Attila Computer & Hardware Recommendations

[alQamar]

Hi guys, if anyone is running on Nvidia you should take some time to read about my latest findings in the peformance comparison thread (link in my signature)

[Birk]

Currently running.

GTX 770 AMP Edition
i5-2500k 4.7Ghz
8Gb RAM 1666mhz or whatever. Will upgrade to DDR4 when changing CPU.

Just bought GTX 980 I noticed that the legendary i5-2500k is still the best CPU. Maybe I upgrade when 5th gen Broadwell or 6th gen Skylake is coming. Anyway I hope the game will go more smoothly in the larger battles with GTX 980.

[alQamar]

The 2500K is fairly dated now and definitely not the best still.

I had the opportunity to benchmark my "old" Sandy Bridge against Noif de Boldemoze fresh i5 Devils Canyon (both K-versions).
First of all OC capabilities are still on the positive balance of the Sandy Bridge, and the performance leap of the Devils Canyon does not by far justify any exchange because you need not only to replace the CPU but also your mainboard.
In some benchmarks I even beat his CPU because the higher OC.

Splenyi is right the Sandy is outdated but it is an evergreen and probably one of the best CPUs Intel crafted in the last years. So just to say avoid falling to much into "specs". It is basically the same as replacing a 670 against a 770 which does not make that much sense, while replacing a 670 against a 970 does make a bit more sense, mostly because the bigger memory.

So all in all you got a solid roadmap @Birk. Stick to it at the moment.

[Biggus Splenus]

I had the opportunity to benchmark my "old" Sandy Bridge against Noif de Boldemoze fresh i5 Devils Canyon (both K-versions).
First of all OC capabilities are still on the positive balance of the Sandy Bridge, and the performance leap of the Devils Canyon does not by far justify any exchange because you need not only to replace the CPU but also your mainboard.
In some benchmarks I even beat his CPU because the higher OC.

Splenyi is right the Sandy is outdated but it is an evergreen and probably one of the best CPUs Intel crafted in the last years. So just to say avoid falling to much into "specs". It is basically the same as replacing a 670 against a 770 which does not make that much sense, while replacing a 670 against a 970 does make a bit more sense, mostly because the bigger memory.

So all in all you got a solid roadmap @Birk. Stick to it at the moment.

Oh wow, I didn't realise this. What was his CPU clocked to, and yours? I know that sandybridge can OC higher, but I thought that Haswell's higher IPC would lead it in front.

[alQamar]

Oh wow, I didn't realise this. What was his CPU clocked to, and yours? I know that sandybridge can OC higher, but I thought that Haswell's higher IPC would lead it in front.

He has a very good cooler, don't know the brand at the moment. His Devils Canyon finally run stable at 4.4 GHz, all settings above the stress tests failed resulting in a bluescreen.
Aircooled my Sandy Bridge ran fine at 4.6 GHz, since I have a watercooling I can push it up to 5.1 GHz which I only do for extreme benchmarking (because the temps).

In this test Sandy vs Devils I downclocked my one to 4.4 GHz to see a direct comparison, in those where I was ahead I ran at 4.6 GHz, so I was impressed that the better architecture of the Devils Canyon does not give so much of an advantage like the few MHz more.

On top of that I have 1600 MHz RAM CL9 and he has 2133 MHz CL11 but as we found out in the benchmark thread this does not impact much in benchmarks. We took the 2133 one because it was note more expensive compared the 1600 MHZ RAM

[Copperbad]

total noob alert. Thank you so much for making this resource available. I look forward to getting all I can out of my system on tuesday. Would you mind looking over my hardware real quick?

My rig:
MOBO: Asus Z97-A
CPU: Intel i5 4690K with Noctura NH-D14 cooling unit.
GPU: EVGA GTX 970 4G
RAM: 8gigs crucial Balistix
PSU: Corsair CT500W
HD: WD 1TB 7200 (I have an SSD for my OS)
SCREEN: Acer S231HL LED

It's my assumption that this should be able to handle the crap out of Attila, it runs Rome II pretty well. What do you think is the weakest link?
What's the final take on the GTX 970 debacle? Am I really going to see performance dips above 3.5 VRAM usage? Would you recommend returning the card? If so, what would you replace it with?

[SPARTAN VI]

"here and now" is about as stupid as it gets in a thread like this.

who here wants to spend 350$ on a gpu just for 1 game? who here builds a 1000 to 2000$ gaming pc just for 1 game? who?

just to clarify, I am talking about 290x lightning(best after market cooler there is) vs 970 not 290. 290 can be had for as low as 230 - 240 right now.

The "here and now" statement came up a few times, so I'm not sure to which one you're referring. I addressed the "here and now" statement in terms of the in-game settings since CA decided that the extreme quality is meant for future hardware.

if that is the case I stand corrected If rome 2 is what matters most to you, than a nvidia gpu makes the most sense since this is the case, you need to attach some disclaimers on your recommendations, like this is for rome 2 or total war series only, not for general gaming.

It really comes down to price. Nvidia hardware only has the edge in Total War when AMD's offerings at that price bracket aren't competitive. AMD may be behind right now, but either side is always a price drop away to remain competitive when its competitor inevitably leap frogs over them. If you can find a R9 290 or 290x under $300, there's really no other choice, else the GTX 970 is still a solid performer.

total noob alert. Thank you so much for making this resource available. I look forward to getting all I can out of my system on tuesday. Would you mind looking over my hardware real quick?

My rig:
MOBO: Asus Z97-A
CPU: Intel i5 4690K with Noctura NH-D14 cooling unit.
GPU: EVGA GTX 970 4G
RAM: 8gigs crucial Balistix
PSU: Corsair CT500W
HD: WD 1TB 7200 (I have an SSD for my OS)
SCREEN: Acer S231HL LED

It's my assumption that this should be able to handle the crap out of Attila, it runs Rome II pretty well. What do you think is the weakest link?
What's the final take on the GTX 970 debacle? Am I really going to see performance dips above 3.5 VRAM usage? Would you recommend returning the card? If so, what would you replace it with?

My final take on the GTX 970 debacle: VRAMgate is overblown from a performance perspective. The card was designed to only use 3.5GB of VRAM, so games will only use that allotted 3.5GB and it will use it beautifully. Should a game exceed this constraint, you'll see performance degradation, but so would EVERY card when its exceeded its VRAM allowance. What we were seeing out of the DOS synthetic benchmarks were end users forcing the card to dip into the last 0.5GB, which is slower than the 3.5GB partition AAAND not how the card was designed to work, thus the perceived performance degradation. That said, if the card was designed to use 3.5GB of VRAM, that's how it should've been marketed and advertised. I feel it's still dishonest to say it has 4GB, when it's not designed to use all of that VRAM. However, it's still a strong performer and I wouldn't hesitate to buy a GTX 970 right now if I had $350 to burn.

[SPARTAN VI]

I had the opportunity to benchmark my "old" Sandy Bridge against Noif de Boldemoze fresh i5 Devils Canyon (both K-versions).
First of all OC capabilities are still on the positive balance of the Sandy Bridge, and the performance leap of the Devils Canyon does not by far justify any exchange because you need not only to replace the CPU but also your mainboard.
In some benchmarks I even beat his CPU because the higher OC.

Splenyi is right the Sandy is outdated but it is an evergreen and probably one of the best CPUs Intel crafted in the last years. So just to say avoid falling to much into "specs". It is basically the same as replacing a 670 against a 770 which does not make that much sense, while replacing a 670 against a 970 does make a bit more sense, mostly because the bigger memory.

So all in all you got a solid roadmap @Birk. Stick to it at the moment.

I agree with alQamar. From our own benchmark thread, we can extrapolate that you'll likely see better performance gains going from a GTX 770 to GTX 980 than you would if you upgraded an i5 2500K to an i7 4770K:

Intel Core i7-4770K @ 4,2 GHz 1x NVIDIA GTX 780 : 51 FPS
Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3,8 GHz 1x NVIDIA GTX 760 : 37 FPS
Intel Core i5-3570K @ 4,2 GHz 1x NVIDIA GTX 780: 49 FPS

So I would stick with a 2500K and grab that GTX 980, instead of upgrading the 2500K and sticking with the GTX 770.

[Biggus Splenus]

I agree with alQamar. From our own benchmark thread, we can extrapolate that you'll likely see better performance gains going from a GTX 770 to GTX 980 than you would if you upgraded an i5 2500K to an i7 4770K:

Intel Core i7-4770K @ 4,2 GHz 1x NVIDIA GTX 780 : 51 FPS
Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3,8 GHz 1x NVIDIA GTX 760 : 37 FPS
Intel Core i5-3570K @ 4,2 GHz 1x NVIDIA GTX 780: 49 FPS

So I would stick with a 2500K and grab that GTX 980, instead of upgrading the 2500K and sticking with the GTX 770.

Well that is unfortunate. Doesn't look like Broadwell will be innovating in power very much either

[soulson]

I just bought a new rig. Cant wait!!!

4690k
8GB ddr 1600
GTX 760
Z97 Asrock Fatality

[Biggus Splenus]

Nice build. Post about the motherboard when you get it up and running, I've always been cautious towards the Fatality lineup

[soulson]

Nice build. Post about the motherboard when you get it up and running, I've always been cautious towards the Fatality lineup

The board is the Z97 model as I plan on overclocking once my EVO 212 arrives. I played Rome 2 last night everything on ultra with zero issues. Very happy thus far.

[Zipzopdippidybopbop]

Thanks; I have a 32 inch Toshiba TV that I use as a TV/monitor.

By the way what's wrong with the CX600 PSU?

[Biggus Splenus]

Thanks; I have a 32 inch Toshiba TV that I use as a TV/monitor.

By the way what's wrong with the CX600 PSU?

There's nothing wrong with it, but there are better units for a similar price on the market at the moment.

[Totalheadache]

Thanks; I have a 32 inch Toshiba TV that I use as a TV/monitor.

By the way what's wrong with the CX600 PSU?

you'll see a big improvement if u get something like this....

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/QNIX-QX271...3D121110804377

[Zipzopdippidybopbop]

There's nothing wrong with it, but there are better units for a similar price on the market at the moment.

But I already have it on my older rig; I just planned to salvage and port it over (save cash see).

you'll see a big improvement if u get something like this....

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/QNIX-QX271...3D121110804377

No need for a new monitor lad =P

[Biggus Splenus]

But I already have it on my older rig; I just planned to salvage and port it over (save cash see).

Yea that's what I mean. No need to buy a new unit if you've already got that one, the upgrade wouldn't be cost effective keep it. Also how old is your PSU?

Guys, are the requierments of Attila really higher than those of Rome 2? I am asking, because I dont understand these things really well, and there are some experts here.

I have Asus GTX 750ti 2GB, core i5 4670, 8gigs of ram and I play on 22 inch monitor 1920x1080. (this machine was assembled with the idea of a cost-effectivness)
I play Rome 2 on ultra, with no AA and Vegetation alpha, and I have no complaints.
So on what settings would this PC run Attila in your oppinion? I am asking, because these days the games are becoming incredibly heavy, and I am kind of worried

I think you PC will run fine. It'll be released soon enough, so we can always wait till then to see if you need an upgrade or not it's fine to play games without the graphics being maxed out.

[Shapur e Sassani]

will asus n56jn play attila without any problems?

[AnthoniusII]

So...Attila must be out of my PC's reach despite the fact Shogun II plays on extreme and Rome II on extreme without the 2ndery option like vsynch etc...
OS: W7 64bit Ultimate
IntelCore2 Quad CBU Q8200 @2.33 Hz
GeForce GTX 660
4.0 G Ram
but with a very small and old disk!

[Biggus Splenus]

So...Attila must be out of my PC's reach despite the fact Shogun II plays on extreme and Rome II on extreme without the 2ndery option like vsynch etc...
OS: W7 64bit Ultimate
IntelCore2 Quad CBU Q8200 @2.33 Hz
GeForce GTX 660
4.0 G Ram
but with a very small and old disk!

What's your screen res? What unit size do you play on? What kind of FPS do you get? And do you notice animation stuttering in battles, even when the FPS seems smooth? Extreme is the preset below ultra, so I'm not surprised you can reach that with a 660 after turning off "secondary options" (which are usually the most taxing on the GPU anyway, like blooming, AA, vsync, depth of field). An old hard drive won't impact performance, just load times (and it's also unreliable, you should upgrade a hard drive every 4 years max, recommended 3 years).