More FPS

As long as you keep them cool there is no problem. I had a Q6600 Oc'ed to 3,2Ghz for 5 years until I bought the 2500k. Mine gets to 55?C on full now on summer, and 45?C in winter.

 

Aow ! The Q6600 my first quadcore, never OC'ed it, bought it in 2007, still runnin, some nostalgy there ! At what frequency is your 2500K ? I heard it can reach around 5 Ghz. And sadly my room is kinda hot so even in winter i'm always around 40-50? whithout overlocking.


EDIT: Just read your whole message sry for the question :B

 

my 2500k is running at 4Ghz now. I can easily get it to 4,5Ghz or higher but I don't really need that much power, 4Ghz is more than enough while keeping a low voltage and low temps

 

^ You are running a water cooler and your 'safe' (until the warranty runs out) temp is rather higher than any other piece of silicon, beside some ASICs, suggest..., What did you expect? Run a benchmark that also utilizes AVX for 24 hours and tell me what your temps are.
Also, your mention of power consumption is entirely pointless, as the i5 (any of them) isn't even comparable in the majority of heavily threaded tasks, let alone several games. As Intel plays fast and loose with their tdp numbers, it's very easy to exceed those specifications. With very similar idle draws, it would take several years to recoup the power cost difference, unless you are paying over 0.50 USD per kw (you aren't). I was unaware that we power our desktops on batteries... We aren't even discussing the entirely unnecessary socket changes.
I mean come on, it doesn't even have FMA 4...That's pathetic. Of course, if you like to buy arcs specifically targeted to running legacy applications one at a time, that's your prerogative.

However, you do seem to understand that i5 releases since the 2500k have been very incremental in most regards and easily caught by a mild OC, so I must give you some credit there.

It's funny when people use 2 points of comparison with no knowledge about either, isn't it. I get 108 fps min with maximum settings if I use the same parameters you used, so as other people have already explained, your numbers make little sense. Also, you seem to not understand what a physical CPU core is, nor do you know the difference between arcs.



"Now it records 4 cars at 60fps "

That looked nothing like 60 fps.




I see a thread of commonality between some of the people posting in here: a complete lack of knowledge about the many layered interactions between hardware, software and what constitutes as valid points of comparison.

Time to play less and learn, little boys.


Anyways, estama,

That would explain some of the behavior I have noted during profiling. Besides the issue with the torque engine thread, what was the decision process behind the choice of instruction sets? I would assume this is just a compatibility build right now based on the current selection.

Thanks for the info.

- - - Updated - - -

As I already explained, hyperthreading functions by utilizing resources in the pipeline that are not utilized by the primary thread. If indeed HT is providing any sort of significant benefit at this time, it only means that the intel pipeline is not being utilized very effectively yet.

It's exactly the opposite of optimized code and the antithesis of 'good multithreading'.

 

I have 6GB Ram. But with 32bit you can only use 3GB ram.
I think i just have to by a new pc...

 

i thought it was AMD gpu's that people have been complaining about. thought there were certain graphics glitches only happening with AMD cards, but not nvidia. as for AMD processors, I have no trouble keeping 60 fps with normal settings with my setup: amAMD phenom II x4 965 3.4ghz; gtx 650 ti; 8Gb 1600Mhz ram. this doesn't necessarily mean other people aren't having issues with AMD cpu's nor that you're incorrect about them not being optimized, just that I personally haven't seen these issues.

 

I'm lucky enough to be in the boat of a High-end PC group. I have a 4670K and a GTX770 OC 2gb. I can set every setting to high, even still I can easily pull anything from 85 FPS to well into the hundreds. Safe to say that saving as much money as you can for a PC really does pay off in the end. Even if you can't afford a 770, I would highly recommend the Asus GTX660ti or the OC'd 660ti for just abit more. You could get a 680 if you feel like it, I would have gotten one but I got a good deal on a 770. Overall, spend anywhere from $200-$300 on a CPU (4670K HIGHLY Recommended) and then spend as much as you can on a GPU, unless you have the hardware to match a GPU over about $500 it could be overkill.

 

My entry level FX4100 begs to differ. I have no problems running this game with all settings maxed on just about any map I've played so far at 1920x1080 and twice that res running eyefinity with two 1080p monitors.

FX4100 Black edition 4.5GHz OC'd obviously, with a Cooler Master Hyper 212+ EVO
8GB Corsair Vengeance 1600MHz DDR3 RAM
1GB GDDR5 Sapphire Radeon HD 6870
850W Thermaltake PSU

Also, it's not the fact that AMD isn't optimized for it, that's the job of the programmers or in the case of Bulldozer CPU's that's the job of the OS developer and application programmers in a sense.
Might I add my 4100 isn't even a true quad core? It's two physical cores and two logical cores, those two logical cores have no FPU so they can't do Floating Point Operations but it manages just fine, the only game that really doesn't like FX CPU's is GTAIV, at least FX CPU's with 2 or less physical cores considering it's a straight Xbox 360 port that requires at least three physical cores that can process Floating Point Operations.
I bought my CPU right when it came into consumer hands and there was no mention of it being two physical cores and two logical cores, I assumed it was four physical cores and I'm a little disappointed in the fact there was no mention of that but it was about half the price of an i5 which is built the same way technically speaking and my 4100 had better head room for a nice OC.

Also, as for the frame rate for some reason there's a giant ball of dynamic light next to most spawn areas that can cause very choppy FPS when you look at or are near it. I noticed it on another older computer of mine, might be your problem.

That's a mighty fine setup you got there, partner. That there Phenom, never let her go. I wish I had bought one before they discontinued them, probably the best CPU AMD ever made aside from it's newest higher series, a bit ahead of it's time too. That's also one of my favorite Nvidia GPU's as well, next is the GeForece 8800GT/GTS, such a good card.
I also agree. Besides the whole flickering texture thing is something that needs to be fixed by a driver update, it's obviously the way the textures are loaded that doesn't agree with AMD GPU's, I didn't really notice it much aside from the Leguna SECA track that had two textures on each billboard that were flipping back and forth through each other. Most new AMD CPU's were designed with the thought of multi-threading, single threading performance isn't down by much on the Bulldozer's but in quite a few un-forged tests Bulldozer's were very good in multi-threading.

 

my computer is the worst with beamng only 0-5 fps (matters what map and car) ill just get a new pc

 

I posted that ages ago? There have been numerous update since then that have resolved the problems people have been having.

 

With.... 20 fps?

 

Forgive me, for some reason when I clicked the thread title it went to the bottom of the page your post was on, so kind of my fault and kind of the forum's fault and besides even in the demo I had no issues playing it and a nice steady 60+FPS with all settings maxed and maybe some 40FPS dips in heavy maps.

More like a steady 60FPS and higher with VSync off like I said above and 40FPS dips in very heavy maps which more than likely aren't optimized right. Even two to three vehicles colliding I had no issues with frame rate. Didn't phys stress test much.

Not sure why there was a bunch of AMD hate in this thread. You'd think AMD stole your girlfriend, your job and all your friends the way it was being put down.

EDIT: Back when I bought this CPU the 4100 was the only 4 series, there were no 4130's and I was looking for a nice quad core CPU.

 

It's ok Just don't be so quick to judge next time.

 

I wasn't judging, I was just stating facts. I meant no disrespect or attitude towards you and I'm sorry if it seemed that way. I'm just a fellow PC and auto enthusiast and it's disheartening to see AMD put down by fault of the developers.

 

I have [Specs in my sig] and it runs BeamNG with 60 FPS on highest set-- wait, make that 20 FPS on LOWEST settings on empty grid map and I want more FPS and I have 2 $300 upgrade options.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1DSkF

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1yrSa

Which would be better optimized for BeamNG?

 

I'm a Phenom person but with either of those setups you need to have at least a 500W PSU, those 7770 and 7750 take up a lot of power. Also, never do single RAM, you want dual channel RAM so go with the double 4GB Patriot. The Phenom does a better job at single threading and an amazing job and multi-threading but that A8 is probably quite a bit more powerful and has room for overclocking.

Those 7770 and 7750 take up about 200W-300W by themselves and the CPU's are both rated about 95W plus the power to the Mobo and RAM and the HDD drives and the disc drive, that 430W won't cut it so I'd recommend like a 600W to be safe. Thermaltake makes some very well made cheap PSU's that are all at least 80 Plus Bronze certified. Antec probably makes some of the best though and have a Gold certified rating. But my Thermaltake has never let me down and has protected my computer from quite a few outages, they have over and under voltage protection as well.

So basically: The A8 for a CPU, the dual channel 4GB Patriot RAM, the HIS 7770 and at least a 600W PSU though instead of that MSI I suggest a Gigabyte or an ASUS Mobo. Personally I've had bad luck with MSI Mobo's and disc drives. Don't forget to disable the A8's built in graphics in the BIOS and the onboard mobo graphics.

What do you plan on for an OS, HDD and disc drive?

Though I feel this is derailing the thread, so if you'd like you can PM if you need more help or suggestions.

 

I have an Intel i7 950 with everything maxed with all the post processes enabled and maxed too and I get 50-65 fps

Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2

 

I'm going to merge it with my current HDD, Case and Optical Drive...

I also thought that the HD 7750 doesn't require much power... Minimum System requires are a 400w PSU..

 

Usually the GPU power requirement is stated for the GPU alone (in this case I doubt) as the GPU manufacturer cannot know how much power your CPU etc is going to consume.

General rule, total up how big a power supply you will need for your hardware, increase it by 50% to get the size you will buy.

 

Basically as Six said that's bare minimum for the PSU and it's based on the GPU alone nothing more. Alright, cool, you sure that case is certified to work with ATX and Mini-ATX? I just read your sig, that HP case is probably too small for the Mobo you're looking to get. You'll have to get a new case as well. Thermaltake and Cooler Master make some very good and cheap cases that are built for air flow, such as the Cooler Master HAF XB which is a LAN box style case with handles on the side for easy transportation and it retails for $100-$80 depending on where you buy it. I'm going to build an Intel/AMD or AMD/AMD setup using that case sometime soon for a nice portable desktop my family can use for gaming.
Other than the case the HDD's and the optical drives will obviously work without a hitch in any case.

Basically this, one of my golden rules, though I usually go a bit more overboard in the case that I add another GPU later and a few more HDD's since I have a 1TB Seagate and two 500GB Western Digital's though the third HDD is a USB3.0 WD Enterprise Passport, the transfer speeds on USB3.0 are pretty nice too, I usually get about 122MBPS on large files.