and you can't see it anymore. :lol:
 

I never ever claimed Nvidia makes a CPU
 


That's awesome. but you still haven't answered the question, have you chief? :ange:

Please share with the class why you posted "go ahead waste money on Nvidia" in a CPU bottlenecking discussion...
 

In the context of gaming "go ahead waste money on Nvidia" could also be said of Intel CPUs.
 


Ah! I see, you're simply a hardcore fanboy who passionately hates anything that's produced by any company other than AMD.
In fact, you hate other companies so much that you can't help dissing competitor products unrelated to a CPU bottlenecking discussion.

That makes a lot more sense, I understand your comments in the proper context now. Fanboys are experts at ignoring evidence that doesn't support their brand preference.

Well, I'm not sure who could possibly take you seriously at this point - you managed to keep talking until you obliterated all vestiges of your own credibility.

Well played, sir. :)




 

Na I am just loyal to my wallet not marketing hype.
 
Hello all. Had a friend that was playing with a 2.5ghz quad core 6gb ram and a radeon hd 4350 and he was having problems everytime he went to an indoor location it would lag and had horrible peformance but in outdoor locations on the game it was fine. Solution... went out and got a radeon hd 6770 and wola...game works beautifully. Just thought I would post this in case anyone else is having the same problem. Can I run it said it should be fine but I guess the game needs more graphics power.
 
Im running 2 super clocked 560's, and while I have no issues visually at all, The game is still demanding enough to kick up the fans to about 60%. Especially when I'm in the forest. But that's ok.
 
you are not even level 10 and you are stating the world / environments are uninteresting and small. When you get higher level, around level 24, you can go to Tatooine, which is huge. It's not even possible to get around without personal transportation or taxi's and everything you see, you can get to. The worlds are structered incredibly well and provide tons of visuals and impressive architectures. I appreciate your benchmarking, but MMO's should never be reviewed after completing only the introductory facets of the game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom