My system is fairly beefy, why does an old game like WoW

[NamelessMC]

My friend just set up his rig last night.

Core 2 Quad NOT over-clocked Q6600 2.4ghz
4gb G.Skill ram DDR2-800
Shuttle XPC motherboard (It's the newest shuttle)
Sapphire 3870 512mb slim version

In Shat with hundreds of people running around like cockroaches, his system never hit less than 70fps.

His resolution is 1440x900 but with 8xAF enabled.

 

[Twoboxer]

I was asking the same questions as the OP . . . I run a QX6700 OC'd to 3.2GHz, and twin 8800GTX's . . . 768MB lol . . . and I had low frame rate and stuttering in towns (lots of players around) or in raids (with the eye candy turned on). The following approach helped me in EQ2, and will probably work in WoW:

Run it in a window at the same resolution as your desktop, and bring up Task Manager to monitor performance. You will note that - when you see that "stutter" or a drop in frame rate - that your CPU utilization is around 52%. That's one core at 100%, the other @ 2%. FWIW, my quad reads 27%.

If you get the same results, you are obviously CPU bound - and my guess is that is what you will find MOST of the time the frame rate drops.

Another way to test it is to remove the UI from the screen (if you can in WoW) and see if the frame rate improves. That will also show that you are cpu bound since the UI graphics are virtually static. Watch your CPU utilization at the same time.

Also FWIW, running the game in SLI mode with my twin GTXs results in a drop in frame rate and an increase in graphics stutter as SLI "decision-making" apparently puts an even larger load on the poor little cpu.

Slow down from network issues is a whole 'nuther category, and produces different results . . . Geez, these games can be played on dialup while using Ventrillo/Teamspeak lol . . . as long as your cpu isn't maxed out at the time. Dual cores and quads do help a bit here, especially if you are running a real-time parser as well.

But for the game itself . . . it just shows that while dual/quad cores and SLI are nice, there's nothing like raw horsepower . . . er, clock speed

 

[Anubis]

ive been sending the OP tells and im gonna do a simple test this weekend do clear up the CPU/GPU bottleneck debate

Opty 165 + 7600 GT is one system the other is a C2D 8400 @ 4GHz + 8800GT
im just gonna swap the video cards and see what happens, if its a GPU bottleneck the FPS on the opty system should jump a ton when i toss a 8800GT in there and the other system should have its FPS tank, if not then its CPU related

 

[bfdd]

e6600 @ 3.2 24/7 w/ 8gb ddr2-800 8800 GTX and I still chug too bro, I don't understand it so *shrug* It pisses me off when I can run much more graphically challenging games and get better FPS than WoW running through Shattrath.

 

[Twoboxer]

Originally posted by: bfdd
e6600 @ 3.2 24/7 w/ 8gb ddr2-800 8800 GTX and I still chug too bro, I don't understand it so *shrug* It pisses me off when I can run much more graphically challenging games and get better FPS than WoW running through Shattrath.

Clearly, MMORPG's can be more challenging to your PC. Why?

Because Crysis (eg) does NOT display the player's character - just the weapon(s). Easy.

Because an MMORPG can have 50 or 100 uniquely dressed, randomly moving characters, all in the field of vision (maybe). Characters that can also throw things, cast spells/arts with massive impact to be calculated. All uncontrolled, and virtually unlimited.

The "zone" is also typically much bigger- not the relatively narrow canyons Crysis moves you through. Meaning there's more decisions about what to render and what not to.

Then there's the UI (User Interface) Crysis has virtually none. Then there's the data flow. If you've ever run a parser, check the logs lol.

MMORPG's are just more challenging, particularly on the cpu side. And multiple cores help less than SLI (if that's possible lol) for most games in existence today.

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: Twoboxer

Originally posted by: bfdd
e6600 @ 3.2 24/7 w/ 8gb ddr2-800 8800 GTX and I still chug too bro, I don't understand it so *shrug* It pisses me off when I can run much more graphically challenging games and get better FPS than WoW running through Shattrath.

Clearly, MMORPG's can be more challenging to your PC. Why?

Because Crysis (eg) does NOT display the player's character - just the weapon(s). Easy.

Because an MMORPG can have 50 or 100 uniquely dressed, randomly moving characters, all in the field of vision (maybe). Characters that can also throw things, cast spells/arts with massive impact to be calculated. All uncontrolled, and virtually unlimited.

The "zone" is also typically much bigger- not the relatively narrow canyons Crysis moves you through. Meaning there's more decisions about what to render and what not to.

Then there's the UI (User Interface) Crysis has virtually none. Then there's the data flow. If you've ever run a parser, check the logs lol.

MMORPG's are just more challenging, particularly on the cpu side. And multiple cores help less than SLI (if that's possible lol) for most games in existence today.

No shit? Duh there's more stuff going on on screen, but it's nothing that intense. Not a lot of shaders and the textures that are out there aren't that great. WoW is a modified WC3 graphics engine. IMO the reason it causes such a hit on video performance is because the engine sucks for what they're using it for and they need to rewrite it. It's probably not optimized for shit. Now for UI, I use the bare f'in minimum in WoW, my UI uses something like 5mb of ram?
Also, to people who brought up internet speed and all the "incoming connections" have you ever even played an actual MMO? You are only ever connected to one thing, that's the actual server. All the data from everyone else filters through that and the server sends it out to you to tell you where they are what they're doing and so on. I'm running 15/2 fios when I ran speed tests I pulled 22/4 so I highly doubt my internet is lagging in comparison to the server which is about 30-40 miles from where I live.

 

[btcomm1]

I have a feeling it's their code that sucks, someone mentioned that they had a 3870 and quad core not even overclocked and got better fps then some of you. Makes it sound like it may be at least partialy a CPU issue. Also I'm sure you guys have tried /console timingmethod 2 does that make a diff?

 

[Twoboxer]

Originally posted by: bfdd
No shit? Duh there's more stuff going on on screen, but it's nothing that intense.

That's the whole point - the low frame rate is mostly a cpu issue, not a gpu issue.

 

[Soubriquet]

Well reading the remark about driver I was wondering, this is nothing to do with Vista is it ?

How does it run in XP compared to Vista?

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: Twoboxer

Originally posted by: bfdd
No shit? Duh there's more stuff going on on screen, but it's nothing that intense.

That's the whole point - the low frame rate is mostly a cpu issue, not a gpu issue.

Happens on my buddies 3.2ghz quad so what's your point? He only gets bout 2 frames more than I do in Shatt. IMO it's their shitty engine. Same reason WC3 was hurting computers when it came out. Doesn't look great but for some reason just rapes the PC.

 

[kuroshouten]

patch 2.3 i believe they changed alot of video coding and upgraded it. I've been told that many people saw a decrease in fps accross the board no matter where they were. It was suggested to try the newest drivers first of course. Or you can try reverting to older drivers. i'm with you on the whole "blizz can't seem to code for crap" though. If it makes you feel any better i get 10 fps in shattrah and about 2-4 fps in Black Temple while raiding (i believe its all the fires they've got going on in there). Anyway i'm gonna be building a new comp so i can get rid of this 5+ year old Gateway computer from hell (P4, x800AIW PRO, 1gig of ram, and dying hard drives).

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: kuroshouten
patch 2.3 i believe they changed alot of video coding and upgraded it. I've been told that many people saw a decrease in fps accross the board no matter where they were. It was suggested to try the newest drivers first of course. Or you can try reverting to older drivers. i'm with you on the whole "blizz can't seem to code for crap" though. If it makes you feel any better i get 10 fps in shattrah and about 2-4 fps in Black Temple while raiding (i believe its all the fires they've got going on in there). Anyway i'm gonna be building a new comp so i can get rid of this 5+ year old Gateway computer from hell (P4, x800AIW PRO, 1gig of ram, and dying hard drives).

go with a OCed C2D, i get nearly 70 FPS in shat now

 

[SystemPlue]

I was running a FX-60, 7950gt and 2gig ram running dual monitors in window mode... i notice that when i have the WoW window on the 2nd display it would be a lot slower.... 20-90fps (Main display) and 5-50fps (2nd display)

But i just upgraded to a Q6600, 2gig ram, 8800gt 1gig and both display run at similar FPS 30-120fps

Hyjal and Black Temple fps are not as bad as SSC/TK instances or Shattrath fps.... i am guessing the 2 extra cores help when im playing WoW on 1 screen and doing desktop work on the other..

 

[kuroshouten]

That's true... haven't done SSC in a while but i remember getting horrible fps lag during fights like Hydross, Lurker and Vashj. I think its due to all of the water textures. people keep jumping in and out of water and the comp needs to compute it or something.

 

[dakels]

I'd like to revive this old thread.

I built a new quad system and noticed some things:

old system:
P4 D 3.0ghz @ 3.2ghz
2GB (4x 512mb) HyperX DDR400 LL
Raptor 74gb HD
X1950 Pro

new system:
Q6600 @ 3.1ghz.
4gb PC1066 OCZ Plat
Raptor 74gb HD (C: ) Spinpoint F1 (F: has wow folder)
Asus 4850 stock

I ran WoW last night with the task manager open tracking CPU usage. At all times my CPU was around 90%+ on the first core, 5-10% on cores 2, 3, 4.

1680x1050
Max settings, 24x8, max details, vsync on.
Custom UI (Pitbull, grid)

With the CPU at 2.4ghz I would see FPS dips to 40-45fps in busy areas in shatt and stabilizes around 55-60fps.
With the CPU at 3.1ghz the FPS dipped to 52-55fps and stabilized at the vsync max of 60fps.

A while ago with old system SSC and TK were pretty much unplayable. I'd hit 40-60fps in many areas but super busy areas meant 10-20fps and SSC and TK raids = 2-10fps. Other instances were fine though, and in even older days I used to do 40 man Nax, BWL, AQ with about 10-30fps on a R9800 and same rig.

So it would appear to me with this very simple and inconclusive test that WoW is heavily CPU bound. Also it is not utilizing my other 3 cores, not even 2. I am missing something?

What is a good tool for tracking CPU, GPU, memory usage while playing?

Thanks

 

[Sutareteiru]

I actually had the same exact problem, I solved it by going to window'd mode, for some reason in full screen mode my 8800gt (when I owned one) kept getting 10 fps then i would go to window'd mode and it ran smooth. Dunno what the issue is, but i would guess driver.



Good luck to ya!

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: dakels
new system:
Q6600 @ 3.1ghz.
4gb PC1066 OCZ Plat
Raptor 74gb HD (C: ) Spinpoint F1 (F: has wow folder)
Asus 4850 stock

I ran WoW last night with the task manager open tracking CPU usage. At all times my CPU was around 90%+ on the first core, 5-10% on cores 2, 3, 4.

It seems you have to enable dual-threaded capability, after patching the game:

Originally posted by: Dravic

What to mess with dual core optimizations? (as of 2.0.3)

/console timingmethod 1 - old method
/console timingmethod 2 - dual cores

 

[dakels]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: dakels
new system:
Q6600 @ 3.1ghz.
4gb PC1066 OCZ Plat
Raptor 74gb HD (C: ) Spinpoint F1 (F: has wow folder)
Asus 4850 stock

I ran WoW last night with the task manager open tracking CPU usage. At all times my CPU was around 90%+ on the first core, 5-10% on cores 2, 3, 4.

It seems you have to enable dual-threaded capability, after patching the game:

Originally posted by: Dravic

What to mess with dual core optimizations? (as of 2.0.3)

/console timingmethod 1 - old method
/console timingmethod 2 - dual cores

I'm a noob, how do I do that?
I looked at it again last night and recorded some rough stats. At 2.4ghz no OC, the CPU usage in WoW is about 90%+ (roughly about 95% avg), minimal on other processors. At 3.1ghz OC'd, it varies from 80-95%, 85-90% avg. The increased CPU ghz seems to help my min fps. I will have to do more precise measurements this weekend if I get a chance.

I was wondering if anyone can suggest a good in game tracker that gives me a report on CPU and GPU usage while I am full screen in game. So far I have just been leaving my task manager on minimized with CPU utilization on slow update.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: NamelessMC
There's gotta be something wrong. You guys don't understand. WoW is from 2004 and he's on a Core Micro based processor at 2.8ghz and an 8800GT along with 4gb of ram.

His description sounds about right. I'm on a C2D 6600@2.9ghz, 8800GTX, 4gb ram. I don't play WoW anymore, but back around February I would get about 30fps in Shattrath.

The frame killer in that game was the draw distance. Turning the draw distance down a bit would often double or triple the frame rate.

 

[taltamir]

CPU limited... try an intel quad core at over 3.5ghz

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: taltamir
CPU limited... try an intel quad core at over 3.5ghz

"guys, WoW is causing blue screens. what the hell is this garbage?"

(while I had an unstable 3.2ghz overclock, WoW was the only game that would blue screen)

 

[dakels]

Originally posted by: taltamir
CPU limited... try an intel quad core at over 3.5ghz

It sucks to be CPU limited when the 3 other cores are basically doing nothing while 1 is hammered. I don't expect even core distribution like Prime95 but 1 core maxed while other 3 at 5-10% is absurd. These games demand so much yet utilize resources so poorly.

 

[Foxery]

Yegods. All of the answers were given earlier in the thread, but nobody paid attention to them.

1. It's not multithreaded. Of course throwing more cores at it is useless. (Apparently 2-core support can be manually enabled, but that's as far is it goes.)
2. This guy was bang on, and all you did was flame him:

Originally posted by: Twoboxer
Because an MMORPG can have 50 or 100 uniquely dressed, randomly moving characters, all in the field of vision (maybe). Characters that can also throw things, cast spells/arts with massive impact to be calculated.

The graphical detail in WoW may not be sophisticated in the way you're used to, but the sheer volume of unique textures and particle effects it has to process in a crowded area dwarfs anything you get in the average shooter.

It probably goes beyond simply CPU/GPU saturation; it's also memory and bus saturation from trying to keep 100 people's armor, weapon, and facial textures and particle effects for enchantments all in view while still maintaining the floor and walls. Compare this to loading a small number of detailed textures in a FPS - the latter is much simpler. On old systems in particular, you can run into, say, a bank and have it appear completely empty for about 30 seconds while your machine comes up with the eleventy billion textures needed to render the players standing there.

And yes, some of you are using ludicrious resolutions, draw distances, and AA settings. What did you expect?

 

[Mango1970]

Same applies to games like Everquest. Old as heck and outdated in regards to quality of graphics. But place 54 people in a raid situation, throw on spell effects and all textures and even on my Q6600 G0 at 3.3 with 4 GB or RAM and dual 8800 GTX and it can bog down.

 

[dakels]

Well I found a way to enable quad cores in WoW. While it seems to work ok, All 4 cores are utlized now (according to task manager and Asus AI control), about 40-60% 1st, 15-40% for the rest 2-4, the performance didn't go up too much. Interesting. I will have to review it better but it seems to be offloading some of the processes. I can't tell but it doesn't seem to be multiple threads, but flipping around from core to core. That's not entirely true but I may see something like, 60/20/10/10, then 40/20/40/20, etc. I'll have to run some more tests and try it longer. I only had about 20 minutes to mess with it. Maybe it will work better for others.

In machines with more than 2 logical processors (whether they are multiple physical processors, multiple DualCore or single QuadCore processors, or DualCore + HT processors), a new variable is saved to the config.wtf file.

The processAffinityMask variable is a decimal number composed of a binary mask representing which cores WoW will allow certain threads to be scheduled on. By default, this variable is set to "3" representing logical processors 1 and 2.