real world use cases - FPS boost 48 to 77 - is this a joke?

And most of those new players are used to playing 16 vs 16.

Planetside 2 was the first to think of having more than 32 people on a server.

Name one game beside Mag and BF that has more than 16 vs 16? Oh and it has to be an FPS. Majority of the playerbase is built from CoD kids and BF players who are used to small scale battles so they expect their systems to be able to handle this like it's still small scale battles. Now you are just trying to argue for the sake of arguing

it

heres a good article on the topic, its a bit of a long read but pretty informative
http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html

Well for AMD CPU users, OMFG is hopefully going to address your performance issues.
However, good framerates are very possible with the proper system and more importantly a properly optimized system.
I see framerates 100-190 in low activity areas, 60-140 in mid-activity and 50-120 in the heaviest battles. These numbers are acheived with only 1 of my 7970s turned on, a 1920x1080 rez, and all graphics setting turned up as high as they can go.
With an Eyefinity rez of 6080x1080 and still only 1 7970 turned on, I see framerates 60-100 in low activity areas, 50-80 in mid-activity and 40-60 in the heaviest battles. My system is optimized in many ways for gaming as well as being aggressively overclocked.
The bottom line is if you are not whilling or able to put in the time, effort, and cash into gaming on the PC, don't expect the results of those who do. You can always get Planetside 2 on PS4.

it's quite easy to imagine such fps jump, if you know anything about programming and optimization. sometimes just swapping two succeeding lines of code can give extreme speedup of a loop (think along execution time going from 10s to 0.1s). sometimes adding a simple if statement or removing one has amazing results. sometimes, you look at your code after it's written, do ctrl-a, delete, and write it second time, this time properly and receive 200% performance.

it remains to be seen if SOE will deliver. they got LOTS of unused raw processing power on my other cores, so there's room for a lot of improvement.

There's your problem. You should have gotten Intel and Nvidia.

Honestly though, you're going to gain the most from this. Those eight cores should be better in aggregate than a 4-core hyperthreaded Intel. But they're not, because AMD's individual cores are slower. Do your research next time. Don't brag on components that suck in PS2 and then whine that your framerate is low. Its not like this is new information either, we've known that Intel was better than AMD for PS2 for a year now.

That is incredible- I have the same CPU as you do and I am frequently CPU locked ~30 in large battles and it will frequently dip below. Granted, I do not OC my CPU but wow, I mean wow.

i7 2600k with radeon 6950 1gig, no problems playing. I guess it occasionally drops to 30, but no lower than that, usually hovers around 60 FPS. Playing at 1920X1080, High/Ultra settings with vsync/flora/shadows/light effects off.

I recently took out my radeon 6950 to diagnose some problems with PC, for the hell of it tried playing without dedicated video card (using Intel HD 3000 that's built into 2600k processor). Seemed playable with above 30 fps on very low settings, looked very ugly though. Must say I didn't test for too long.