Looking for a new CPU mostly for MMOs

[Betatest]

Okay, I am downloading it right now, will be back when it is done.

Hmmm, sorry, but which one should I download, there are bunch of programs.

 

[Betatest]

Okay, I uploaded the image with final score, because I have no idea how to upload it to their database :'(

http://i52.tinypic.com/255nev8.png

I checked other results from different setups, for example BE 955 and I am pretty darn close to them, so what could be causing my problems then?

 

[Betatest]

Okay, another thing, I reformated my harddrive, did a clean install, installed the latest drivers for everything (chipset, sound, graphic card, lan), installed WoW since they are giving 7 free days and I am sitting in Orgrimmar with tons of people around me with 25-30 FPS which is pretty good I would say, other then that I am at 60 constatly.

 

[Vesku]

...

HoN - Farming (last hitting, poking the other lane and whatnot) - 60+ fps constant a small fight occurs, my FPS is down again)

League of Legends - The exact same thing as in HoN.

...

I take it as the games are heavily cpu dependant or am I wrong and something fishy is going on with my cpu/system or whatever?

Definitely something fishy with your system, full 5 v 5 fights in LoL stayed at 60 (vsync) for me when I was running a system that should be about 20% slower than yours overall.
Last time I used it OCCT would save a temperature graph from a burn in, should be easy to see if your cpu gets too hot under load.

 

[Betatest]

Right now, I am playing WoW and my temperatures are at 63, both cores and cpu. I guess it is really about the heat afterall.

 

[Vesku]

Definitely try a CM 212+ or Xigmatek Gaia.

 

[nyker96]

for the budget you are on, here's a suggestion that will boost your MMO fps, overclock your 940BE to about 3,5ghz, sell off that 460gtx, get a 560 Ti. boom your fps will be lot better. for not too much money. getting a 2500k while using a 460gtx isn't gonna boost your performance too much since 460gtx probably is your bottleneck.

stuff like Wow is very GPU sensitive, if you play RTS it's more CPU bound. so dump your cash into gpu upgrade will allow you get more fps and higher detailed settings.

 

[cebalrai]

Okay, another thing, I reformated my harddrive, did a clean install, installed the latest drivers for everything (chipset, sound, graphic card, lan), installed WoW since they are giving 7 free days and I am sitting in Orgrimmar with tons of people around me with 25-30 FPS which is pretty good I would say, other then that I am at 60 constatly.

On the highest settings?

By the way, you should still get the latest BIOS for your board. They often update the motherboard's cooling routines for the CPU.

I checked the version of BIOS via CPU-Z and it said that I have the first version that supports Phenoms II.

Edit: I have the FD version.

The FD version is the 3rd oldest BIOS listed out of eight, written way back in mid-2009. Not only that but the Phenom II 940 that you have isn't supported until the FI version, which is three updates later than the one you're using. Not sure why you're hesitant to try this.

http://www.gigabyte.com/support-downloads/cpu-support-popup.aspx?pid=3097

Look on that list. Your 940 is the very first CPU listed.

 

[soccerballtux]

believe the gigabyte flash util runs in windows, easy peasy.
Don't think that'll help his FPS but it couldn't hurt to get newer bios.

I just reinstalled wow after reading about the 7 days thing loaded Org, but wasn't a very busy time so no telling what the performance will be like. It was semi-busy and got down to about 52fps, I'd say only about a third as busy as I've seen it before. More to follow...

 

[Betatest]

for the budget you are on, here's a suggestion that will boost your MMO fps, overclock your 940BE to about 3,5ghz, sell off that 460gtx, get a 560 Ti. boom your fps will be lot better. for not too much money. getting a 2500k while using a 460gtx isn't gonna boost your performance too much since 460gtx probably is your bottleneck.

stuff like Wow is very GPU sensitive, if you play RTS it's more CPU bound. so dump your cash into gpu upgrade will allow you get more fps and higher detailed settings.

After reading tons of pages about performance in MMOs, I am pretty sure they are all about your CPU, not your GPU. Changing my resolution to lowest possible does not give me a single FPS boost, so from that I assume that the games are CPU dependant. I know that most of the new games (Witcher 2, Crysis, Fear or whatever) are GPU dependant, but I am not playing them. I have seen many many people on justin.tv streaming with the "crappy" GTX 460 with i5-2500k with 200+ FPS in WoW for example.

Okay, I downloaded the BIOS utility, to what version should I update it and there are two checkers. One is Load CMOS default after update and second one is DMI data pool, should only the CMOS default be checked, it was when I started the program.

 

[cebalrai]

After reading tons of pages about performance in MMOs, I am pretty sure they are all about your CPU, not your GPU. Changing my resolution to lowest possible does not give me a single FPS boost, so from that I assume that the games are CPU dependant. I know that most of the new games (Witcher 2, Crysis, Fear or whatever) are GPU dependant, but I am not playing them. I have seen many many people on justin.tv streaming with the "crappy" GTX 460 with i5-2500k with 200+ FPS in WoW for example.

Okay, I downloaded the BIOS utility, to what version should I update it and there are two checkers. One is Load CMOS default after update and second one is DMI data pool, should only the CMOS default be checked, it was when I started the program.

Get the most recent one.

 

[Auggie]

I run a laptop with an old Core2 E8400 I believe, way, way slower than the OP's setup. My graphics card in this laptop is a 9800M GTS chipset.

I run WoW at 1920x1200 with medium detail for most things, full spell detail and Ultra view-distance (one of the hardest things as far as maxing loaded and displayed textures). I get very smooth framerates (been a while since I've watched the numbers, but it's somewhere around 60 FPS during 10man Firelands raids, way way higher in cities and out of combat/spell displays).

Anyhow, my point is that my performance blows away the OP's with much worse hardware. Something is wrong, and I don't think it's a few Degrees Centigrade.

 

[Betatest]

WoW is running perfectly fine and it seems like WoW isnt heating my cpu that much, was around 58 when I checked. I have no problems whatsoever in WoW atleast even un dungeons with all the effects I am at 60. I have not tried anything else since I reinstalled my system and updated everything so dunno. Also, when I compared my system to the others with the Performance Test program, I was pretty darn close to the others.

 

[yottabit]

Personally after skimming through this thread I do think a 2500k would be a nice upgrade for you but only really if you overclock it. I built a 2500k system for a hardcore WoW friend who didn't want his framerate to drop below 60. We were torn for a little while between the Phenom II to upgrade his existing AM3 system and the 2500k but he decided he wanted it futureproof for future expansions etc.

It's clocked at 4 Ghz stock volts with a 5850 everything on Ultra except Shadows and it literally NEVER drops below 60 fps (@ 1680x1050)

My system with an i5 750 @ 3 Ghz and 5770 bounces around between 30 and 60 fps on Ultra with the same settings (1680x1050) (we both have VSYNC on)

People seem to be neglecting the fact that WoW runs much better on current gen Intel CPUs than AMD in general
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-directx-11-performance,2793-10.html
"Clearly, AMD's CPUs are holding back performance in Cataclysm compared to Intel's processors." same thing in SC2, something about those Blizzard games...

Yeah a Phenom might get 60 fps most of the time, but if you really want fluid gameplay then you can't have 60 fps most of the time, you want a CPU that can push 100-200 FPS that way it will *drop* down to 60 in the most intense moments lol

 

[sm625]

I took a look at your baseline. Your vector graphics ratings are really low. Not sure how that affects MMOs.

Also your monitor is at 59 Hz. Again, I'm not sure if you even can force it to 60 or if it would make any difference at all but it is something to look at.

 

[Gryz]

Anyhow, my point is that my performance blows away the OP's with much worse hardware. Something is wrong, and I don't think it's a few Degrees Centigrade.

You can not compare yourself with the OP.
You run at medium settings.
It is a known fact that some settings in WoW do have a huge impact on fps. Just lowering shadowdetail from "ultra" one knotch lower to "high" (or whatever it is called), can sometimes *double* your framerates.

I don't think even a gtx580+2500k will run WoW at 200 fps with full settings at 1920x1200.

The devil is in the details. There is no way to do a benchmark in WoW that is 100% repeatable. Most of the benchmarks I've seen in online articles were people taking the same flightpath again and again. But even then, the conditions are never the same. And once we start benchmarking in cities or in raids, all bets are off.

Another factor is that the most people just play the game, and conclude "it runs fine on my machine". They don't even keep an eye on their fps. They don't compare outdoors versus cities versus raids. They don't know what hardware they have or what (exact) settings they play at. They're just happy with what they got. And when their system seems responsive, they don't care if they get 30 fps or 200 fps. For them, "it just works fine". There is no way to compare systems based on these subjective kinds of reports.

And then there are some people who do look at fps-numbers. Because they bought a new computer and want to make sure they get good numbers. If the results are disappointing, it is natural to humans to not brag about it. Very few people will say: "look, I spend a lot of money on hardware, and I bought the wrong equipment, my game still runs bad". Nope. They will report optimal numbers. They will exaggerate a little. To others it will look that these reported numbers are much better than what they get themselves.

I think the OP's computer is fine. I think he just expects too much.

 

[yottabit]

Another factor is that the most people just play the game, and conclude "it runs fine on my machine". They don't even keep an eye on their fps. They don't compare outdoors versus cities versus raids. They don't know what hardware they have or what (exact) settings they play at. They're just happy with what they got. And when their system seems responsive, they don't care if they get 30 fps or 200 fps. For them, "it just works fine". There is no way to compare systems based on these subjective kinds of reports.

And then there are some people who do look at fps-numbers. Because they bought a new computer and want to make sure they get good numbers. If the results are disappointing, it is natural to humans to not brag about it. Very few people will say: "look, I spend a lot of money on hardware, and I bought the wrong equipment, my game still runs bad". Nope. They will report optimal numbers. They will exaggerate a little. To others it will look that these reported numbers are much better than what they get themselves.

I think the OP's computer is fine. I think he just expects too much.

Everyone has their own standards. My fiancee is really happy playing on the athlon ii x2 250 + 9600 GT rig I built for her. She gets 30-60 FPS at Good settings at 1366x768. My friend absolutely couldn't stand his FPS dropping below 60 on Ultra, and hence we built the i5 2500k + 5850 rig

OP sounds like he wants to get a constant 60 fps too, and 2500k overclocked is the best route for that right now. The video card he has should enable constant 60 fps at 1080p with lowering only a couple key settings

 

[Gryz]

Everyone has their own standards.

Agreed. My point was: comparing these different standards is hard, if you don't use exact numbers. And that is what most people seem to do: do a lot of handwaving. Not only in this thread, but in general, imho.

My fiancee is really happy playing on the athlon ii x2 250 + 9600 GT rig I built for her. She gets 30-60 FPS at Good settings at 1366x768. My friend absolutely couldn't stand his FPS dropping below 60 on Ultra, and hence we built the i5 2500k + 5850 rig

I bet your fiancee doesn't do raiding ? Maybe your friend does do raiding ?
Your fiancee runs at 1366x768, your friend might have 1920x1200 ? That's 1m vs 2.3m pixels.
Your fiancee might not use AA, your friend maybe wants 8xAA ?
Good settings versus ultra settings makes a big difference in itself.

So my point again: you can't compare numbers people give you. Unless you know exactly what those numbers stand for.

OP sounds like he wants to get a constant 60 fps too, and 2500k overclocked is the best route for that right now. The video card he has should enable constant 60 fps at 1080p with lowering only a couple key settings

And who says that replacing his CPU will have the biggest impact ? I think that "lowering only a couple key settings" will have a much higher impact on fps. At zero cost.

Look at Tom's Hardware. How did he do his testing ?
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-directx-11-performance,2793-2.html
He took a flightpath through Twilights Highlands. Outdoor areas only. And when flying, you will see some players and NPCs on the ground, but not many. Result: a benchmark that is a lot less demanding than being in a city, or doing 10/25-man raiding.

Now let's look at what numbers Tom is getting:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-directx-11-performance,2793-5.html
Ultra settings. 1920x1080. Using a i7-980x (I think).
gtx580 - 103fps.
gtx460 - 81 fps.

Remember, that is average fps in a simple outdoor flight ! If you go raiding, or to a city, you can expect half of that framerate. And the lower boundary will drop even lower. My conclusion is: it looks like the OP's system is performing in WoW as expected.

Now the second question: will upgrading to a i5-2500k help his framerates ? I'm sure it will. But how much ? Look at these 2 pages:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-directx-11-performance,2793-9.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-directx-11-performance,2793-10.html
Tom's conclusion: "Clearly, AMD's CPUs are holding back performance in Cataclysm compared to Intel's processors."

But there are 3 factors here that should not be forgotten.
1) Tom tested at 1680x1050. When playing at 1920x1200, the impact of the GPU increases, and the CPU decreases. If the OP plays at 1920x1200, upgrading his CPU will have less effect on his framerates.
2) Tom doesn't say which GPU he used to test the CPUs. But he should have used his fastest GPU, to make sure he tests CPU-performance, not GPU-performance. So I expect a gtx580 was used in these 2 particular tests. Gtx580 gives higher absolute framerates. But the OP has only a gtx460. When replacing the CPU, the absolute change in frame will be lower too, than in Tom's tests.
3) The problem is when raiding. One of the problems there is that during raiding, there are a lot more spell-effects on the screen. I would guess that spell-effects are mainly a load on the GPU, less on the CPU. This is different from performance in cities, where fps are more impact by the amount and constant change of players and NPCs on the screen. So in raids, I would expect the GPU to have a large role on low fps than it would have in situations like the benchmark (taking a flightpath).

This is all speculation. I don't play WoW anymore, so I can't test anything myself. And as we know, testing in WoW has always been very limited because you can't redo test-runs reliably. But it is my belief that upgrading the OP's CPU to a i5-2500k will not suddenly improve is average fps in raids from 30 to 60.

As I've written in an earlier post. If you can sell your current cpu+mobo+ram, then go for it, buy a i5-2500k and see if WoW runs faster. But if you have to pay the full price for a new cpu+mobo+ram, I doubt that the 300-400 euros is worth it. Personally I would 1) turn down shadows a notch, and 2) wait 6 months, and buy an Ivy Bridge. I know the pain, I have a E8500 myself, and I don't find it worthwile to upgrade yet, because the games I play (e.g. Fallout3, Portal2, Witcher1, and even Crysis 2) do not benefit enough to make it worth the money. I'm waiting for IB.

 

[Betatest]

I am currently playing on 1680x1050 and I am not planning on jumping to 1920x1080 anytime soon (3 years), thats why I bought the GTX 460 since it is plenty for MMOs (not that demanding on GPUs). As I have said earlier, I have seen some streaming with GTX 460 (I am almsot certain that streaming via XSPLIT eats a whole amount of CPU power) and they still achieve 60+ fps while raiding Firelands. I will probably live with the Phenom for a couple of months and wait for i5-2500k to drop the price a bit.

 

[toyota]

the 2500k will not likely drop in price. it will simply be replaced at the same price point by a cpu that's 100 to 200 mhz faster.

 

[sm625]

Yeah the cheapest unlockable intel sb will probably be $190 a year from now on ebay. The only way to stop that is to hope that the $190 bulldozer is faster than the 2500k when both are overlocked. If it is, then the price of a used 2500k will drop along with the price of bulldozers.

 

[Betatest]

Okay, I managed to get my temperatures down by like 15C I guess, I added on more fan that is blowing air directly to the CPU, no changes whatsoever.

 

[soccerballtux]

Personally after skimming through this thread I do think a 2500k would be a nice upgrade for you but only really if you overclock it. I built a 2500k system for a hardcore WoW friend who didn't want his framerate to drop below 60. We were torn for a little while between the Phenom II to upgrade his existing AM3 system and the 2500k but he decided he wanted it futureproof for future expansions etc.

It's clocked at 4 Ghz stock volts with a 5850 everything on Ultra except Shadows and it literally NEVER drops below 60 fps (@ 1680x1050)

My system with an i5 750 @ 3 Ghz and 5770 bounces around between 30 and 60 fps on Ultra with the same settings (1680x1050) (we both have VSYNC on)

People seem to be neglecting the fact that WoW runs much better on current gen Intel CPUs than AMD in general
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-directx-11-performance,2793-10.html
"Clearly, AMD's CPUs are holding back performance in Cataclysm compared to Intel's processors." same thing in SC2, something about those Blizzard games...

Yeah a Phenom might get 60 fps most of the time, but if you really want fluid gameplay then you can't have 60 fps most of the time, you want a CPU that can push 100-200 FPS that way it will *drop* down to 60 in the most intense moments lol

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=32028089&postcount=103

 

[makken]

Based on what you've told us, it definitely sounds like a throttle issue. If you really want to confirm it, grab a program that can record CPU temp and load, and run that in the background while you play Aion, then report the results. I believe speedfan can do this.

What you should see, if it is a throttle issue is your CPU pegged at 100% usage, and your temp pegged at TJmax.

Also, before you run out and buy a new CPU cooler, do some basic checks on your cooling system:
1) make sure there is no dust buildup inside your case
2) make sure all fans are functioning properly
3) make sure you don't have anything (eg. cables) blocking critical airflow
4) make sure the airflow in your case is well defined -- for example, check to see if your GPU exhaust is going into your CPU intake, as that can easily cause your CPU to overheat (I believe most 460s exhaust out the back so this shouldn't be a problem)

 

[pkilway01]

Sorry, but I think you should jump all over this deal listed in the Hot Deals section (CM Hyper 212 + for only $14.99 after rebate plus shipping). You can't beat the performance for the price!