No dual core love in 2015

[Erenhardt]

Each to his own I guess, but if I had a dual core that ran with 30+ FPS minimum, I would much rather play the game that way than to be locked out of it. Lots of console games run at 30FPS, and many more people play on them than PC, and I don't think they consider the experience "horrible".

In fact I DA:I runs about 30 to 40 FPS on my system, and I consider it less than ideal, but quite playable.

What is your system?

Not every dual core is 4.6Ghz intel haswell.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Playing farcry4 now, in heavy battles/big towns dips to low 40's, but mostly low 50's. Just exploring/hunting animals = 52-64 fps on "high". g3258@4.6 *8gb ram now r270@270x speed. Certainly playable.

Have you tried the game at the factory CPU clock?

 

[Danrr]

I was thinking on buying Farcry 4, but I haven't read all this BS about the "requirements", now I will not buy the game.

When I started to play games on my fist PC you had the "minimum requirements", my PC don't even meet those requirements but that didn't stop me for trying to "play" at 10 FPS or lower.

That was the main reason I decided to build my fist PC buying the parts, to be able to play most recent games at "high-medium" quality-experience.

If the game developer wants to limit my options or wants to put restrictions on what I need to have in order to play their game, I will not buy it, ever.

It seems that they are trying to lure you to the a more "secure" customer base, consoles.

 

[frozentundra123456]

What is your system?

Not every dual core is 4.6Ghz intel haswell.

An i5 2320 and a HD7770. The problem I am sure is the gpu with only 1gb of vram. I was just referring to the comment that 30FPS is "terrible", not specifically to a dual core question. With that gpu at 1080p, I am pretty much limited to 40FPS +/- for most new games, but I dont really feel the need for 60FPS min like some do.

 

[escrow4]

Played through the prologue. No support for 16:10 (black matte bars) so off to a fantastic start! All settings maxed including enhanced godrays with no AA or Vsync ranges from 60-80FPS, dips down to 50+. Stutters are irritating and its basically FC3 v2. Meh. Back to Unity I go.

 

[lyssword]

Have you tried the game at the factory CPU clock?

Yes i did, about 10-15fps slower on average

 

[lyssword]

32FPS minimum's are horrible. I'll test this on my 5930K today.

Yes it is horrible, but I believe it is GPU-limited. The textures and lighting are amazing, pretty much like very heavily (1000 mods) modded skyrim. I'm sure I would have higher fps on g980 vs my r270(oc'd) on high settings.

 

[SPBHM]

32 min for a 30FPS locked console port is not horrible,

 

[Morbus]

Yes it is horrible, but I believe it is GPU-limited. The textures and lighting are amazing, pretty much like very heavily (1000 mods) modded skyrim. I'm sure I would have higher fps on g980 vs my r270(oc'd) on high settings.

It's clearly not GPU-limited if an overclock on the CPU will increase FPSs by 40-50%!
It's obviously CPU-limited.

 

[lyssword]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2408934, my oc'd chip is at least equal to the 4-yr old i3-2100. If you compare the 2100 vs 4770, the weak i3-2100 is ~77% of the fps, if you compare my card (270) vs 980, my card is ~48% of the 980. You can also see the 12-thread sandy bridge (or even 4770k) being slower than 4670k, so clearly it's not a perfectly threaded game. you can also see 4threaded i3 4330 being almost as fast as 8thread sandy bridge, although something weird is going on with 5960x

 

[boozzer]

I just googled for some scene related news. it seems both far cry 4 and DA I are both artificially 4 core locks. both got fixed by using an injector type of program. oced 3258 at 4.5 can get 50+ fps in 1080p easily it seems.

damn, kinda **** up how pirates can play the game while legit 2 core customers can't.

why the stupid artificial locks? is intel paying for this? this is the only way it makes any kind of sense.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I just googled for some scene related news. it seems both far cry 4 and DA I are both artificially 4 core locks. both got fixed by using an injector type of program. oced 3258 at 4.5 can get 50+ fps in 1080p easily it seems.

damn, kinda **** up how pirates can play the game while legit 2 core customers can't.

why the stupid artificial locks? is intel paying for this? this is the only way it makes any kind of sense.

well it certainly would not make sense for intel to want this, since it locks out their latest low end gaming chip the overclockable pentium. If anyone benefits from this, it is amd, since it leaves their athlon X4 as the only viable sub hundred dollar gaming chip. And relax amd fans, i think it is just lazy porting. I do hope people complain loudly enough to stop this though.

 

[RussianSensation]

Really? Even in AMD's showcase game for "moar cores" and mantle, an i5 and *even an i3* under DX are faster than an FX8350 under mantle.

BF4 Final Stand Benchmarks

Deal with that.

Bad example. In BF4 Final Stand with Mantle FX9370 beats i5 4670k with a 295X2. Chances are someone with a cheap/weak CPU wants the best bang for the buck in BF4, and they will quickly realize a budget R9 270/270X or 280 with an FX CPU and Mantle is a way better deal than an i3+750Ti/760. The former system would win easily. In fact you can't buy anything new from Intel+NV for BF4 at the same price as an FX8000 OC+280 + Mantle and have faster performance in BF4 multi-player.

Also, not sure why people always keep talking about FX8000 when 9370 is $200, a competitor to i5. Those lower clocked 8000 series are well below $150, with frequent sales on 8320-8350 for $100-$130.
http://slickdeals.net/f/7423034-fx-8350-4ghz-processor-115?v=1

For most modern games an overclocked FX8000 or a stock 9370 will rip an overclocked 3258 apart, especially in Crysis 3, Metro LL, BF4 Multi-player. Actually FX OC can even outperform the SB i5's in BF4 multiplayer. Ok so with FC4, 3258 works but so what. There are so many games now where you lose 30-40% of the performance with higher end cards such as 290X/970 on a 3258. That means for next gen games you will soon become both GPU and CPU limited with the 3258 since you can't really upgrade beyond a 280/280X and take any more advantage of the GPU power.

The idea of buying a $350 next gen card with a $60 3258 is not sound. Also, I find it hard to believe someone is willing to buy a $350 GPU but can't spend $70-120 extra to step up to an i3/locked i5? 3258 is perfect for Blizzard style games which let's face it is a very popular % of all PC gaming. It's perfect for SC2, WOW, Hearthstone, Diablo 3 gamers.

A $115 FX8350 @ 4.7 Ghz will absolutely rape an overclocked 3258 in well-threaded titles which as of now is almost every modern AAA/popular PC game.

Here is recorded footage of 1.5Ghz 970 paired with an FX8350@4.7Ghz against an i5 4690K@4.8Ghz in AC Unity, all max settings with 4xMSAA:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mYXPvkvNTbY

3258 shines for low threaded titles but for newer modern titles it's overrated/overhyped beyond belief. As I said before, it can't even outperform a 6-year-old i7 920@4.0Ghz in demanding AAA titles.

 

[AtenRa]

Here is recorded footage of 1.5Ghz 970 paired with an FX8350@4.7Ghz against an i5 4690K@4.8Ghz in AC Unity, all max settings with 4xMSAA:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mYXPvkvNTbY

But you are GPU limited,
But nobody will play bellow 60fps
But fx sucks
but
but
but



Really now, with 2x MSAA it would be much better performance wise.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I just googled for some scene related news. it seems both far cry 4 and DA I are both artificially 4 core locks. both got fixed by using an injector type of program. oced 3258 at 4.5 can get 50+ fps in 1080p easily it seems.

damn, kinda **** up how pirates can play the game while legit 2 core customers can't.

why the stupid artificial locks? is intel paying for this? this is the only way it makes any kind of sense.

Far Cry 4 is patched to work with 2 cores now.

It seems the only reason is consoles uses core 0+1 for OS and the game want to start with 2 and up. And when they lazy devs either dont, or are pressed not to change this. Then you artifcially need a quadcore for PC that.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Bad example. In BF4 Final Stand with Mantle FX9370 beats i5 4670k with a 295X2. Chances are someone with a cheap/weak CPU wants the best bang for the buck in BF4, and they will quickly realize a budget R9 270/270X or 280 with an FX CPU and Mantle is a way better deal than an i3+750Ti/760. The former system would win easily. In fact you can't buy anything new from Intel+NV for BF4 at the same price as an FX8000 OC+280 + Mantle and have faster performance in BF4 multi-player.

Also, not sure why people always keep talking about FX8000 when 9370 is $200, a competitor to i5. Those lower clocked 8000 series are well below $150, with frequent sales on 8320-8350 for $100-$130.
http://slickdeals.net/f/7423034-fx-8350-4ghz-processor-115?v=1

For most modern games an overclocked FX8000 or a stock 9370 will rip an overclocked 3258 apart, especially in Crysis 3, Metro LL, BF4 Multi-player. Actually FX OC can even outperform the SB i5's in BF4 multiplayer. Ok so with FC4, 3258 works but so what. There are so many games now where you lose 30-40% of the performance with higher end cards such as 290X/970 on a 3258. That means for next gen games you will soon become both GPU and CPU limited with the 3258 since you can't really upgrade beyond a 280/280X and take any more advantage of the GPU power.

The idea of buying a $350 next gen card with a $60 3258 is not sound. Also, I find it hard to believe someone is willing to buy a $350 GPU but can't spend $70-120 extra to step up to an i3/locked i5? 3258 is perfect for Blizzard style games which let's face it is a very popular % of all PC gaming. It's perfect for SC2, WOW, Hearthstone, Diablo 3 gamers.

A $115 FX8350 @ 4.7 Ghz will absolutely rape an overclocked 3258 in well-threaded titles which as of now is almost every modern AAA/popular PC game.

Here is recorded footage of 1.5Ghz 970 paired with an FX8350@4.7Ghz against an i5 4690K@4.8Ghz in AC Unity, all max settings with 4xMSAA:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mYXPvkvNTbY

3258 shines for low threaded titles but for newer modern titles it's overrated/overhyped beyond belief. As I said before, it can't even outperform a 6-year-old i7 920@4.0Ghz in demanding AAA titles.

Nice deflection with the pentium. i was not discussing that cpu at all. In addition, the i3 under DX is faster in both min and average fps than the 9590 under mantle. So we have a cheaper cpu at less than 1/3 the tdp being faster than the amd flagship. So you are right, it is a bad exanple---for AMD.

 

[Enigmoid]

Bad example. In BF4 Final Stand with Mantle FX9370 beats i5 4670k with a 295X2. Chances are someone with a cheap/weak CPU wants the best bang for the buck in BF4, and they will quickly realize a budget R9 270/270X or 280 with an FX CPU and Mantle is a way better deal than an i3+750Ti/760. The former system would win easily. In fact you can't buy anything new from Intel+NV for BF4 at the same price as an FX8000 OC+280 + Mantle and have faster performance in BF4 multi-player.

No idea where you are getting this.

Sure in Mantle the 9370 beats the 4670k but why are you using mantle when it performs worse than DX. Not to mention if, as you state in your next sentence you are using a nvidia card would you care about AMD's more CPU hungry drivers.

Not to mention that the two are close enough under Mantle to be indistinguishable and the the i5 overclocked will gain quite a bit while the 9370 only has a little more overclocking headroom.

And their have been numerous complaints about BF4 mantle on the 280 and 280X.

Note that the FPs are high enough that really it doesn't matter which CPU you use (though I am not convinced that they did strenuous testing).

Also, not sure why people always keep talking about FX8000 when 9370 is $200, a competitor to i5. Those lower clocked 8000 series are well below $150, with frequent sales on 8320-8350 for $100-$130.
http://slickdeals.net/f/7423034-fx-8350-4ghz-processor-115?v=1

Because lower clocked 8xxx models frequently overclock to 9370 levels while costing only 65% the price.

For most modern games an overclocked FX8000 or a stock 9370 will rip an overclocked 3258 apart, especially in Crysis 3, Metro LL, BF4 Multi-player. Actually FX OC can even outperform the SB i5's in BF4 multiplayer. Ok so with FC4, 3258 works but so what. There are so many games now where you lose 30-40% of the performance with higher end cards such as 290X/970 on a 3258. That means for next gen games you will soon become both GPU and CPU limited with the 3258 since you can't really upgrade beyond a 280/280X and take any more advantage of the GPU power.

Well no duh. They are about 2x as expensive too. I agree that the 3258 isn't meant to be paired with high end cards. Did anyone actually recommend this?

Here is recorded footage of 1.5Ghz 970 paired with an FX8350@4.7Ghz against an i5 4690K@4.8Ghz in AC Unity, all max settings with 4xMSAA:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mYXPvkvNTbY

Yes, gameplay at 40-44 fps average with 30 fps mins. Completely representative of how many people are going to play the game. How about shooting for 60 fps average?

 

[JumBie]

I just googled for some scene related news. it seems both far cry 4 and DA I are both artificially 4 core locks. both got fixed by using an injector type of program. oced 3258 at 4.5 can get 50+ fps in 1080p easily it seems.

damn, kinda **** up how pirates can play the game while legit 2 core customers can't.

why the stupid artificial locks? is intel paying for this? this is the only way it makes any kind of sense.

Dragon age DOES NOT work on dual core processors, the injector does nothing for it. Far cry 4 however does work with the injector.

EDIT: I stand correct, the crackers have managed to get extreme injector to work with dragon age now. I guess its time to buy it and give it a shot.

Shame on EA and Ubisoft, needing crackers to allow 70% of the market to play their game.

 

[lyssword]

tried AW free weekend multiplayer, seems to run pretty well on high(it did have a message about weak cpu or something in the beginning). It didnt feel like it was dipping below 60fps, however it was mostly on 12 player maps.

 

[Shehriazad]

Dual cores will slowly phase out for gamers(unless they hyperthread)...that said...finally a reason why the AMD 860K is superior to that retarded Intel Pentium anniversary CPU. xD (only comparing because they're in the same price category) Also for most people mumbling about 40fps.

With a decent monitor that doesn't tear horribly 40fps will be just fine and feel just as fluid as 60fps. 25-35 is where it gets wonky for gaming. But once you hit near 40 your only enemy is tearing.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Dragon age DOES NOT work on dual core processors, the injector does nothing for it. Far cry 4 however does work with the injector.

EDIT: I stand correct, the crackers have managed to get extreme injector to work with dragon age now. I guess its time to buy it and give it a shot.

Shame on EA and Ubisoft, needing crackers to allow 70% of the market to play their game.

If you actually owned the game, you would know by now that FC4 works on dualcores after patching.

 

[boozzer]

Far Cry 4 is patched to work with 2 cores now.

It seems the only reason is consoles uses core 0+1 for OS and the game want to start with 2 and up. And when they lazy devs either dont, or are pressed not to change this. Then you artifcially need a quadcore for PC that.

I don't own or play either game. so I wouldn't know their official patched state. but I would give my left #$% that the devs are pressed not to change it. I would 100% understand the lazy + money part if they have to change the engine or anything time consuming, but if injecting a dll can make it work, they have no excuses left.

100% deliberate.

 

[escrow4]

Still don't get why you'd waste your time on barely office processors in a gaming box. Why not just get a 4790K or 5820K and be done with it? Ports are lazy, get over it, overspec and move on. Both would smash any FX. And no minimum FPS? FX dip way more, they cannot sustain consistent frames.

 

[AtenRa]

FX dip way more, they cannot sustain consistent frames.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADaALZ0RWDA&list=PLPPlscE2CXdFD3sh6m6sNiPB9GdtPU0wU&index=7

 

[tential]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADaALZ0RWDA&list=PLPPlscE2CXdFD3sh6m6sNiPB9GdtPU0wU&index=7

If no one sees the settings it doesn't really matter....