Whats your FFXIV Benchmark score?

Page 10 - 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.
G

Guest

Guest
Machine name: xxx-PC
Operating System: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600) (7600.win7_gdr.100618-1621)
System Manufacturer: built myself :)
System Model: what i thought would be a badass computer, but sadly according to the benchmark is garbage :(
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (8 CPUs), ~2.7GHz
Memory: 10240MB RAM
Available OS Memory: 10238MB RAM
Page File: 2536MB used, 17937MB available
Windows Dir: C:\Windows
DirectX Version: DirectX 11

Card name: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280
Manufacturer: NVIDIA
Chip type: GeForce GTX 280

scores seemed odd after checking other posts, not sure where i stand.
physx on 2557 HIGH
physx off 1400 HIGH
physx card is a lowly 8800 gts 320mb evga, just dug it out of the closet to see if it made a difference. apparently it does.

havent run low yet. Comparing to peoples scores with comparable systems seems like im getting hung up somewhere, any suggestions would be a help. However, im playing the beta and it seems to run pretty well with all settings maxed. my score is whats called average. kinda sucks
 
Y

yanje03

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2010
162
0
18,690
Machine name: xxx-PC
Operating System: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600) (7600.win7_gdr.100618-1621)
System Manufacturer: built myself :)
System Model: what i thought would be a badass computer, but sadly according to the benchmark is garbage :(
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (8 CPUs), ~2.7GHz
Memory: 10240MB RAM
Available OS Memory: 10238MB RAM
Page File: 2536MB used, 17937MB available
Windows Dir: C:\Windows
DirectX Version: DirectX 11

Card name: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280
Manufacturer: NVIDIA
Chip type: GeForce GTX 280

scores seemed odd after checking other posts, not sure where i stand.
physx on 2557 HIGH
physx off 1400 HIGH
physx card is a lowly 8800 gts 320mb evga, just dug it out of the closet to see if it made a difference. apparently it does.

havent run low yet. Comparing to peoples scores with comparable systems seems like im getting hung up somewhere, any suggestions would be a help. However, im playing the beta and it seems to run pretty well with all settings maxed. my score is whats called average. kinda sucks
Click to expand...

good to know physx could help a lots
 
K

Kraze7

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
106
0
18,680
Droogan,

Wow that is a huge boost with physx on vs. off. And that's high scores too. Let us know what you low scores it. If you got time please test out low scores with and without physx on.

Low scores = CPU intensive. High scores = GPU intensive.

That make me just want to test out with my spare GTS 250 as physx with GTX 480 as main. If the high scores boost over 1k like yours with physx on.
 
G

Guest

Guest
hey i scored alot lower then what i was hoping for and was wondering if anyone can give me tips on what to upgrade that would pull my score alot higher?
i scored a 4370 on High and i want to play the game on high settings so i need to be atleast to 6000?

my rig setup:
Windows 7 64-bit
8G ram
AMD Phenom II x4 965 processor 3.4 GHz
Ati Radeon 5870 overclocked

im thinking about upgrading to a 5970 but not sure if that would improve that much? ive beeen trying beta but the game is so sluggish at high settings? any thought what to do?
 
OvrClkr

OvrClkr

Splendid
Jul 2, 2009
8,565
0
31,160
hey i scored alot lower then what i was hoping for and was wondering if anyone can give me tips on what to upgrade that would pull my score alot higher?
i scored a 4370 on High and i want to play the game on high settings so i need to be atleast to 6000?

my rig setup:
Windows 7 64-bit
8G ram
AMD Phenom II x4 965 processor 3.4 GHz
Ati Radeon 5870 overclocked

im thinking about upgrading to a 5970 but not sure if that would improve that much? ive beeen trying beta but the game is so sluggish at high settings? any thought what to do?
Click to expand...

what resolution do you play at?
 
Helltech

Helltech

Distinguished
Mar 5, 2009
3,349
1
21,160
hey i scored alot lower then what i was hoping for and was wondering if anyone can give me tips on what to upgrade that would pull my score alot higher?
i scored a 4370 on High and i want to play the game on high settings so i need to be atleast to 6000?

my rig setup:
Windows 7 64-bit
8G ram
AMD Phenom II x4 965 processor 3.4 GHz
Ati Radeon 5870 overclocked

im thinking about upgrading to a 5970 but not sure if that would improve that much? ive beeen trying beta but the game is so sluggish at high settings? any thought what to do?
Click to expand...

The beta is a graphical mess right now. Just look at the support forums, people with SLI 480's are even having problems.

SE has come out to say they are still optimizating it, I'd wait till the game comes out.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Redid the benchmark with/without physx in high/low res. Again im a little worried as for the scores. my previous high res score with physx enabled was around 2500. That score seems pretty low, like i said in comparison with comparable systems. so tonight i ran all tests and these are the scores i received.

res: High physx on: 2025
High Physx off: 1837

Low phsyx on: 2682
Low phsyx off: 2153

As you can see i scored nearly the same as a previous high res/phsyx on benchmark on low/physx on, tonight it just seemed to run like crap. all background apps were off, although steam was running the background when i scored better before. The graph at the bottom which im guessing tells you how your benchmark is running looked like a poor guy suffering a 10 minute heart attack. it was all over the place. on some previous runs of the bench it was a pretty stable line running near the top. I have to admit im confused over the results. I dont think my computer and its set up is a reliable source, as one night it can run the same bench 400 +/-. On top of that, the score still sucks considering what i think is a pretty decent rig.

As for running the beta, it still performs pretty well, atleast in my opinion. Ive heard the game doesnt support sli/physx, so i cant say for certain if my physx card is helping at all. from my last scores the physx increased my score by 1000, whereas tonight it did what, 200? /sigh. fraps was doing average 20-22 fps in the city, 50-55 fps in the wilderness.

I think im going to have to agree with some users that maybe the bench is just screwy. its a little depressing and frustrating to see this kind of varied and low ass score. I just dont understand how this computer is scoring so friggin low when the beta plays pretty well. according to the score chart i should be barely able to play with everything set to minimum.

quick recap of my rig.
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (8 CPUs), ~2.7GHz
Memory: 10240MB RAM
Available OS Memory: 10238MB RAM
Page File: 2536MB used, 17937MB available
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280
Manufacturer: NVIDIA
Chip type: GeForce GTX 280
Physx: 8800 gts 340 mb

So, take from this post what you will. does physx help? according to the bench yes, sometimes more than others. in game? dunno. Im watching my wife play on her HP whatever with a 260 gtx and its running fine, with no physx.

will run some cleaning/antivirus/defrag etc. to see if anything helps. will update again.
 
notty22

notty22

Distinguished
Oct 8, 2009
2,958
0
21,160
What is strange , and i'm surprised no one has commented. I don't believe there is physX support ! lol
Though it is a supported Nvidia , the way its supposed to be played game ?
What also supports this, is ATI cards seem to score as well as Nvidia cards , yes-no , comments ?
I have the gtx 460 and optioned in NC control panel to use cpu for physX and my scores stay the same.
But I believe the poster who seems to get consistent better scores enabling physX ?
 
OvrClkr

OvrClkr

Splendid
Jul 2, 2009
8,565
0
31,160
AFAIK the game will not use physX, it has a physics calculation engine that works on both AMD and NV cards. I tested the bench with and without my GTS 250 and did not see any gains.

On the other hand I did notice that the CPU doesn't even break a sweat @ 3.6Ghz, I bet this game will run fine (maxed out) as long as the user has a quad @ 3Ghz or higher + 460/5830 or better.

mem_cpu_usage4.png


mem_cpu_usage3.png
 
Y

yanje03

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2010
162
0
18,690
hey i scored alot lower then what i was hoping for and was wondering if anyone can give me tips on what to upgrade that would pull my score alot higher?
i scored a 4370 on High and i want to play the game on high settings so i need to be atleast to 6000?

my rig setup:
Windows 7 64-bit
8G ram
AMD Phenom II x4 965 processor 3.4 GHz
Ati Radeon 5870 overclocked

im thinking about upgrading to a 5970 but not sure if that would improve that much? ive beeen trying beta but the game is so sluggish at high settings? any thought what to do?
Click to expand...

since you are using AMD cpu, I think your cpu is the bottle. check this new honest review
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/overclock-cpu-build-a-pc,2700-16.html

AMD CPU isn't a good choice to match most good GPU. from what I noticed FFXIV use a lot CPU resource. if you put a AMD phenom II x4 with a GTX 470 or 5870, AMD CPU already be a bottle. your graphic card is fine but CPU.
 
oooen1gmaooo

oooen1gmaooo

Distinguished
Jul 28, 2010
239
0
18,690
my i5-750 oc to 3.6 uses 50-60% of my cpu when in the open beta, and w/ my GTX 470 oc to 700/1700 I get 50-60FPS in field and 30-40 in camp...
 
Y

yanje03

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2010
162
0
18,690
seems nvidia new driver will improve a lot performance for FFXIV on 400 series card.

http://www.ffxivcore.com/topic/15652-nvidia-drivers-ver-26052/
 
Y

yanje03

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2010
162
0
18,690


I feel FFXIV is graphic card killer. take a look how many leaf on a tree and they are all moving. If turn AA to max, good luck. on the other hand 50M fiber is very common to Japanese and we are on the same server. GG. I don't even see a mob spawn and it already got killed by someone else. at this point, to get good performance for it we need super good pc with super good internet connection. otherwise just relax, definitely this game can't be loved by hard core MMO players since most of them have no patience at all.
 
N

NewenClass

Distinguished
Sep 10, 2010
1
0
18,510
Win 7 Pro 64bit
Intel Core i7 cpu 930 @ 2.8 ghz (8 cpus)
nVidia GeForce GTX 460

High: 2749 / 11751ms

Low: 4518 / 11621ms

I don't know much about processor clocks and what not so i haven't touched it.
 
R

Ryga

Distinguished
Sep 13, 2010
1
0
18,510
high 854
Low 1675

Packard bell iXtreme IXX6622
windows 7 home 64bit
intel core 2 quad processor Q8300 2.5ghz
Nvidia Geforce GT320 1024mb
4GB DDR3

bought my PC today from PC world showed the guy the recomended specs for FFXIV and he sold me this told me id be able to run it with no issues i dont know much about PC's so did he see me coming or is somthing else not right
 
P

Petey1013

Distinguished
May 6, 2010
379
0
18,810



Oh god return it. Well it's not actually that bad, hope you only payed $4-500 for it. needs a new video card, other then that it's ok i guess. Old tech though.
 
P

pandemonium_ctp

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2009
105
0
18,690
Off-topic/RE:


That was a common problem in XI - especially when NMs were so highly sought after for their drops. The NA client was also much different compared to the JPN version since there weren't mandatory client delays built-in (ability delays, crafting delays, etc...). A lot of NA players ended up getting the JPN client version just to help compete.

Regarding your comment of it not being able to be loved by hardcore MMO gamers, that's true, but to an extent. XIV was actually geared toward the casual gamer (compared to XI) and recent years XI has seen tremendous changes to allow casual gaming, so "hardcore gamers" are not very attuned for it in the broad sense. As for the elite top-end gaming spectrum, it will be more patience taxing compared to any other MMO that most NA players are into (WoW, GW, Warhammer, etc...).

I was honestly scared to see dismal results with all of these varied scores by rigs with GPUs that are well beyond mine. About 14 months ago I finally updated my entire system and decided on 2x MSI HD4830 1G @$105 per. So far they've proven pretty capable for their cost and have yet to let me down minus video tearing (which after countless hours of research and many, many cigarettes, I'm really believing it's software issues with Directdraw). Profile has full specs.

Low: 3958
High: 2719

Which by how the benchmark appears, seems to be plenty. I can't wait until the 22nd. ^^

For another very in-depth thread on the subject I recommend here: http://www.ffxivcore.com/topic/7393-gpu-and-cpu-score-list/page__p__155236

And if you had problems getting CF/SLI to work even after trying the d3d9.dll found on your system, this solved my problem:
http://bygzam.up.seesaa.net/zip/ff14bfull-100618.zip
 
B

benski

Distinguished
Jun 24, 2010
1,611
0
19,960
Well what an oddity. I installed Windows 7 64 bit (was XP 32) and overclocked my GPU and my scores went from a 2843 on high down to a 2643 and from a 3940 to a 2571 on low! So it looks like this game hates windows 7, or at least this benchmark does. Have to wonder how representative that is of game performance, I wouldn't expect a game to be worse on a 64 bit system.

 
OvrClkr

OvrClkr

Splendid
Jul 2, 2009
8,565
0
31,160


The OS has nothing to do with the score, of course they will vary from one OS to the other but it leans more towards the GPU/RAM/CPU and GPU driver.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom