Hydaelyn Role-Players

So, right now, I'm playing FFXIV on my laptop. It's not new necessarily, but it's not super old. I got it back in December of 2012 for Christmas. It works alright, but it's a pretty significant step down from what I really want. I can play it at a resolution of 1920x990 (something like that) in windowed mode, but the graphic settings are too low for my liking. The highest amount of FPS I can get in an unpopulated area is around 20-30 FPS. My desktop is absolutely impossible to use. I don't know its specs, but the fact that it's from 2009 is enough to tell me I won't be gaming on it any time soon. The only MMO I play is FFXIV, and the rest of the time I mostly just use it for general things like Tumblr and whatnot.

In case you need them, my current laptop specs are:

Processor: Intel® Core™ i7-3632QM CPU @ 2.20GHz

Installed memory (RAM): 8.00 GB

System type: 64-bit Operating System, x64-based processor

Display adapters: AMD Radeon HD 7730M / Intel ® HD Graphics 4000

I don't know if that's enough information or even the correct information, but that's what I got from the Control Panel>System.

Really what I'd like is to play FFXIV with the best graphics possible. As in, the best graphics possible (without hindering gameplay, naturally). My budget is probably around $700-$900, possibly $1000 (though definitely no guarantee on that one). Also, I use Razer Game Booster to launch FFXIV, though I'm not really sure if it actually helps or not. I'm not really picky about brand or anything. I haven't had any hits elsewhere and the people on this site are so friendly and helpful I thought I'd try my luck here.

After a point, XIV appears to be more limited by your CPU than your GPU, as is the case with most MMOs. Obviously there's a lot of debate among people about what to use, but my system (which runs very close to Ultra; I turn the shadows down a bit) is a Core i7-930 with a GeForce GTX 770 and 12Gb of RAM.

If all you do with the computer is play one MMO, you'll find that the build plan is simple. Get the beefiest GPU and Intel CPU you can find in your price range and at least 6Gb of RAM; CPU clock speed is more important than number of cores, since MMOs, like most games, largely aren't heavily multi-threaded and so don't scale across additional cores especially well. (That's why I recommend Intel over AMD; AMD has an advantage in core count per dollar, but that won't help you so much with games.) Also, the XIV client is 32-bit, so it'll never use more than 4Gb of RAM. If you can afford it, SSDs will dramatically improve your load time and improve your performance somewhat in character-heavy areas like cities (as they improve texture load time). I use Crucial MX100s, which are quite favorably priced.

The #1 greatest impact on computer performance TODAY is the hard disk. It is a physical component with moving parts that has reached the end of it's innovation. Replacing it with an SSD will skyrocket your file access times above any other component in the system.

The #2 bottleneck is the GPU (graphics processing unit). You should never be using the Intel HD Graphics for any video playback. This "GPU" is actually built onto the i3/i5/i7 processor and is a very bare-bones sort of graphics solution. It is fine for office work, but dumps out whenever you try to render graphics intensive applications.

The #3 bottleneck is people who insist on gaming on laptops. Before everyone rages at me, hear me out first:
Don't get me wrong, laptops CAN play games. But you cannot defeat the laws of physics. The more intense your application, the more power it consumes. The more power something consumes, the more heat it generates. Thus its size must increase so it doesn't burn out like a light bulb. Laptops and tablets cannot compensate for this power consumption.

Little do you know, but as you play your games on a laptop, the processor, RAM, and GPU speeds are all being throttled back consistently to try and limit their power usage so the thing doesn't explode in a fireball on your lap. Yes, they will play games, but you will never be doing it at maximum efficiency.

As for advice:
The i3/i5/i7 processor family is one large marketing ploy by Intel to generate sales. All three processors use the exact same die. The difference is that Intel intentionally damages their own product to fit specific price points. The i3 has areas of the chip that are intentionally burned out so they do not work. The i5 is fully capable of hyper-threading, if Intel hadn't burned out the connecting channels. Etc, etc, etc. The best processor you can buy is the i5 series UNLESS you are doing intense graphics editing (Photoshop, etc). There are no other applications out there that make use of the hyper-threading of the i7, and video games are mostly 32-bit which means they only run on one core to begin with.

I would not go below 8 GB of RAM. The reason being mulit-tasking. Sure your game may only use 3-4 GB, but all your web browsers, video, and music in the background are using that other 4 GB.

I haven't had experience with AMD as far as graphics, but on the nVidia side I can say anything over a 580 series is not usually needed. Video Game graphics have long stopped being innovative since the shift away from the PC market to consoles. GPU makers no longer need to compete so strongly since you can't just up and replace a GPU in a console every 6 months.

I hope this may give you a little more insight into any future purchases.

(06-24-2014, 11:05 AM)Coatleque Wrote: [ -> ]The i3/i5/i7 processor family is one large marketing ploy by Intel to generate sales. All three processors use the exact same die. The difference is that Intel intentionally damages their own product to fit specific price points. The i3 has areas of the chip that are intentionally burned out so they do not work. The i5 is fully capable of hyper-threading, if Intel hadn't burned out the connecting channels. Etc, etc, etc. The best processor you can buy is the i5 series UNLESS you are doing intense graphics editing (Photoshop, etc). There are no other applications out there that make use of the hyper-threading of the i7, and video games are mostly 32-bit which means they only run on one core to begin with.

Well... it's rather more complicated with the chips, actually. Creating chips is a technically demanding process that often goes wrong in various and interesting ways, so every chip is made to be the Most Awesome Chip Intel sells. However, some fail that test, and so they get binned down until they pass the tests for the appropriate type of chip. That's one way you get i5s and i3s, and is the primary way that nVidia creates its lower end cards. However, Intel also likes to differentiate its market, so they also use laser cuts on the back end of the process to disable features. So, it's not entirely a marketing strategy.

Hyperthreading has nothing to do with 32 bit code and is actually related to the instruction pipeline. The idea is that, while one part of the core is being used for, say, floating point, the non-FP parts can be used by another thread. HT is really good for certain types of workloads that can benefit from this, image and video editing being one along with VMs, compiling, and other branch-heavy work; in general use computing, its benefits are modest, but they are measureable (if small). i7 does have other advantages, however (higher clock rates, usually; unlocked multiplier in the K models; larger L3 cache in some models; etc.).

Also, 32-bit code can totally use multiple threads and cores, and can benefit from HT. I'm sitting here looking at Excel 2013 32-bit maxing all 6 cores on my desktop chugging through some ugly formulas, and when I fire up my IIS Express 32-bit for some load testing, I'll be using all 12 virtual processors again. HT shows a benefit for our code when I kick off threads for data fusion, as the part that does FP math is independent of the part that does string manipulation. The HT also helps deal with pipeline stalls when async I/O goes on. It's about a 10% gain, depending on what's going on -- enough to justify the expense of a server.

In general, though, yes, if you're looking for the best perceived performance in general usage, SSDs do that. They will not, however, improve graphics quality in XIV (save indirectly), for all the texture loading speed in world won't help Intel HD Graphics.

Oh boy, all this computer lingo is making my head spin @_@ (I feel old using the word "lingo..."). So, basically...

• Replace hard disk with an SSD (Crucial MX100 possibly?)
  
• Beefiest GPU and Intel CPU I can find
  
• At least 6-8 GB of RAM
  
• Never use Intel HD Graphics for video playback
  
• Don't use laptops for gaming
  

Did I get all that, or is there anything I missed? @_@ In regards to Coatleque's comment on never using laptops for gaming, the only reason I'm using my laptop is because my desktop sucks (I inherited it from my mom in 2009). My mom also bought this laptop for me for Christmas, so I didn't really have a say in what kinds of hardware it got. Anyways, is what I listed above basically it, or are there additional things I should take care of?

Yep, I think that's it. Coatleque and I actually agree, I think, on all of the big bullet points, just not on the finer differences that, in reality, don't really matter for your stated objective (web stuff, XIV at Very High or Ultra). And the SSDs will make your computer feel like it's something out of sci-fi, with 5 second cold boot times, instant app loading, etc. The MX100s are great because they're only 4x the cost of a hard disk, yet have the quality that Crucial/Micron is known for. I recommend getting a pair and mirroring them because SSDs usually have a very annoying failure mode, where they just vanish from the computer if they die. If you want to go with other brands, Samsung, Intel, Corsair, and Mushkin make fine SSDs, or so I hear. I personally try to stick to Crucial/Micron for things involving memory, as Micron is one of the few actual fabricators of memory chips (fewer hands = less opportunity for stuff to go wrong).

Oh, if you're building from scratch, be sure to get the right size power supply. The modern nVidia cards need at least a 600W power supply (the TDP on a GTX 770 is a whopping 230W -- over twice that of your average CPU! It needs 42A of 12V power, which is roughly four times that of a modern Xeon!). I imagine ATI cards are similarly demanding. It's entirely possible to kill your computer with the draw from your video card if your power supply isn't up to the task. If you ask 10 people what brands they like, you'll get 20 different answers, but I've had good luck with Corsair and Thermaltake PSUs in the past.

(06-24-2014, 02:27 PM)Ackermans Wrote: [ -> ]In regards to Coatleque's comment on never using laptops for gaming...

Well, to be fair I tried very hard to not say that directly. It tends to cause flame wars. I just wanted to explain that it wouldn't be the most 'efficient' use of a laptop. Obviously a throttled back i5 quad is going to out-perform an overclocked core-2 duo.

I played WoW on laptops since 2006 and went through 3 of them because of them overheating. They CAN play these games but...I wouldn't recommend it.

If you'd like, my fiance has worked for Microsoft and Dell, and he's incredible at building rigs. He could probably put you a shopping list together if you were willing to build your own.

I play on ultra max with my 4+ year old AMD Athalon Phenom II x6. TAKE THAT INTELOSERS.

SSD definitely helps a lot, but only for loading and such, if you have enough ram (8GB+) most of the stuff will be stored there, so it won't bottle neck during an instance. SSD definitely lets you win chase scenes in Ul'dah though .

My FC leader plays on a Core 2 Duo with a GTX 470. With proper tweaking to the game's settings, she gets pretty good graphical quality and performance even in demanding fights like Titan, but she also runs at 1680x1050 (whereas I run at 2560x1440). ARR is surprisingly good at scaling back as long as you have a reasonably capable GPU.

I love my desktop. I usually load in just as or same time as other PC users even though I am following them OR I load in before the other user does. Those scenes are funny actually.

*cough*Cicero*cough*


I run on an i7-3770 8GB GTX770. I'd have 16 GB but I'm too lazy to memtest the RAM I got in from RMA cause one of the sticks was bad. (That made my first month of FFXIV hell)

With what I have I also have a 750W PSU.

Uh oh... now we've come down to comparing specs....



Intel i5, 16 GB RAM, 480 GB twin SSD RAID-0, GTX-680 w/4 GB, 800 Watt. 5.1 SB-ZxR going to Pioneer HTS.

That's a pretty nice rig Coat, FOR A LOSER.


I however, play in style.

(06-24-2014, 03:52 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: [ -> ]That's a pretty nice rig Coat, FOR A LOSER.

I however, play in style.

For a Mac... I'm really not surprised at those stellar graphics

Oh, this could be fun. I'll post both of the machines I use regularly.

Desktop:
i7 4770K
16GB 2133MHz RAM
GTX 770 2GB VRAM
240GB  Samsung Evo Pro 840

Laptop:
i7 4702HQ
8GB RAM
GTX 870M
128GB SSD

In terms of graphics, the HD4200/4400 iGPUs perform well enough to run the game and have it look like the PS3 (PS3 probably gets more effects though). I've used one of the more recent intel NUC boxes for emergency gaming before. (Raiding is impossible on them though). The HD4600 or the higher-end 5000 series would probably be good enough for things not overly intensive.