Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Guild Wars 2: Your Graphics Card And CPU Performance Guide

Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
August 27, 2012 5:23:23 AM

Hmm.. shame I can never touch an MMORPG ever again...
Score
8
August 27, 2012 5:35:17 AM

get your graphs and test setup to match:

Radeon HD 6450 512 MB GDDR5
Radeon HD 6670 512 MB DDR3
Radeon HD 7770 1 GB GDDR5
Radeon HD 6850 1 GB GDDR5
Radeon HD 7870 2 GB GDDR5
Radeon HD 7970 3 GB GDDR5

where's the 6850 in the graphs ? There's a 6870 instead ...
Score
-8
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 5:37:40 AM

I'm wonder how my pII x4 955BE will perform, there none in the chart...

Anyone know? at stock speed and at 3.8 O.C....
Score
11
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 5:43:36 AM

Interesting. The less-than-$100-without-external-power-connector Radeon 7750 is a balance card providing appealing visual while still runs good framerates at 1080p. I imagined if you tinker with the Best Appearance preset a little bit you can get better image quality without framerates dropping below 30. I mean let's face it, who plays on their PC without tinkering the settings here and there, that's just stupid.

Great review as always! Really appreciate it
Score
12
August 27, 2012 5:46:33 AM

I'm disappointed that this neglects the post processing bar when determining if the best appearance setting is enabled when taking in to account processing ability. I have an fx4100 and an hd 7950. How will that do at high grahhics settings?
Duh, we want to know this stuff.
Score
2
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 5:49:32 AM

haplo602 said:
get your graphs and test setup to match:

Radeon HD 6450 512 MB GDDR5
Radeon HD 6670 512 MB DDR3
Radeon HD 7770 1 GB GDDR5
Radeon HD 6850 1 GB GDDR5
Radeon HD 7870 2 GB GDDR5
Radeon HD 7970 3 GB GDDR5

where's the 6850 in the graphs ? There's a 6870 instead ...


Although it's probably a typo, there's probably no need to use the 6850 as well since the 7770 should perform similar
Score
3
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 5:54:22 AM

Now I wonder where some people got the idea that GW2 was nvidia favored O_o
Score
0
August 27, 2012 6:00:56 AM

You gots me wanting to buy this game......
Score
3
August 27, 2012 6:01:21 AM

stingstangI'm disappointed that this neglects the post processing bar when determining if the best appearance setting is enabled when taking in to account processing ability. I have an fx4100 and an hd 7950. How will that do at high grahhics settings?Duh, we want to know this stuff.

It will be cpu limited, you'll get around 35-40fps
Score
5
August 27, 2012 6:05:41 AM

Guild wars 2 min system requirements is Core 2 Duo 2.0 Geforce 7800, I would like u to test base on that too.
Score
13
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 6:11:17 AM

TomfreakGuild wars 2 min system requirements is Core 2 Duo 2.0 Geforce 7800, I would like u to test base on that too.

gpu wise, the gt version of the 7800 will perform about the same level as the 6450 in question. a low end core 2 duo will be on the lower end of the cpu chart.
Score
1
August 27, 2012 6:14:24 AM

Playing mine on EVGA GTX 570 SC... everything runs smoothly. The game is absolutely great. I was a 50/50 member of GW1 and I was hoping GW2 wouldn't disappoint. GW2 truly delivers fun experience and entertainment without having to shell out 10 or 15 monthly. My gaming laptop with GT 650M with output to 1080p display to a TV also performed smoothly in medium setting. I haven't tried max setting though on that.

Score
0
August 27, 2012 6:14:44 AM

Ugh really hate developers who do that. Its not just low performance with the Bulldozer cores. Its almost purpostantial performance loss, or a big error in coding. Heard that sometimes with Bulldozer everything gets piled onto 1 core like the engine has no idea what to do with the architecture.
Also DX9, are they serious? THIS IS 2012. DX10 is 6 years old. Get with it already and learn to code a game engine. Its not like this is a multi-platform game.
Score
2
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 6:25:44 AM

burmese_dudePlaying mine on EVGA GTX 570 SC... everything runs smoothly. The game is absolutely great. I was a 50/50 member of GW1 and I was hoping GW2 wouldn't disappoint. GW2 truly delivers fun experience and entertainment without having to shell out 10 or 15 monthly. My gaming laptop with GT 650M with output to 1080p display to a TV also performed smoothly in medium setting. I haven't tried max setting though on that.


the 650m will perform similarish to the 7750 in question

falchardUgh really hate developers who do that. Its not just low performance with the Bulldozer cores. Its almost purpostantial performance loss, or a big error in coding. Heard that sometimes with Bulldozer everything gets piled onto 1 core like the engine has no idea what to do with the architecture.Also DX9, are they serious? THIS IS 2012. DX10 is 6 years old. Get with it already and learn to code a game engine. Its not like this is a multi-platform game.


being dx9, it allows users who still use windows XP to play without someone creating a mod or use the directx hack to force xp to run it. I mean skyrim also runs on DX9
Score
6
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 6:32:50 AM

amuffinA dual core SB pentium outperforming an 8 core FX.........ROFL!

Thats why I really hope that piledriver/steamroller pulls through.
Score
8
a c 109 U Graphics card
a c 185 à CPUs
August 27, 2012 6:33:10 AM

A dual core SB pentium outperforming an 8 core FX.........ROFL!
Score
3
August 27, 2012 7:00:21 AM

You tested the game only in DirectX 9. Where is DirectX10 and 11? Or aren't they implemented yet (post-release patch)?
Score
7
August 27, 2012 7:01:06 AM

This definitely shows us that the way GW2 was compiled does not favour AMD instructions or architecture, but is compiled in such an inefficient manner that it only supports Intel.
Score
-10
August 27, 2012 7:09:53 AM

Quote:
A dual core SB pentium outperforming an 8 core FX.........ROFL!


That really makes you wander, if games/programs really know to put Bulldozer to work. I think it just sits there, idling at least 50% of processor raw power.
Score
8
August 27, 2012 7:12:13 AM

i have a question...

intel has moved on from their core2 line, and came out with higher preforming parts, amd has moved from athlon and phenom line to... a new architecture, i dont know if they match the old one yet or not.

but when you are doing a cpu test on a game like this where its very scaleable, it would be nice to see the core 2 dual and quad, also a phenom dual tri and quad core (from what i understand athlon and phenom for most gaming scenarios are the same) because many of us have the old dual core, and quad core cpus, and dont feel the need to upgrade because its just not nessassary for normal computer use yet.
Score
11
August 27, 2012 7:12:55 AM

rdc85I'm wonder how my pII x4 955BE will perform, there none in the chart...Anyone know? at stock speed and at 3.8 O.C....

from what i know, above the current amd line, but below the intel.
Score
0
a c 92 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 7:13:04 AM

The game runs great on my setup and I love it. Playing on a phenom II x4 and a 6850.
Score
2
August 27, 2012 7:13:10 AM

Also what are the chances of a Crossfire/SLI scaling review?
Score
2
August 27, 2012 7:18:57 AM

alidanfrom what i know, above the current amd line, but below the intel.

No, my Phenom II X4 955BE was destroyed by the current AMD line.
Score
-1
August 27, 2012 8:26:54 AM

mmstickNo, my Phenom II X4 955BE was destroyed by the current AMD line.

I have pIIx4 965 BE with HD 5850 and I can run balanced (with some options put to higher) with ease and the new line struggles? Yeah, I can see the facts here.
Score
-1
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 9:06:06 AM

no C2Q love ? AFAIK, Q6xxx and Q9xxx are still going strong.
Score
4
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 9:41:47 AM

esreverThe game runs great on my setup and I love it. Playing on a phenom II x4 and a 6850.


Thanks, good the hear that....


edit:

Quote:
I have a Phenom II 955 @3.7Ghz with an HD7970 and am pretty disappointed with the performance.

I realise the 955 isn't exactly the latest processor these days but I'm usually in the 25-45 fps range playing GW2 and in a game that is making good use of four cores I'd expect to be at least matching the SB i3 with its minimum 39fps.

I am planning on an upgrade next year anyway, but in my mind an overclocked 955 shouldn't have any trouble doing 45-60fps in a game like this if it was properly optimized.


Err, so I should just aim for balanced setting for the best play rate? :sweat: 

I think i will need to upgrade my network connection first before buying....
Score
0
August 27, 2012 10:18:28 AM

I have a Phenom II 955 @3.7Ghz with an HD7970 and am pretty disappointed with the performance.

I realise the 955 isn't exactly the latest processor these days but I'm usually in the 25-45 fps range playing GW2 and in a game that is making good use of four cores I'd expect to be at least matching the SB i3 with its minimum 39fps.

I am planning on an upgrade next year anyway, but in my mind an overclocked 955 shouldn't have any trouble doing 45-60fps in a game like this if it was properly optimized.
Score
-1
August 27, 2012 11:55:00 AM

AMD should just dump their waste of space FX line and bring back the Phenom II's X6 which are faster if not the same performance. This has been such a slow year for PC upgrades, choosing between slow retarded AMD parts or retardedly priced Intel parts.
Score
6
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 12:19:50 PM

before i read, a humble request: please do a similar article for sleeping dogs :) 
Score
1
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 12:37:35 PM

@Don
In the Core scaling graph, you've called SB-E "dodeca core" => 12 cores. Isn't it a hexacore with HT?

BTW, For those people asking about the Core 2 series, they perform just about as well as the llano A8 series does (though still a bit higher per clock).
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/399?vs=89

Quote:
Ed.: Clearly, it appears that AMD's best shot at catching Sandy Bridge at 3 GHz is a quad-core Bulldozer-based chip at 5 GHz or so. Sorry, couldn't resist

:lol: 
Score
2
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 12:49:07 PM

^ and for any major PC game that is released. Why does Toms do only a few PC game performance reviews ?
Score
0
August 27, 2012 12:58:13 PM

I guess a pair of GTX 690's will not have a problem running this game?
Score
-8
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 1:04:18 PM

Cryio said:
You tested the game only in DirectX 9. Where is DirectX10 and 11? Or aren't they implemented yet (post-release patch)?

DX11 may come in a later patch, but they've said for now they're sticking to DX9 for compatibility purposes.
Score
1
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 1:06:47 PM

I think Don was having a bit of fun with us !!

:) 
Score
0
August 27, 2012 1:17:43 PM

on my system, Phenom II X6 1075 overclocked to 4.04GHz, and a GTX460 1GB (GPU at 860MHz, and memory at 1900 MHz)

I get around 45 - 50 FPS most of thentime with everything maxed out at 1920x1080

for sleeping dogs, on the same specs, I can max out everything except the AA (keep it on normal, this is due to only having 1GB of video memory) and hold 60FPS most of the time (I keep vsync on because it will jump to around 70+ FPS and get some insane screen tearing)

I am also using the high res texture pack. That game looks good and it is well optimized (looks better than guild wars to by about 20 times and performs better)
Score
4
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 2:03:14 PM

Nice article, but I'd like to mention that this was run on the beta client. As of 8/26 performance has changed for a number of people.

Thanks for running through the tests, Don, appreciate it.
Score
4
August 27, 2012 2:17:25 PM

Arenanet is still working on optimizing the game (I think/hope). I know I know the game was very very clunky in the first two beta weekends but at headstart the game is much smoother.
Score
3
August 27, 2012 2:20:29 PM

folks, stop the DX10/DX11 nonsense ... this is an MMORPG (sort of) that needs to run on many hw configs with most somewhere average and below average by todays standard. they'd work against themselves with DX10/11 since graphics engine is one of the last parts that make a good MMO.
Score
3
a b U Graphics card
a c 108 à CPUs
August 27, 2012 2:24:26 PM


A real review would have compared higher resolutions in CPU scaling instead of simply using 1280x

The editor comment was WAY out of line.

Score
-8
a c 191 U Graphics card
a c 123 à CPUs
August 27, 2012 2:26:11 PM

My 970BE @3.8 with a HD7870 has been playing well on max settings. I'd have liked to have seen a Phenom II on the charts though, and a C2D.
I like the events too, except when I'm the only character in range when one pops up and get croaked before deciding whether or not to participate.
Graphics is a lot better than GW1, but NPCs often look like they're in another layer, rendered with a different palette.
...and there are still bugs. I can't bind to my tilt wheel.
There is at least one other Georgia Tech alumnus (or student) playing, because I couldn't name my Engineer "George P Burdell." Oh well.
Score
3
August 27, 2012 2:31:40 PM

rdc85Thanks, good the hear that....edit:Err, so I should just aim for balanced setting for the best play rate? I think i will need to upgrade my network connection first before buying....


Don't get me wrong you'll still be able to play the game ok, that was my fps on maximum settings at 1080p and it was definitely the CPU which was the bottleneck so your 460 should be fine. My Cpu gadget was showing about 85% usage on all four cores. Setting the visuals to balanced doesn't help me much but going to minimum puts me at a more or less steady 60fps (v. sync.)

I am in the Sylvari area at the moment and don't remember noticing any frame rate problems when I played a beta weekend in the Human and Norn areas a while ago, so it could just be that specific area or maybe some kinks got into the system before release.

I will try a different area but I'm hoping Arena Net can find some more power from the AMD CPUs.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 2:38:51 PM

leongrado said:
Arenanet is still working on optimizing the game (I think/hope). I know I know the game was very very clunky in the first two beta weekends but at headstart the game is much smoother.


hmm, it has been a completely opposite experience for me. Ran excellently all through betas, and saturday morning of headstart - 60 fps no problem. Sunday evening, after a small patch, same exact settings, my system cannot get up above 30. Not sure what Anet changed, but it's frustrating to having to go from 60 fps to 30 and below in a matter of 36 hours.
Score
2
August 27, 2012 3:15:54 PM

Great review. Lots of effort to test all the cpu-gpu combinations at 3 presets with different resolutions.
Score
2
August 27, 2012 4:09:59 PM

Looks like my GTX 460 OC will handle this just fine at 1680x1050 on my meager 22" monitor.
Score
0
August 27, 2012 4:17:57 PM

Honestly though..

If you play any MMORPG, you turn off most settings. I know I turn on everything for Everquest but I dont. Why? It gets in the way of playing or raiding.
Score
-4
August 27, 2012 5:11:40 PM

So is it better than swtor or a wow killer?
Score
-3
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2012 5:14:22 PM

You need to take into account that these performances tests appear to have been done during a beta event and do not take advantage of performance optimizations done by ArenaNet up to release.

The DirectX 9 renderer flag does now show up in the release client, and was not present during the last couple of stress tests either.

There are also some missing graphics optimization settings.
Score
1
August 27, 2012 6:00:58 PM

I beta tested GW2 using a GTX 280 and the game ran well. I couldn't run everything on max, but for the most part all settings were above normal. Last week I upgraded to a GTX 670 and have been getting very poor results.

2012-08-27 10:46:42 - Gw2 - Everything on max
Frames: 499 - Time: 20000ms - Avg: 24.950 - Min: 16 - Max: 33

2012-08-27 10:47:59 - Gw2 - Turn reflections off
Frames: 714 - Time: 20000ms - Avg: 35.700 - Min: 17 - Max: 51

2012-08-27 10:48:52 - Gw2 - Reflections, shadows off and shaders on low
Frames: 859 - Time: 20000ms - Avg: 42.950 - Min: 22 - Max: 63

I've used 301, 304, 305, and 306 driver versions. The results above are from 306. Please advise!

Win 7 64 bit
12gb ram
SSD
i7 920 @ 2.67ghz
Score
0
!