Personally I got shearing, especially headlooking around planet surfaces. Turning on vsync (not in-game strangely but in the nvidia control panel settings) finally fixed this for me.
P.S. all slightly OT, apologies.
Personally I got shearing, especially headlooking around planet surfaces. Turning on vsync (not in-game strangely but in the nvidia control panel settings) finally fixed this for me.
P.S. all slightly OT, apologies.
Most games do not do multi-threading well, and in that case clock speed is all that matters. Since i5's are just as fast per thread as i7's people have often thought it just made sense to spend less money for the same performance, figuratively speaking.
"Most" games. That's changing rapidly, and Elite: Dangerous certainly does not fall in that category. It multithreads very well. I've played it on both an i5 and i7. The i5, even though overclocked, would get bogged down in busy areas such as asteroid belts with a lot of ships around. The i7 doesn't even come close to breaking a sweat.
So in that context, if you've got the extra cash to spring for an i7, your money will not be wasted.
"Most" games. That's changing rapidly, and Elite: Dangerous certainly does not fall in that category. It multithreads very well. I've played it on both an i5 and i7. The i5, even though overclocked, would get bogged down in busy areas such as asteroid belts with a lot of ships around. The i7 doesn't even come close to breaking a sweat.
So in that context, if you've got the extra cash to spring for an i7, your money will not be wasted.
My MSI 980Ti runs Elite on Ultra 1080 - 60C @ 175 FPS. Not sure why you are up that high. I do have a custom case with 240 MM case fans so I'm putting lots of air through it. I'm using the stock Twin Frozr fans that came with the GPU.
Typically, a "gaming" PC isn't that much more powerful than an regular one, but has been tweaked to give additional performance. There's a decent article here. Do you want to spend $120 for an extra 10% performance? I would, but your mileage may vary. I do a lot of video editing and rendering so for me it is worth it.
Full disclosure, I have an 8 core AMD CPU, but it's the best one you can buy until Zen comes out.
Turning off vsync to get a higher FPS is an indicator of how the game is performing. It will drop when around planets and stations and that lets you compare to others. If you have vsync on then you are not getting a true sense of performance and can't compare apples to apples, as it were.
Last edited:
The R9 390's have a max operating temp of 96c. A lot of users are hitting 80-86 as an average under full load. I recently got a Be Quiet 800 case, very good case I have to say. The case coupled with a good fan profile allows me to run with the temp under 70c under full load which is very good for an R9!
I'll turn Vsync of in the winter to save on the heating bills!
Actually it was done for free by our electricity supplier (Southern Electric in the UK). I think it's more convenient for them because they can take meter readings remotely.
Usually a restricted budget.
V8 BMW and V12 Aston Martin are both cars, but which can you afford?
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I used to live in a small two storey tenement with paper thin walls and no heat upstairs. I had a 20" CRT which weighed 90 pounds and would heat my computer room in winter very effectively. In summer I had to have windows open and fans.I'll turn Vsync of in the winter to save on the heating bills!
Well the Xeon is just 5€ more then the I5.....
http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-4x-3-40GHz-So-1150-BOX_853872.html
http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/Intel-Xeon-E3-1231v3-4x-3-40GHz-So-1150-BOX_960054.html
Well if you go for Skylake its a whole different story. Its slightly more expensive and not all desktop mainboards support the Skylake Xeons.
http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-4x-3-40GHz-So-1150-BOX_853872.html
http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/Intel-Xeon-E3-1231v3-4x-3-40GHz-So-1150-BOX_960054.html
Well if you go for Skylake its a whole different story. Its slightly more expensive and not all desktop mainboards support the Skylake Xeons.
Oh I agree totally. Turn it off to get a figure that you can use to compare against others, just don't leave it off ... I would suggest.
OK, thanks. I am in the UK, but with Scottish Power - don't suppose they will invest in new meters!
I am starting to put together the spec of my next PC.
I see the recommended spec is for an i7 processor (it will be Intel for me).
Is there a specific reason why Hyper Threading is beneficial for ED?
Most everywhere I read that an i5 is the most cost-effective solution for gaming (for me only ED) with only marginal benefits in getting an i7.
I have not seen any performance figures for ED though.
Anyone got any hard facts that could be useful?
Thanks
My friend and I have AMD 8350 and R9 280's for the video cards. We both have no issues running Elite on the highest settings.
Just an FYI
Also the Vibe HTC VR states on the steam page.
CPU: Intel® i5-4590, AMD FX 8350 equivalent or better
So the 8350 will do the job just fine, it is an 8 core and for the price can't be beat.
I do also have a main rig that has a i7 3770K and my HTPC has an 8350. I was able to buy my motherboard and CPU for the price of just the CPU for the i7. If you have the extra money to burn... go i7, but if you want to build as much performance as possible but not break the bank I would say go with the AMD 8350.
I have been very happy and surprised at the performance of the 8350.
Last edited:
I have a 120Hz gaming monitor so I leave it off for the best results.
http://www.viewsoniceurope.com/uk/products/archive/V3D245.php#pFeatures
Not sure what I'll do for VR yet.
A modern i5 absolutely blows a 8350 out of the water. It's such an outdated chip that I really wouldn't recommend it if you're building a new rig.
Per-clock performance is terrible due to two cores sharing a single FPU, outside of the old 32nm production method. Price/performance of an 8530 is only good if you're doing a heavily multithreaded workload all the time, or are building an ultra-budget gaming rig, otherwise you might as well get an i3 or i5 just to futureproof the machine quite a bit more.
An i3 or i5 is better than an eight core AMD? Riiiiight....
Yes, it's dated, but still outperforms most Intel chips. The current FX chips do have their flaws, but they are still damned good. "Price/performance of an 8530 is only good if you're doing a heavily multithreaded workload all the time" - Like Elite you mean, video processing, database work, running multiple VM's, or the other things I do daily? As for budget, when I bought my AMD FX-8370 it was literally 15% of the cost of the top end i7 at the time with 90% of the performance of the Intel chip. When I OC the AMD CPU, I got comparable performance.
I'm not going to turn this into an AMD vs. Intel rant. Both chips are decent when the right model is used for the proper purpose. But your statements are dismissive and frankly wrong. When you say "per-clock performance," I take it you mean IPC and that is only one measure of a CPU.
The "outdated" chip you don't recommend scored 11 when I took the Steam VR test. Why don't you go here and take a look for yourself at how the 12 core i7's scored against it.
As for building a ultra-budget gaming rig, yes you can build one today with an AMD FX and still get superior performance. Or wait for Zen which improves on the IPC by 40%.
These values are without OverClocking BTW.
lol.
Why did you pick a single benchmark of a game that's mostly GPU limited instead of CPU limited?
And yes, a core i3 can beat a 8 core AMD chip in gaming tasks:
Note that Crysis 3 is heavily multithreaded and happily uses 8 cores.
Also:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/06/19/intel-core-i7-4790k-devil-s-canyon-review/5
How about that multitasking performance? http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/06/19/intel-core-i7-4790k-devil-s-canyon-review/4
Last edited:
You just have to hope that they decide to release the HIGH end/Enthusiast side of the product line first instead of rolling out the mid range or lower first which N has done a few times in the past.
Personally, Pascal didn't put me off buying a top of the line factory overclocked ASUS 980ti a few weeks ago for this new rig I just finished. If Pascal goes like most of the other rollouts over the last 25 years, it is going to be awhile before this new generation of cards from Nividia as well as AMD reaches the level of stability and support the 980ti series now enjoys. The up side is that those thinking about building a new gaming rig might soon be able to grab the same card I just bought for under $400.00!
Now that would be an awesome deal for a stable and mature graphics technology! As for the CPU side... I agree that ED at least seems to run very well with an i5, but my philosophy has always been to go with the best components you can afford and don't skimp on CPU or the GPU, even if there is something shiny on the horizon. Because there is ALWAYS going to be something shiny on the horizon!
As for which chipset to go with... There is something to be said for going with the Z170 at this point in time since Skylake and future "Lakes" are all going to use it. If for nothing else than having a more future proof base for the next 5 years.
Last edited:
Hopefully tomorrow I'll be able to see how my new PC that I just built performs. I chose the i7 processor after reading up on the i5 vs i7 stuff and also consulting with some of my fellow engineers at work who have also built PCs*. I had to cut a few corners off my ultimate gaming rig design and that included getting a GTX 960 4GB instead of the 980ti 6 GB I wanted but I'm sure it will be fine. I'm only driving a 32" 1920x1080p monitor and even my poor old MacPro was capable of driving that monitor with its AMD HD 5770.
*If I have to skimp I'd rather skimp on the GPU and not the CPU. Replacing the GPU when I can afford to won't be as big of a pain as swapping out the GPU. The resale value of the 960 is probably higher than the CPU as well.
*If I have to skimp I'd rather skimp on the GPU and not the CPU. Replacing the GPU when I can afford to won't be as big of a pain as swapping out the GPU. The resale value of the 960 is probably higher than the CPU as well.