just to make it for eveyone saying upgrade your cpu there were no i5 or i7 cpus when they start making engine for this game
It really doesn't matter when they started making the engine, the thing is that all MMOs are CPU bound. Also, ForgeLight engine is one of the only engines (if not the only) that can handle this many people on a none instanced state with graphics like this.
He asked what he could do. I told him what he could do and why. I even said there wasn't much else he could do since they were working on optimization. (What are they optimizing if not the engine?). So, actually, I already said what you're trying to correct me on...
Probably typed it wrong. To clarify, if you drop graphics settings so low that you can't tell an enemy sniper from a tree, then what you have dropped settings for? There's a diminishing return between increasing/decreasing graphics and your ability to perform. Too far either way and it affects your gameplay. The only way out is to increase the performance of your machine, to upgrade parts or to buy a newer, more powerful machine.
Are you mentally challenged? The i5 and i7 series were launched in 2008... aka SOE would have had 4 years to make use of that tech...
Before shortening the life span of your CPU, due to over clocking, try this solution first. If you are running Windows 7 or 8, there's a good chance that some of your core's are in "parked" mode. This basically means that your CPU is "Hyper threading". Check out this link out about Hyper threading. http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/hyperthreading-technology-explained/ I had the same issue. I turned my "Hyper threading" to OFF to play BF4 without little annoying issues, but I forgot to switch it to ON when I wanna play Planetside 2. I'm sure that there are some guys, in these forums, that are tech genius's and maybe they can double check. Hope this helps you mate.
I think that PlanetSide2 is not accurate about the CPU/GPU limits. I doubt there is much option for him with that 1366 socket. Not entirely accurate, but then again I know what the slow part of my PC is. It is the graphics cards. If I turn the graphics settings up the game does indeed report GPU limited a very small amount of the time, but it is the majority of the time claiming it is CPU limited. Before anyone tries to tell me I need a better CPU, I doubt a 5930k would do much better. I also doubt that improvements with DDR4 would be worth the cost. I guess If I had $10,000 I could build a dual CPU server based machine that would have more CPU power, but if you believe windows PlanetSide2 normally uses a massive 10% of my 4930k.
Since the max turbo clock on an i7-5930k is a bit lower, the performance may be the same or even worse. On my i5 Ivy bridge I see the CPU usage topping around 60% when playing PS2 (divided by number of threads its almost the same) The problem is, your 6 cores/12 threads are without use here. While this much CPU horsepower may be awesome for things like video or 3D-rendering, there are rarely any games that use more than 4 threads of that CPU (Battlefield 4 and Crysis 3 for example) Some Are even Worse and don't even fully utilize 4 cores (like Skyrim or Starcraft 2 which reach their limit with 2 cores. I remember crysis 1 ran faster on my dual core than on my quad core which even clocked down due to low workload) Any recent Intel CPU (sandy bridge or later) with less cores and higher clock speed will outperform your expensive CPU in almost any games. (This is why an i5 is still the recommendation for a gaming rig, its cheaper and the price difference can be put into a decent cooler for overclocking) It's the same question like in '07 when choosing beetween a dual and a quad core: Anybody said for games you don't need 4 cores. (I remember crysis 1 ran faster on my dual core than on my quad core which clocked down due to low workload) Or: "Why do you want a graphics card with 1 GB memory, there are no games that benefit" OT: When comparing the older i7-990X (6 cores/12 threads) and the i5-2500k (4 cores/4 threads) both with almost the same maximum clock speed, the newer i5 will cruch its opponent in almost any game. The older i7 needs an overclock of 1,0-1,5 GHz to compete, and the 2500k can be overclocked, too (And Ivy Bridge and Haswell offer even a bit more performance.) B2T: So as long as you don't run there massive CPU powerhorse @ around 4,3 - 4,5 GHz you can get more gaming performance when switching to an i5 that costs not even a third. That explains the problem with the AMD FX CPUs: Many cores, on a high clock speed. but low performance per clock (remember the Pentium 4: They were crushed by AMD and Core 2 CPUs with down to half the speed) ================================================================ TL;DR: The number of cores are almost meningless here. More importent is good per clock performance paired with a high clock speed. That's why Intel Core-i CPUs (Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, Haswell) offer that much performance in games. And that's why AMD FX CPUs are that disappointing when it comes to games. (Athlon 64, Phenom II, Core 2, 1. Gen Core-i are in-between)
I know this forums believe paper examples over real world. Now explain why I get better performance with my 4930k including the old GTX 660 then the majority with the 'better for gamin' quad cores, and a much newer GPUs? This includes Skyrim. The whole point you are missing is that PlanetSide2 is claim it is CPU limited, but it is not. I stand by what I say that the ingame CPU or GPU limited text is not accurate.
i have to agree with that. before i upgraded my gpu, id get 20-40 fps and it still said cpu limited, yet when i upgraded my gpu my fps skyrocketed.
I have an i5 6600k @ 4.4 a R9 390 @ 1.2 and 16gb of ddr4 and was barely reaching 20 fps with a very high CPU usage which is normal for this game however my gpu usage was very low as well as core clock (almost idle). After trying lots of possible soloutions from installing drivers to disabling iGPU what actually fixed it was reinstalling windows (10).
