my config is FX 6300+16DDR3 1866 kingston+R7 360 2gb+ HD 1TB.
I have the opportunity to do an update and am in doubt on what to upgrade the CPU or the VGA.
Which would have more impact on the performance of the game? GPU or CPU?
Please guys! I need help !
Nobody?
Well, I wanted to let some one else answer this, but if you push me.
GD needs the CPU more than the GPU. If I compare your GPU with a GTX 960 for example:
http://www.hwcompare.com/19177/geforce-gtx-960-vs-radeon-r7-360/
Sure, the 960 is better, but for GD I am not sure you will see a massive difference. You will see improvement, sure, and maybe better improvement in other games, but for GD, it will likely be better to upgrade your CPU.
But, if you want to change CPU, that means motherboard too, maybe even RAM if the motherboard does not support your current RAM. And CPUs are quite expensive.
It might be better to know exactly what CPU and what GPU you are considering to upgrade to. But as the question stands now, I vote CPU.
I have run an alienware i7/amd7970m as well as a dual xeon 5600/ GTX 960 and now with a GTX 1060. GD prefers nvidia in my experience. but 960 vs 1060 really made no difference, settings are on max either way.
Funny thing is GD really loves my z800 with these dual xeons. The chips were expensive as hell when purchased and have zero re-sale value, and if you rank them on a CPU comparison site, they suck balls. But for some reason, I can host GD MP with Grimmest and OBS and other things running and merely have a minor hiccup in performance every once and awhile when the next screen over is loading 100s of enemies.
ymmv
Generally the game is more cpu intensive but that is because the game engine maxes out one core of your cpu. Things that seem to help here are higher cpu clock speed and bigger l3 cache size. Ryzen chipset architecture might also help because the gpu is routed directly from the cpu.
However most improvements are going to be marginal because your system will still bog down somewhat on a busy screen.
Actually i would like to hear if anyone has noticed an improvement in performance from a Ryzen 1700 or 1800 cpu??
I believe the xeon chips are enteprise level server chips basicly. Basicly they are designed for heavier loads with data processing and transfer, just the sort of requirements GD has. If you have a dual chip system then you can more effiently spread the work load which is going to give you a more stable experience. This sort of set up is ideal for GD and multiplayer hosting.
You are no doubt also benefiting from having 2 l3 caches to work with. Thus the chips are able to store and process more data “on board” without having to fetch it from the ram. This is one of the strong points of the custom amd chip that powered the xbox one, from memory i think it had a 34mb l3 cache, which allowed it to store and directly retrieve substancial more data than any desktop processors available at the time.
I dont like nvidia. My favorite cards are from AMD/ATI because nvidia its much more instable with drivers and performances diferencer between drivers new and old. Maybe a get a RX 470.
This is one of the strong points of the custom amd chip that powered the xbox one, from memory i think it had a 34mb l3 cache, which allowed it to store and directly retrieve substancial more data than any desktop processors available at the time.
Thanks to a post else where by matthewfarmery i see that my memory failed me and i gave misinformation here. Just wanted to correct it and apologize for not checking the correctness of information before i posted.
So the large cache that i spoke about is actually esram (embedded static RAM).
Xbox One is powered by an AMD “Jaguar” Accelerated Processing Unit (APU) with two quad-core modules totaling eight x86-64 cores clocked at 1.75 GHz,[8][39] and 8 GB of DDR3 RAM with a memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s.[8][40] The memory subsystem also features an additional 32 MB of “embedded static” RAM, or ESRAM, with a memory bandwidth of 109 GB/s.[41] For simultaneous read and write operations, the ESRAM is capable of a theoretical memory bandwidth of 192 GB/s and that a memory bandwidth of 133 GB/s has been achieved with operations that involved alpha transparency blending.
The term static differentiates SRAM from DRAM (dynamic random-access memory) which must be periodically refreshed. SRAM is faster and more expensive than DRAM; it is typically used for CPU cache while DRAM is used for a computer’s main memory.
So the the 32mb of esram basically works as a very large l3 cache for the processing core. i got it half right…
You have no clue what you’re talking about adn are better off not talking about things that you know not. I have a 1080, drivers are fine, peformance is great. HAd a 970 before that. That was great too.
People that talk about hardware when they aren’t tech savy are a pain in the rear end. Don’t do it. You spread misinfo.
I would neighter update the CPU or GPU for a game like this.
The most performance (not for only games, its generally) boost comes not from those, but with an solid state drive.
I currently have GF 1060 6GB GPU, it does superbly with scenery on max settings but once physics are applied (a lot of enemies, projectiles, etc) it’s up for CPU I guess, and mine is terribly outdated (Phenom II 945). Gonna update this week with Ryzen 1600X.
Well, realistically speaking out of stuff that is currently available there’s nothing better than i7 6700/7700 when it comes to single core performance, but it’s pricy, esp. if you would need to replace your mobo and memory too. Which is your case, since it seems you still use DDR3 as well. Pretty much why I decided to try Ryzen. Some ppl recommend to go with high end broadwell instead, but idk, might be hard to find.
grab the ryzen 1700 or 1800 if you can afford it. it will pay off in the long run.
My issue with 1700/1800 is I could had gotten 7700k if I was willing to spend that much money. Which performs better than any ryzen in most games right now. Sure in some distant future where games will be coded to handle 8+ cores 1700/1800 will shine, but this isn’t happening before years 2020-2022, and by that point there would be something better than ryzen.
It may not be as far away as you think… amd has already negotiated with big companies like Bethesda to produce games that are optimized for Ryzen 1700 and 1800. Ashes of the Singularity developers are also currently working to optimize the game around Ryzens awesome multicore processing, and they report they are getting encouraging results.
While the 7700k has better single core performance it cannot touch Ryzen 1700x or 1800x for multicore performance. If you happen to play and stream or record video with software like OBS the Ryzen 1700x or 1800x will give you an increase in performance and quality that you cant get from the 7700k.
But maybe you are right, to future proof your system for more that 3-4 years and still keep up with the latest advances in tech has always been an issue and probably wont change in the immediate future. I bought a 4930k about 3 years ago and i feel that an upgrade to the Ryzen 1800x will be due by the end of the year…
So i can see your point.
There are some other things about the Ryzen chipset architecture i really like though. Primarily that the GPU pipeline runs directly from the CPU and not through northbridge as it does with the current intel architecture. This removes a potential choke point for graphics data.
Anyway, who am i to tell you where to bestow your coin…? I hope you enjoy your rig upgrade whichever way you go.
Hello there,
when upgrading my vga gtx660 oc to gtx 970 oc I noticed some perfomance boost.
kingston 8gb, 4690k on asus z97 back then, 16gb now.
But since I run the same cpu @ 4.5Ghz I doubled my fps in crucible extraspawn with video settings on max except anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering at a resolution of 1920x1080. Barely below 30fps then, 140 fps, sometimes more, sometimes less in most other game locations.