Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Guild Wars 2 CPU vs GPU

Last response: in Video Games
Share
March 27, 2012 8:58:32 PM

Hello
I want to build a new gaming PC to play GW2 . I will for sure wait for Ivy Bridge and Kepler less expensive cards to come out and see how they perform before buying anything. My budget is $700.00 and I already have the case.


My questions are:

Is a core i3 enough for GW2 ? (I thing I will be doing a lot of WvW)
Is a core i3 going to slow down a HD7850 or any other card around $250.00 ?
Shoud I get a core i5 and spend less on the GPU ?
If I get the core i5, should I get the unlocked one to OC it, or save some money and get the locked ones?

I could also get the $250.00 card and a Sandy/Ivy Bridge based Pentium (the cheaper one of sourse) and upgrade to a core i5 like in3 or 4 months. But i don't know if the Pentium will manage to run GW2 smoothly until I can get another CPU.


Thanks in advance for your help.

More about : guild wars cpu gpu

Best solution

March 27, 2012 10:56:11 PM
Share

Can't really answer these questions until the game is thoroughly benched on a variety of setups. Any answer you get would be speculation. My speculation is that since it is an mmo on higher tier than Star Wars tech-wise, it will likely be more demanding on the CPU but still require at least something above a 6950/560ti tier to play with some eyecandy and 60 fps.
March 28, 2012 2:46:14 PM

WOW. A card better than a 560Ti and a quad core will eat my budget. I always thought a $200 card would be more than enough for 1080p in this game. Damn, I'll have to kill my self with overtime.
Related resources
March 28, 2012 7:19:03 PM

The Minimum Requirements for Guild Wars 2 were released a few days ago.
The requirements arnt that big, heck, i was running the Beta with a Core 2 Duo and a 9500 GT!

Just take note that the requirements will go up over time.
March 28, 2012 9:51:00 PM

I should rephrase, at least a 6950/560ti*.
March 29, 2012 4:57:53 AM

Get the core i3 2120. Thats the best performing CPU per dollar you can get.
As far as the GPU a GTX 560 or an HD 6850 will be more than enough to play the game on max settings and high resolutions at great FPS.

Sources: I beta tested the game.
March 29, 2012 1:09:06 PM

Thanks for the answers! I will post my build before buying!
:o )
March 29, 2012 1:10:20 PM

Hey!!!! i wanted a happy face, not THAT big eyes. Here you go.
:) 
March 29, 2012 2:32:57 PM

vehlor said:
WOW. A card better than a 560Ti and a quad core will eat my budget. I always thought a $200 card would be more than enough for 1080p in this game. Damn, I'll have to kill my self with overtime.


Pretty sure he is over exaggerateing. Believe it or not the game is still an mmo and the engine they are using is pretty sophisticated for an MMO however its hard to believe that a 560ti is going to be the bottom line. I would say that an i3 is getting pretty close to a bottleneck however I havent really seen many builds with anything under an i5 2500k. I would just save your money a bit longer. I wouldnt drop whatever you performance expectations of the gpu because it would hurt the bottom line on gaming performance regardless of the cpu but at the same time you dont want to push yourself into a corner in case you want to upgrade in the future. An i5 isnt that much more expensive when you consider what you get even past just gaming performance and for the time being it can handle anything you throw at it especially if you get a decent heatsink and overclock.
March 29, 2012 2:39:00 PM

csiegle56 said:
Pretty sure he is over exaggerateing. Believe it or not the game is still an mmo and the engine they are using is pretty sophisticated for an MMO however its hard to believe that a 560ti is going to be the bottom line. I would say that an i3 is getting pretty close to a bottleneck however I havent really seen many builds with anything under an i5 2500k. I would just save your money a bit longer. I wouldnt drop whatever you performance expectations of the gpu because it would hurt the bottom line on gaming performance regardless of the cpu but at the same time you dont want to push yourself into a corner in case you want to upgrade in the future. An i5 isnt that much more expensive when you consider what you get even past just gaming performance and for the time being it can handle anything you throw at it especially if you get a decent heatsink and overclock.


Well the next step down is a 6870 which is the current cut for the GPU having no impact on WoW, a fairly unsophisticated engine going on a decade old. I'd guess a 560ti is going to be the entry point for not turning down conspicuous settings but that's just what I expect, as the same holds true for Star Wars at 1920x1080.

Only exception to this is if they're just rehashing the old engine, in which case no one is going to play the game after a month. =/
March 30, 2012 12:45:24 AM

casualcolors said:
Well the next step down is a 6870 which is the current cut for the GPU having no impact on WoW, a fairly unsophisticated engine going on a decade old. I'd guess a 560ti is going to be the entry point for not turning down conspicuous settings but that's just what I expect, as the same holds true for Star Wars at 1920x1080.

Only exception to this is if they're just rehashing the old engine, in which case no one is going to play the game after a month. =/


Are you serious I could play WoW on ultru with my old gtx 460. Just saying these are not demanding games.
March 30, 2012 1:38:49 AM

csiegle56 said:
Are you serious I could play WoW on ultru with my old gtx 460. Just saying these are not demanding games.


Technically I can play wow on ultra on any video card. Doesn't mean that there won't be some frame dips related to the GPU though. Already enough dips just due to poor coding and poorly optimized use of the CPU in the first place.

Probably should read my post again and understand what it's saying. Once you have a 6870 or better you're unlikely to meet any situation where the GPU causes an fps drop below 60 fps for any reason. There will be frame drops while raiding but this is a limitation of the game's dependency on the CPU over the GPU, and its poor use of the CPU at that. A card like a 460 was a good GPU, but currently WoW still has some scenes where a 460 or worse can become equally as limiting a factor as the CPU once you employ 4x anti-aliasing.

So yeah, I'm serious.
March 30, 2012 2:35:13 AM

Yea obviously when there are animations and post processing effects and what not the CPU might cause a temporary bottleneck. I do understand that thats why I told him regardless that he should just wait until he can afford an i5. I have played WoW with a single GTX 460 2gb and I never had a single problem with frame rate dropping below 60 very often or for an extended period of time for that matter. I also have a friend with a 560ti that would rip through a game like WoW with complete ease. Maybe the cards you looked at didnt have as much vram as anti-aliasing is quite the memory hog but I can certainty say there is no way a 560ti is the bottom line for WoW especially when its overclocked to nearly compete with a stock 570. I have a fairly high end system Gtx 580 SLI, i7 2600k @ 4.8ghz, 8gb 1600mhz cas 7, Asus extreme IV gene-Z, Corsair AX 1200. I can say with a great amount of certainty that I did not build it to play wow nor does anyone else spending a good deal of money on there rig. I cannot say this enough it really is not a demanding game for goodness sake's the game is about 8 years old I believe. Graphically speaking I don't think blizzard was trying to pull a crysis on us. Im sure some people were playing on max settings at that time and the GPU sure has made leaps and strides since.
March 30, 2012 2:43:33 AM

csiegle56 said:
Yea obviously when there are animations and post processing effects and what not the CPU might cause a temporary bottleneck. I do understand that thats why I told him regardless that he should just wait until he can afford an i5. I have played WoW with a single GTX 460 2gb and I never had a single problem with frame rate dropping below 60 very often or for an extended period of time for that matter. I also have a friend with a 560ti that would rip through a game like WoW with complete ease. Maybe the cards you looked at didnt have as much vram as anti-aliasing is quite the memory hog but I can certainty say there is no way a 560ti is the bottom line for WoW especially when its overclocked to nearly compete with a stock 570. I have a fairly high end system Gtx 580 SLI, i7 2600k @ 4.8ghz, 8gb 1600mhz cas 7, Asus extreme IV gene-Z, Corsair AX 1200. I can say with a great amount of certainty that I did not build it to play wow nor does anyone else spending a good deal of money on there rig. I cannot say this enough it really is not a demanding game for goodness sake's the game is about 8 years old I believe. Graphically speaking I don't think blizzard was trying to pull a crysis on us. Im sure some people were playing on max settings at that time and the GPU sure has made leaps and strides since.


Well that was certainly some words.

I didn't say that a 560ti was the bottom line for wow. I said it is likely to be the bottom line for playing at 60 fps without sacrificing eyecandy in modern MMO's, as indicated by Star Wars, where it is in fact the bottom line to play the game with 60 fps without sacrificing anti-aliasing entirely. I said that a 6870 was the bottom line in wow if* you want to clear the threshold where the GPU can potentially be a limiting factor in performance for certain scene draws. Any frame drops that you incur in WoW with a 6870 or better will be CPU related, and no matter how good your CPU is, you will occasionally drop below 60 fps in the game because of how it is coded.

No matter how much you think your gtx 460 "ripped through" WoW, the fact remains that a 460 still has the potential to provide performance below the otherwise standard minimum threshold set by the CPU in Warcraft specifically, since it is so incredibly CPU bound. It would be incredibly beneficial if you could stop saying things like "ripped through" or "destroyed" or "everything I threw at it". This isn't the mmo champion tech forums, and those blanket statements don't provide any numbers so they end up as fairly empty platitudes.

All of that aside, you seem to have an alarming reading deficiency.
March 30, 2012 5:27:28 AM

Yet your still completely wrong and dont realize this is not a modern MMO it is a game that can be played with hardware from six years ago that wasn't even intended for gaming and yes a GTX 460 does rip through it with 60fps. If you want numbers here you go. Its average fps is 60 without overclocking and its a 1gb model anything more significantly reduces the fps hit that it takes from anti-aliasing. Also dont exclusively blame poor coding on fps drops there are many different factors that influence what you think is a random fps drop.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-...
March 30, 2012 5:34:27 AM

Wait, so you posted the WoW fly-by open-world benchmark where there are no other entities on the screen to show me that with anti-aliasing enabled the 460 is already bordering on dipping below 60 fps at 1920x1080 on *average* without even a single special effect being rendered on the screen?

Well, I mean thanks for proving my point. lol

On a quick side note, you should watch what the WoW benchmark consists of so you at least get why I'm kind of laughing about it. No one has ever used it as an indicator for WoW performance nor recommended hardware based on it because it's a flight route bench. Just fyi.

All of that aside, the fact that you want to counterpoint the 6870 with the gtx 460 is relatively confusing since you can buy a 6870 for the exact same price as a gtx 460 right now. It makes me think that you started talking without even remotely researching what was available. Either card can be had for $140.00 and there isn't a suitable performer under that price bracket as it stands without purchasing a card that you know from the time of purchase won't have a prayer of running any anti-aliasing nor advanced shadows. It leaves me to wonder if you're ready to recommend a gtx 260 for Warcraft in light of that information, just for the sake of being different or if you'll just say, "oops sorry I had no idea what anything costs."

Humorously, none of this relates to the OP's question about Guild Wars 2 which isn't being developed on WoW's engine, and is likely going to require a 560ti as was originally said if you want to run with anti-aliasing and shadows in any combat scenarios with 60 or near 60 fps. hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp
March 30, 2012 6:05:54 AM

Never said anything about getting value my entire point states that you are making an old outdated game into some unattainable goal to reach 60 fps on fairly outdated hardware. It just happened to be a card I used to have and it happened to be a good example. I did not recommend this card to the person who initially started this thread. Neither did I actually bring up world of Warcraft in the first place. Believe it or not at one point I actually owned the card and played World of Warcraft It had absolutely no trouble hitting a stable 60 fps and above when overclocked with rare cases were there was a trivial fps drop for a fraction of a second. Somehow you cannot get it through your head that raising the core speed by 90+ mhz and having additional vram might give a big enough performance boost that is needed to reach a constant 60+ fps. Also when looking at budget hardware most people are not anal retentive and do not care if there framerate drops below 60 so get over it. Last but not least the only reason why open world games with shitty graphics like world of warcraft are recourse intensive at all is because they have quite a big draw distance. When you happen to be on a flight route it just happens to show more of the surrounding area ending up taking more resources from the GPU. When you are in a town or on a raid the limiting factor would be the CPU mostly because of effects and animations. Believe it or not the GPU is not rendering the "special effects" this isnt a directx 11 game running Physx. All in all if you have the intelligence to drag a slider in afterburner to the right and dont buy the 1gb model you will never dip below 60 fps because the game is made to be accessible to people that didnt even have gaming rigs 8 years ago and yes that is with "anti-aliasing and advanced shadows" this isnt metro 2033 believe it or not the shadows are not all that advanced nor recourse intensive.
March 30, 2012 11:50:26 AM

csiegle56 said:
Never said anything about getting value my entire point states that you are making an old outdated game into some unattainable goal to reach 60 fps on fairly outdated hardware. It just happened to be a card I used to have and it happened to be a good example. I did not recommend this card to the person who initially started this thread. Neither did I actually bring up world of Warcraft in the first place. Believe it or not at one point I actually owned the card and played World of Warcraft It had absolutely no trouble hitting a stable 60 fps and above when overclocked with rare cases were there was a trivial fps drop for a fraction of a second. Somehow you cannot get it through your head that raising the core speed by 90+ mhz and having additional vram might give a big enough performance boost that is needed to reach a constant 60+ fps. Also when looking at budget hardware most people are not anal retentive and do not care if there framerate drops below 60 so get over it. Last but not least the only reason why open world games with shitty graphics like world of warcraft are recourse intensive at all is because they have quite a big draw distance. When you happen to be on a flight route it just happens to show more of the surrounding area ending up taking more resources from the GPU. When you are in a town or on a raid the limiting factor would be the CPU mostly because of effects and animations. Believe it or not the GPU is not rendering the "special effects" this isnt a directx 11 game running Physx. All in all if you have the intelligence to drag a slider in afterburner to the right and dont buy the 1gb model you will never dip below 60 fps because the game is made to be accessible to people that didnt even have gaming rigs 8 years ago and yes that is with "anti-aliasing and advanced shadows" this isnt metro 2033 believe it or not the shadows are not all that advanced nor recourse intensive.


This thread is about Guild Wars 2, not some old outdated game. If you're referring to World of Warcraft, you can't maintain 60 fps in a 25man raid during combat 100% of the time even today (including any $1000.00 CPU you wish to employ). It's a limitation of the game and its inability to fully take advantage of hardware. That is largely the result of its age. So basically you're completely wrong in espousing that you can achieve perfect 60+ fps in all scenarios in Warcraft on any array of hardware, you don't understand the point of wanting to pass the hardware threshold where the GPU can potentially become a limitation (since the CPU will forever be a limitation and there is no hardware on the market to change that reality), and I'm not sure you really understand the topic even.

You're arguing about something that you're blatantly wrong about, you're talking about Physx as though that were relevant (it's not, but you're dropping it like a buzzword since you seem to think that this is a widely utilized feature in gaming and somehow ubiquitous as opposed to the narrow scope of handful of AAA games that heavily employ it to any degree), and all the while you're not contributing any relevant info to the OP's question.

In addition to either of those topics, you can't consume 1gb VRAM in WoW (which you seem to be going on and on about for no apparent reason at this point) at 1920x1080 nor even 1920x1200. Your 2gb gtx 460 performs exactly the same as a 1gb gtx 460 in Warcraft. I realize that you have no frame of reference for this since you only barely grasp the subject matter in the first place, but just letting you know.

Also the word is resource, not recourse. Calm down when you're fully exploring this completely off-topic argument. I hate reading your posts while imagining someone trying to inject "recourse" or pronounce "ultru" through labored breath and pouring brow sweat.
March 30, 2012 2:51:04 PM

You made the thread about world of warcraft I never said anything about it until you opened your mouth. The only thing I have been arguing about is the fact that a gtx 460 or a card that is equivelent can handle the game. I have been saying that if there was a limiting factor it would be the CPU in any case. Exactly why I made a joke about physx considering the CPU would normally handle complex computations like physics in almost any case stating that a raid or a scenario similar would not make the GPU the limiting factor. Also believe it or not Vram has alot to do with performance in games like this. Its an open world game there are lots of textures in an open world for obvious reasons. Anti-aliasing also takes up alot of vram having more would soften the blow taken. You are arguing about things that I never brought up or am even arguing about. I own the GPU in question I played the game I know what its capable of. I picked a simple thing to discuss and somehow you have managed to read far to into it
March 30, 2012 9:28:52 PM

csiegle56 said:
Also believe it or not Vram has alot to do with performance in games like this. Its an open world game there are lots of textures in an open world for obvious reasons. Anti-aliasing also takes up alot of vram having more would soften the blow taken.


Available VRAM has a lot to do with performance in any game that can fully saturate whatever amount you do have. Like I said though, you can't saturate 1gb VRAM in WoW so telling me how your 2gb 460 "ripped" through the game because it was a 2gb model (as you've highlighted to avoid 1gb models ever since) is just funny to me. :pt1cable: 

The point that you seemed to want to clarify is that you think Guild Wars 2 will function with eyecandy at 60 fps in combat on a gtx 460 or similar hardware. My point is that a 560ti will probably be the entry point to that experience, since the 560ti or 1gb 6950 are the entry point for that experience in Star Wars, a modern mmo on a modern engine.

I pointed out to you that the next step down from a 560ti as far as logical purchases (ie no standard 560 which no one would recommend) is a 6870. Since a 6870 is roughly the hardware point that you need to reach to avoid limitations in WoW, an *old* game on an *old* and *undemanding* engine, it stands to reason that this isn't going to buy you eyecandy and any anti-aliasing with 60 fps in a newer title.

To counterpoint, you posted a chart showing that at 1920x1080, with anti-aliasing, the 460 and 6870 are already just barely pulling 60 fps on average in WoW. Meaning that those 2 cards are the entry point for full eyecandy in WoW. Not only inherently proving something that I said as matter of fact near the beginning of the thread, but also pointing out that these cards just meet that threshold on such an old, undemanding engine.

So, back to the original point, a 560ti will likely serve the same role for Guild Wars 2 as a 6870 does for WoW. The 560ti/1gb 6950 already serve to fill this role for the new Star Wars mmo which can be considered Guild Wars 2's contemporary, certainly more so than Warcraft. Like I said. In my first post. If you think that is an exaggeration of the hardware that will be required that's fine, but you're probably going to be wrong. There is no empirical evidence agreeing with you, and certainly nothing circumstantial.

Also stop trying to explain to me how Warcraft works for christ's sake. I played the game from November 2004 until T13, was in a top 50 guild and was one of the best bear tanks in the US ever since they revived their viability as well as one of the best cat dps from t8 to t10. I've played the game on numerous hardware configurations over the years. I know explicitly how it performs, as do millions of other people. When you bring up how people were able to max WoW shortly after its release, you overlook the fact that no one was playing the game at 1920x1080, 1920x1200, 2560x1600 resolutions that have become common place. Hell, at the end of 2004 most gamers were still playing on 19" CRT's with a flat screen you dolt.
March 30, 2012 10:16:42 PM

No because guild wars 2 is not world of warcraft and the game has not been released yet. Again only thing im saying is a GTX 460 or equivalent has no problem playing world of Warcraft on max settings. STOP THERE!!!! do not read any farther into the situation this is literally the only thing I want to convey. I did not reccomend hardware nor did I say anything about wow performing perfectly on old hardware I was simply trying to make my point that its an old engine that simply doesn't take a whole lot of graphical power to play. Happy you wasted your time writing 4 paragraphs because you infer things. Apparently my last three comments of stating a simple argument have not gotten through to you.
March 30, 2012 10:32:30 PM

csiegle56 said:
No because guild wars 2 is not world of warcraft and the game has not been released yet. Again only thing im saying is a GTX 460 or equivalent has no problem playing world of Warcraft on max settings. STOP THERE!!!! do not read any farther into the situation this is literally the only thing I want to convey. I did not reccomend hardware nor did I say anything about wow performing perfectly on old hardware I was simply trying to make my point that its an old engine that simply doesn't take a whole lot of graphical power to play. Happy you wasted your time writing 4 paragraphs because you infer things. Apparently my last three comments of stating a simple argument have not gotten through to you.


I don't think you even remember how you started in the thread. lol Your first 2 posts suggest that you think something less than a 560ti is going to play Guild Wars 2 perfectly. I can quote both posts for you, if scrolling up is going to be an exasperating experience for you.

If your second post wasn't meant to infer anything beyond simply stating that a gtx 460 will play world of warcraft on ultra settings most of the time, then that is great but why did you post it in this thread? You should have looked for the GTX 460 world of warcraft thread from a couple of years ago, or noted that you were autistic and incapable of lateral reason along with the post to save me the time of trying to decipher what your point could possibly be.
March 31, 2012 5:26:34 PM

casualcolors said:
I don't think you even remember how you started in the thread. lol Your first 2 posts suggest that you think something less than a 560ti is going to play Guild Wars 2 perfectly. I can quote both posts for you, if scrolling up is going to be an exasperating experience for you.

If your second post wasn't meant to infer anything beyond simply stating that a gtx 460 will play world of warcraft on ultra settings most of the time, then that is great but why did you post it in this thread? You should have looked for the GTX 460 world of warcraft thread from a couple of years ago, or noted that you were autistic and incapable of lateral reason along with the post to save me the time of trying to decipher what your point could possibly be.


Thats exactly what I am saying my first post actually was giving advice to the person who originally started this thread. Although he never said he wanted to run the game on max settings meaning a 560ti will not be the bottom line (at least I would hope not). I just told him he should hold off and get a better CPU. I mean come on If he ever wanted to get a faster card he would run out of options pretty fast with an i3.
March 31, 2012 8:52:31 PM

csiegle56 said:
Thats exactly what I am saying my first post actually was giving advice to the person who originally started this thread. Although he never said he wanted to run the game on max settings meaning a 560ti will not be the bottom line (at least I would hope not). I just told him he should hold off and get a better CPU. I mean come on If he ever wanted to get a faster card he would run out of options pretty fast with an i3.


Goes without saying if he can extend his budget beyond 250 bucks that he should hold out for a 2500k and a better GPU together. But if it's one or the other, an i3-2120 for instance actually has a lot of legs for not being a big fast quad core. Actually does better than most of AMD's quad core offerings in gaming, surprisingly.
April 2, 2012 2:51:25 PM

Well, I do want to play on max settings keeping my fps at least over 40. I want this machine to last at least 3 years so I'll go with i5-K for sure. I may have to get a $100 video card for 3 to 4 month untill I can get a better one.
April 2, 2012 10:04:09 PM

vehlor said:
Well, I do want to play on max settings keeping my fps at least over 40. I want this machine to last at least 3 years so I'll go with i5-K for sure. I may have to get a $100 video card for 3 to 4 month untill I can get a better one.


Sounds like a good plan. You can always hock whatever you grab on ebay eventually, or if you grab a cheaper nvidia card like a 460 you can always keep it for a dedicated physx card in the future.
April 11, 2012 5:13:29 PM

Best answer selected by Vehlor.
August 26, 2012 5:01:32 AM

I can't believe how long they went on arguing over such incorrect statements. For the record I played WoW MAXED on AMD 64 x2 with a NVIDIA 9400 GT...smoothly too...so yeah

ON TOPIC: I have a Core 2 Duo (2.0ghz) with a 9600 GT that has issues running GW2 smooth, HOWEVER my gf's 3.0Ghz CPU with a 8800GT runs the game smoothly with almost maxed settings. As far as "This GPU blah blah" Don't fret the GPU, get one that supports the latest shaders so you can access all gfx abilities and you'll be fine, I'd focus on cpu SPEED, whether dual or quad, all this CPU talk yet the CPU speed seemed to be overlooked. If i had a dual-core pushing 3.0Ghz instead of 2.0 with my 4GB ram and 9600gt I could run the game maxed

PS: With settings at low OR maxed i get the same FPS (around 20 with a fresh start, ends up maintaining around 10 after playing awhile) and my CPU usage gets pushed to 100%. So if you're building a Rig for GW2 put the money in for a good CPU and get an affordable GPU
!