Hello, I'm just making a simple question, and I would like a direct reply to it, anyone who is playing Planetside 2 with an AMD FX 9590 OC to 5 GHz, what are your fps (all kind of battles)?. Please, if you are going to reply with, that's a bad processor, it has a 220 TDP, buy better an Intel i5, PLEASE NO, just answer what I asked, Thanks in advance.
Well my friend is running FX 8350 at 4.7ghz (thats a fx 9590 stock) and it still runs not that good. It just simply isnt a good CPU for this game.
Well i own a FX6300 and when it was running at stock speeds at 3.6GHz i struggled to get 60fps and in very big battles it would drop to 18-22 fps,however since i've overclocked it to 4.6GHz it never drops below 35fps in very big battles(96+) also i have it locked at 60fps through adaptive vsync and so maintains 60fps 90% of the time,with that cpu i would expect better lower fps so maybe big battles 45+ fps if not more.Hope that helps
I don't think the processor speed is such a big deal but the buss speed on the PCI is a big deal, kicking up the buss speed to the video card is where the bottle neck happens. It's how much data you can get to the video card buss. The video buss speed is independent of the processor speed in most cases. You can have a screaming processor and it does you no good if the video buss speed is low. Just kicking up the buss speed 10 mhz is a lot more data .. mine goes up in 1MHz steps. Be careful doing this with PCI's A good example of this is you have a mother board with PCI 2.0 and a video card with PCI 3.0 you can crank up the data rate for PCI 3.0 and it works ok but the other PCI boards on the buss may fail to operate correct because of the data rate.
None of that is relevant. The problem with that CPU is the two core per module architecture, which is why it performs worse than a low end i5, as he said in his first post lol. Its literally just an overclocked 8350.
Yes what you say is correct but now that PS2 process's using 4 cores I have found that that the DATA rate to the PCI buss is a lot more maybe to much more in some cases. I am going to get a GTX-970 PCI 3.0 to test this case on the buss with my I7. AMD does not have hyperthreading as such but they have hardware type hyperthreading sort of like intel in an AMD chip but different. In some ways I am surprised that windows even runs on an AMD chip with all the differences in them.
Thank you all guys, actually I own a 8150 OC 4,2 and in a couple of day I will get a 9590 (I will OC it to 5), I will tell you the results.
Have a 9370 at 4,7. Getting as low as 20-25 frames in huge battles, about 40-50 in small to mid sized battles.
people with 8 core amd processors try this and report back. go to task manager and set the affinity for the game to 0 2 4 6 and see if it makes fps better.
Pre patch, I was getting around 90-110 fps in the warpgate, 60-90 everywhere else, 50-60 mid fights, and 35-50 in giant battles with shadows on Low, all settings high. Now? Around 60 warpgate, and 40ish everywhere else. It drops to 25 on mid range fights and giant battles. I don't know what happened, but it's as if I'm playing with Vsync enabled, when it's disabled. Something done got broked.
try disabling smoothing, helped for me http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/2ep9lb/i_fixed_my_fps_issue_but_why_did_it_fix_it/ Have tried that previously, didn't help, but i will try it again today, and report back, just in case they have changed something Have also tried disabling cores in bios, but i am only allowed on this MB to disable pairs, and not single cores, so that did not help allot.
Planetside 2 is a dual threaded application. It only uses 2 CPU cores and nothing more. Since the AMD FX 9590 (and all AMD cpus) has very weak performance per-core the FPS will be low. The rest of the CPU cores in that AMD FX 9590 are sitting there doing nothing. AMD CPUs are not recommended for Planetside 2.
Wrong. Planetside 2 uses all the cores it can get. I recommend to open some task manager while playing and you'll see it.
i have a program that monitors bus usage and ps2 barely uses 15% at PCI-E 2.0 there is no bus bottleneck in PS2 in the slightest
Calling the 9590 a bad CPU is answering the question you asked. TDP is the most irrelevant possible stat on a CPU. TDP is for determining what kind of CPU cooler you need... 9590 only has about 60% of the per core performance of a similar priced i5. You're just burning your money and asking not to hear about burning your money. FX 9590 will not give you $250 worth of performance in PS2. Get a $200 i5 so you can do 1080p ultra 60fps. Or stick your fingers in your ears, scream lalalalala about the 9590 and enjoy your 20 fps or low detail preset.
I got my FX-8320 running at 4.4GHZ right now and my game runs well. I never really get any lag. My main bottleneck is my older (but overclocked) Nvidia 560ti. Looking to replace that soon.
Did nothing to the fps. The complete cpu utilization was the same as with all cores enabled, about 40-50% So I am wondering why the cpu is not used more? I have about 50% more cpu power to use, but the game wont use it?
