Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 89101112131415161718
Results 341 to 360 of 360

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

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

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

    I have made a benchmark for Shogun II:

    The CPU test says ~24,7 fps for CPU benchmark and ~35,5 fps for graphic benchmark with your settings.
    Intel Core i5-6300HQ Quad-Core (6M Cache, 2.3 GHz ~ 3.2 GHz)
    RAM : 8 GB, DDR4 2133 MHz
    Crucial CT525MX300SSD1 525,1 GB
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX950M 2GB DDR5
    Last edited by IamOdysseus; September 20, 2018 at 11:30 AM.

  2. #2
    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

    Hi I was absent a very long time. Sorry I didn't maintenance this thread or others.

    Given the activities during the time it seems benchmarking is not an important topic any more or my procedure to complicated? Or total war (center) not being major anymore?

    I might try a last one on three kingdoms but I feel it might be no longer worth the time,
    Do younger players use forums anyway these days ?! I feel so disconnected...

    Gesendet von meinem Nokia 6.1 mit Tapatalk
    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.

  3. #3
    Leonardo's Avatar Reborn Old Timer
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Southern Sweden
    Posts
    5,245

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

    Split post moved here.
    Under patronage of General Brewster of the Imperial House of Hader.





    How to make Morrowind less buggy for new players - Of course every player may find it useful.

  4. #4
    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 Karamazovmm View Post
    then again why 16 threads? and why 4 threads on a cpu that doesnt have 4 cores nor HT?
    It's 4 threads (or more) on i3 (dual core with HT) and 8 (or more) on i7 (quad core with HT), the important thing is setting it to a number equal or higher than your number of threads, if you have HT. In his tests alQamar found the best results with 16 for i7 (but 8 wasn't that far from it) and 4 or 8 for i3 (in my test, with 2 cores HT, 4 was the best).

  5. #5
    karamazovmm's Avatar スマトラ警備隊
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil, Săo Paulo
    Posts
    9,639

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

    Quote Originally Posted by SamueleD View Post
    It's 4 threads (or more) on i3 (dual core with HT) and 8 (or more) on i7 (quad core with HT), the important thing is setting it to a number equal or higher than your number of threads, if you have HT. In his tests alQamar found the best results with 16 for i7 (but 8 wasn't that far from it) and 4 or 8 for i3 (in my test, with 2 cores HT, 4 was the best).
    the i3 doesnt have HT for mobile I forgot that they have HT for desktops


    Quote Originally Posted by Splenyi View Post
    Maybe someone out there is gaming on an 8 core Xeon...
    yep thats the only explanation for the 16 threads

    one thing I never understood was the HT in i3 on desktops

    then again we dont have access to the code to see how is the distribution of threads and tasks for warscape

    The very ugly forgive, but beauty is essential - Vinicius de Moraes

  6. #6
    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

    EDIT: New benchmarks uploaded
    CPU-Z Report.txt
    GPU Bench.txt
    CPU Bench.txt
    Last edited by Biggus Splenus; August 20, 2013 at 04:06 AM. Reason: continuity
    | R5 3600, RTX 2060, MSI B450I, 32GB 3200MHz CL16 DDR4, AX760i, NH-U12S |

  7. #7

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

    Intel i5-4670K, 4,1 GHz, Haswell, 22nm lithography, 84 Watts TDP, DDR3 1600 MHz CL9, Dual Channel: 42 FPS


    NVIDIA GTX TITAN (MLAA): 106 fps

    EVGA GTX 770 SC ACX (FXAA): 84 fps

    EVGA GTX 670 FTW (FXAA): 77 fps

    NVIDIA GTX 580 (MLAA): 49 fps


    Explain this to me pls !!!! for example if a intel i5-4670k only gives you 42 FPS , why do you need a GPU that runs more than 42 FPS , that wouldnt be a waste to have for example a gtx 770 that delievers 84 fps !!!!!


    Example : if u have a cpu = 42 fps + Gpu = 84 fps how many total FPS do you will get in total , in the game??????????

  8. #8
    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 Mimoxx View Post
    Explain this to me pls !!!! for example if a intel i5-4670k only gives you 42 FPS , why do you need a GPU that runs more than 42 FPS , that wouldnt be a waste to have for example a gtx 770 that delievers 84 fps !!!!!


    Example : if u have a cpu = 42 fps + Gpu = 84 fps how many total FPS do you will get in total , in the game??????????
    Usually you run at the fps determined by your GPU, which are higher. When you get close up or in thick melee battle the CPU has to do loads of calculations and starts bottlenecking so you get down to the fps determined by it, which are lower. So basically if you have GPU 84 fps and CPU 42 fps, you get 84 fps zoomed out and outside of melee combat and 42 fps while zoomed in and in melee combat.

  9. #9
    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 alQamar View Post
    I don't see a difference on my mobile
    There is a space between "shogun" and "2" on some of the addresses you posted, if one just copy pasted them (like lazy me ) they wouldn't work, because in the correct address it's "shogun2" without a space.

  10. #10
    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 Splenyi View Post
    On a 4670K, on 100% stock settings (including XMP Mem profile off) I got 28.9fps.

    Can someone else with a 4670K please post their results with the same stock settings? I'm troubleshooting, and this is important.

    EDIT: WAIT AND DANDY SECOND!
    In this link posted by someone before: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/201...l-cpu-review/5

    It shows a 4670K at 4.6Ghz only getting 37fps average.... that's pretty much what I was getting before, so I've been stressing about my PC for nothing. But someone has posted an average of 42fps on a 4670K running at 4.1Ghz.....
    Once I get back to my desktop I'll be able to do some tests on that CPU, so we can confront our results, but you'll have to wait until September, sorry.

  11. #11

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

    Quote Originally Posted by alQamar View Post
    Hi Barbarian, his settings are not the cause I checked that with CPU-Z
    I figured it out, it's the blood effects, lol. With blood effects I have 34fps, without 44fps Here, add this line to your "BenchmarkDX9CPU_preferences.script.txt" file in your "steamapps\common\total war shogun 2\benchmarks" folder:gfx_blood_effects false; # gfx_blood_effects , Enable Blood effects #

  12. #12
    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 A Barbarian View Post
    I figured it out, it's the blood effects, lol. With blood effects I have 34fps, without 44fps Here, add this line to your "BenchmarkDX9CPU_preferences.script.txt" file in your "steamapps\common\total war shogun 2\benchmarks" folder:gfx_blood_effects false; # gfx_blood_effects , Enable Blood effects #
    That could explain Splenyi's problem too You are German alQ, so I guess you haven't got the blood pack dlc?

  13. #13

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

    The blood effects configuration line is simply missing from all the predefined benchmark profiles. They were apparently never updated by CA to adjust for DLCs like the blood DLC. Since the line is missing, the benchmark will probably use what's configured in the user settings or maybe even enable it by default when it's not disabled explicitly. This will also influence graphics performance if people use different settings. The preferences.txt file from post #3 in this thread already contains gfx_blood_effects true; but AlQamar should actually change it to false, otherwise people without the blood DLC will report different performance. And the gfx_blood_effects false; has to be added to the CPU benchmark configuration file, otherwise performance for the same configuration will differ by 30%.

    Btw, I am German too but I still have the blood DLC (wasn't much of a problem to get it).

Posting Permissions

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