Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 360

Thread: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

  1. #81
    Biggus Splenus's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    3,547

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    @ VanGoth - all the results in this thread where performed by members of the community, so it's 100% reliable and true...

    alQ saying that AMD CPUs are "unusable" in TW might be going a bit far in my opinion though, because they certainly can be used well to play TW, but if you're in the market for a new CPU specifically for TW, Intel is definitely the logical solution.
    | R5 3600, RTX 2060, MSI B450I, 32GB 3200MHz CL16 DDR4, AX760i, NH-U12S |

  2. #82

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Yes thats my point actually, saying AMD CPUs are "unusable" for TW is plain wrong, perhaps that particular part in his post can be rewritten in some way.
    "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free..." Goethe

    "Share my woman, share my wine, share my soul, burn the sun...this is all just for Rome" Triarii

  3. #83
    SamueleD's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,555

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Quote Originally Posted by VanGoth View Post
    Yes thats my point actually, saying AMD CPUs are "unusable" for TW is plain wrong, perhaps that particular part in his post can be rewritten in some way.
    Let's be honest here: an AMD CPU will run the game, but less than 20fps at stock speeds in melee means pretty much unplayable, the only reason it's accepted is that you are not always in thick melee, but Rome II is going to be a melee heavy game, which means that an AMD CPU is going to cause lag more often.
    They are usable, but any Intel CPU, at the same price, will give you better fps in TW, that's just the way it is, even a cheap i3 (desktop) will perform better than an eight core FX. So while you might still keep yours and enjoy the game, if you are going to buy a new CPU for TW, there is really no reason to pick an AMD one. And finding data for providing better shopping advice for Rome II is the whole point of this thread.

  4. #84
    alQamar's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Dortmund, Germany
    Posts
    5,963

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    I personally do not get why you VanGoth and Aragorn do not submit your results instead of talking and then even say we do not have enough representative data. That's really odd.
    NEW: Total War Saga: Britannia benchmark thread - last update: 10.05.2018
    HOW-TO-step-up-from-MBR-CSM-LEGACY-BOOT-to-UEFI-GPT
    Many of my past contributions in the time from 2011-2017 will contain content that now show broken links. Unfortunately I had to delete all pictures linked on TWC that were hosted on imageshack.us. Read why
    If you are missing anything of interest, please let me know. Sorry for any inconvinience caused.

  5. #85

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Hi alQamar
    Please see attached
    Cheers!
    Attached Files Attached Files

  6. #86
    Laetus
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    23

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Sorry something went wrong with my last post, got en error when posting and I can't edit it. I hope it will work now.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  7. #87

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    hey alQamar.
    Yesterday I upgraded to win8 and noticed that my fps ingame(fall of the samurai) were lower. so I decided to run the cpu benchmark.
    logs3win8.rar
    I got about 2 fps less in comparison with win7
    and now I've overclocked to 4.6Ghz
    log4win8.rar
    @4.6 I get 46 fps...

  8. #88
    alQamar's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Dortmund, Germany
    Posts
    5,963

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    not impossible. The results may change. Some game have advantages in Win8 some not but this FPS drops are not really critical. thanks for submission.
    NEW: Total War Saga: Britannia benchmark thread - last update: 10.05.2018
    HOW-TO-step-up-from-MBR-CSM-LEGACY-BOOT-to-UEFI-GPT
    Many of my past contributions in the time from 2011-2017 will contain content that now show broken links. Unfortunately I had to delete all pictures linked on TWC that were hosted on imageshack.us. Read why
    If you are missing anything of interest, please let me know. Sorry for any inconvinience caused.

  9. #89
    Laetus
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    [...]AMD processors are literally not usable for Total War:[...]
    This is nonsense. Its true, that Shogun runs faster on Intel-CPU's. But Shogun 2 is also running on a AMP-CPU very well!
    Your benchmark is not representative. How many people playing Shogun with settings "ultra"? How many players have an monitor with this solution? You take only a small part of configurations. Im sure, that 90% from all Shogun 2 players do not play with this settings.

    To say, AMD processors are not usable is simply not the truth.

  10. #90

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Quote Originally Posted by gealany View Post
    To say, AMD processors are not usable is simply not the truth.
    have u actually checked CPU benchmark results with AMD cpus @5.0 GHz??

  11. #91
    Primicerius
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Canada
    Posts
    3,522

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance


  12. #92
    SamueleD's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,555

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Quote Originally Posted by gealany View Post
    This is nonsense. Its true, that Shogun runs faster on Intel-CPU's. But Shogun 2 is also running on a AMP-CPU very well!
    Your benchmark is not representative. How many people playing Shogun with settings "ultra"? How many players have an monitor with this solution? You take only a small part of configurations. Im sure, that 90% from all Shogun 2 players do not play with this settings.

    To say, AMD processors are not usable is simply not the truth.
    Most people want to play with either high or ultra unit sizes, for which you need a good CPU. The resolution doesn't have a really big effect on the CPU bench, we only used that one because 1900x1080 is the most common resolution on steam.
    Also most people with an AMD CPU won't have an overclocked FX-8350, running at 5.0GHz, which is the only one to give a result that could be defined as playable.

    Please, stop this pointless debate, we are not saying AMD is crap or something like that, we are just saying that AMD CPUs don't run TW as well as comparatively priced Intel CPUs, on the contrary, they are a lot slower, and that is a fact that any benchmark will confirm, as you can see for yourself.

    The purpose of this thread is to collect data on the performance of various hardware in TW, in order to provide better informed suggestions for those who wish to buy new hardware, and give them an idea on how that hardware will run the game on fairly enjoyable settings (the ones used for the GPU benchmark). On the light of this we aim to suggest the best possible hardware for TW at a given price point. Apparently Intel CPUs are better suited to TW than AMD CPUs, at every price point.
    If, in the future, AMD will produce CPUs that are better suited to TW than a comparatively priced Intel CPU, we will make sure to recommend those, in the meantime, we cannot, in all honesty, recommend a single AMD CPU for TW gaming.

    Basically to run Shogun 2 well on an AMD CPU you need to lower unit sizes, but why would you want to do that, when you can get a similarly priced Intel CPU that will run them higher?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan113112 View Post
    It means very, very little. It compares hardware to the game recommended and minimum specs, which tend not to be exhaustive and often misleading, you are much better of comparing benchmarks.

  13. #93
    Laetus
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Quote Originally Posted by SamueleD View Post
    [...]we are not saying AMD is crap or something like that[...]
    AMD processors are literally not usable for Total War
    Are you sure?

  14. #94
    SamueleD's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,555

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Quote Originally Posted by gealany View Post
    Are you sure?
    Being unusable for something doesn't mean you are crap. AMD offers very good price/performance for heavily threaded applications, unfortunately for AMD TW is not one of those applications.

    And yes, less than 20fps means constant lag in melee, which means unplayabe in a melee heavy game as Rome II, even more as the melee engagements will last longer than in Shogun 2. So AMD CPUs, unless heavily overclocked, are unusable for playing Rome II on a unit setting from large to ultra, which is what most people enjoy.

  15. #95
    alQamar's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Dortmund, Germany
    Posts
    5,963

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    yes unfortunately. The framerate limit in cam close ups and unit blobs is itching. For campaign or small / medium unit size, this might not be a big issue. Would be cool if you can submit your benchmarks aswell gealany.

    @Babydoc you sent me new results with blood disabled but forgot the number of thread tweak so I cannot use yours. CPU-Z would be needed aswell.


    Why we are testing only ULTRA settings with all features enabled:

    1. otherwise high end rigs would be even more bottlenecked and the comparison to low / mid end machines would be not possible
    2. most of all players persist to believe they can play Shogun 2 / Rome 2 on ultra, but literally they have no idea what ultra means. Ultra is not clicking the ultra preset in Shogun 2, as then still some very consuming features are still off that make the game look better.
    3. most players interested into an upgrade want to know if they can handle high or ultra settings. Thats why we show what is needed to run this fluently.
    Last edited by alQamar; August 19, 2013 at 10:02 AM.
    NEW: Total War Saga: Britannia benchmark thread - last update: 10.05.2018
    HOW-TO-step-up-from-MBR-CSM-LEGACY-BOOT-to-UEFI-GPT
    Many of my past contributions in the time from 2011-2017 will contain content that now show broken links. Unfortunately I had to delete all pictures linked on TWC that were hosted on imageshack.us. Read why
    If you are missing anything of interest, please let me know. Sorry for any inconvinience caused.

  16. #96
    baldrick13's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Britain
    Posts
    466

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Quote Originally Posted by SamueleD View Post
    Most people want to play with either high or ultra unit sizes, for which you need a good CPU. The resolution doesn't have a really big effect on the CPU bench, we only used that one because 1900x1080 is the most common resolution on steam.
    Also most people with an AMD CPU won't have an overclocked FX-8350, running at 5.0GHz, which is the only one to give a result that could be defined as playable.

    Please, stop this pointless debate, we are not saying AMD is crap or something like that, we are just saying that AMD CPUs don't run TW as well as comparatively priced Intel CPUs, on the contrary, they are a lot slower, and that is a fact that any benchmark will confirm, as you can see for yourself.

    The purpose of this thread is to collect data on the performance of various hardware in TW, in order to provide better informed suggestions for those who wish to buy new hardware, and give them an idea on how that hardware will run the game on fairly enjoyable settings (the ones used for the GPU benchmark). On the light of this we aim to suggest the best possible hardware for TW at a given price point. Apparently Intel CPUs are better suited to TW than AMD CPUs, at every price point.
    If, in the future, AMD will produce CPUs that are better suited to TW than a comparatively priced Intel CPU, we will make sure to recommend those, in the meantime, we cannot, in all honesty, recommend a single AMD CPU for TW gaming.

    Basically to run Shogun 2 well on an AMD CPU you need to lower unit sizes, but why would you want to do that, when you can get a similarly priced Intel CPU that will run them higher?



    It means very, very little. It compares hardware to the game recommended and minimum specs, which tend not to be exhaustive and often misleading, you are much better of comparing benchmarks.
    actually i can play shogun 2 on max unit sizes with darthmod and still get a good framerate (true i am using shader model 3 high but i won't use model 5 until i get my new graphics card).

    i'm used to console games so a framerate of 30-40 fps during a melee isn't unplayable for me.
    on every total war game I've played i don't see how amd is so horrible.

  17. #97
    alQamar's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Dortmund, Germany
    Posts
    5,963

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    I can understand your point of view. But you need to understand ours aswell. With ultra settings and DX11 AMD cpus are FAR behind Intel and 25 fps were generated by 5.0 GHz core literally a few have. The other one tested only have 15 fps and thats also below your 30-40 you are used to. Everything above 30 is fluent for the human eye.
    NEW: Total War Saga: Britannia benchmark thread - last update: 10.05.2018
    HOW-TO-step-up-from-MBR-CSM-LEGACY-BOOT-to-UEFI-GPT
    Many of my past contributions in the time from 2011-2017 will contain content that now show broken links. Unfortunately I had to delete all pictures linked on TWC that were hosted on imageshack.us. Read why
    If you are missing anything of interest, please let me know. Sorry for any inconvinience caused.

  18. #98
    alQamar's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Dortmund, Germany
    Posts
    5,963

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Quote Originally Posted by Anon052 View Post
    Sorry something went wrong with my last post, got en error when posting and I can't edit it. I hope it will work now.
    thanks for your results, they helped us a lot. Please update your BIOS but AT LEAST AMD chipset and graphics card drivers. Both are outdated. Please run the GPU bench again and leave me a PM with results.
    NEW: Total War Saga: Britannia benchmark thread - last update: 10.05.2018
    HOW-TO-step-up-from-MBR-CSM-LEGACY-BOOT-to-UEFI-GPT
    Many of my past contributions in the time from 2011-2017 will contain content that now show broken links. Unfortunately I had to delete all pictures linked on TWC that were hosted on imageshack.us. Read why
    If you are missing anything of interest, please let me know. Sorry for any inconvinience caused.

  19. #99
    babydoc's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    In a big house.
    Posts
    490

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Check mail AQ

  20. #100
    alQamar's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Dortmund, Germany
    Posts
    5,963

    Default Re: The TWC Total War Benchmark thread - compare your real TW performance

    Quote Originally Posted by Nippy View Post
    Hi alQamar
    Please see attached
    Cheers!

    hi Nippy,

    I noticed some misconfigurations in your rig:
    >> RAM is not configured properly
    go to BIOS and choose A.I tweaker: XMP / XMP 2 as listed below
    XMP #2 9.0-9-9-24-41-2T @ 800 MHz (1.500 Volts)
    >> your graphics card driver is outdated please update
    >> your CPU is not properly overclocked. If you have a NON STOCK Intel cooler choose sync all cores and raise max turbo to 45-42 ill it is running stable. Do not OC on a stock cooler Get the Arctic Freezer 13 if you, otherwise you wasted money for K CPU.

    >>If you have time please replace your mainboard at your retailer for free. Is has a buggy C1 stepping still. You need the fixed C2 stepping.
    Once you configured drivers and RAM please run the benchmarks again and submit all log files. I will not take your results in atm.
    >> number of threads has to be 16 not 32 for your CPU to improve performance with 32 it drops again.
    >> question: your display is not 1920x1080?

    @Babydoc: cpu bench with number of thread 32 is missing you ran default (0)
    NEW: Total War Saga: Britannia benchmark thread - last update: 10.05.2018
    HOW-TO-step-up-from-MBR-CSM-LEGACY-BOOT-to-UEFI-GPT
    Many of my past contributions in the time from 2011-2017 will contain content that now show broken links. Unfortunately I had to delete all pictures linked on TWC that were hosted on imageshack.us. Read why
    If you are missing anything of interest, please let me know. Sorry for any inconvinience caused.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •