Thinking about buying this PC for NS2. What kind of performance can I expect?

PunchinDonkeysPunchinDonkeys Join Date: 2012-09-07 Member: 158426Members
in NS2 General Discussion
Based on your experience with NS2 hardware demands, can anyone tell me what kind of performance I can expect with this machine I am considering buying for cheap. Thanks! (looking to play 60fps+ on any/all resolutions/settings)

-Gigabyte GTX 460 Fermi SuperOverclock Edition
-AMD phenom II X4 945, 3.0 Ghz Quad Core (plan on overclocking in regard to the board)
-Asus 880G motherboard with USB 3.0
-4 GB OCZ platinum DDR3 1600
-Win 7
Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome

Comments

  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    Ram and graphics card is fine, this game is mostly CPU limited.

    I'm afraid that your fps would drop to like 20 fps during combat on this machine, even on the lowest graphical settings.
    AMD cpus are really slow when compared to intel. They are like 2x slower per core.
    Even two cores intel i7 would be faster.

    With 3570k/3770k@5ghz fps would drop to 65 fps during heavy combat.
    With stock 3.4GHz it drops to like 45 fps.
    2700k series is also fine, it is like 10-15% slower per mhz.
    So you can expect like 35-40fps during combat on 2700k and it's also easy to overlock to like 4.5GHz on air.


    Off Topic Disagree 1Agree Awesome
  • ScardyBobScardyBob ScardyBob Join Date: 2009-11-25 Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/comment/2089436/#Comment_2089436

    That's close to your specs.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree 1Awesome
  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    that's not even close, he has intel I7 930 which is faster
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/comment/1997075/#Comment_1997075
    This one is closer. His fps drops sometimes below 20.

    Your cpu has only 3 GHz so you will have 30% less fps. You can expect fps as low as 15 during combat.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • BentRingBentRing Join Date: 2003-03-04 Member: 14318Members
    edited March 2013
    From what I remember reading, my Phenom II 555BE is essentially a X4 with two locked cores. It runs at 3.2 stock and I overclock to just under 3.8 and it's paired with 4 gigs of ram and a 5850 (gpu is never close to maxed in NS2). Early game I see 50fps tops, usually down to mid thirties by the time fades come out and not uncommon to drop below 20 late game.

    This is with everything on low except textures which are medium and 1280x720 resolution.

    My advice would be to save some more and get an I5/I7, which is what I plan to do later this year.
    Off Topic Disagree 1Agree Awesome
  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    With my i5 3570k I get about 100 fps on average during the game. There are some areas where I get 160-180 fps during early game.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    my fps is just like derwalters's: http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/comment/2066155/#Comment_2066155 xD
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • WheeeeWheeee Join Date: 2003-02-18 Member: 13713Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    don't get phenoms, it's old tech. i have a phenom quad core and i drop to 20ish fps in heavy combat, 60 fps idle, 40-60 running around the map, 35-50 vs a single opponent. definitely go intel, they are the best value right now.
    Off Topic Disagree 1Agree Awesome
  • PunchinDonkeysPunchinDonkeys Join Date: 2012-09-07 Member: 158426Members
    how about this 'used' system?

    Processor: Intel Core i3 3220 (dual hyperthreaded 3.30GHz)
    Graphics: HIS Radeon HD 7770
    Memory: 8GB DDR3-1600
    Hard Drive: 1TB, 7200RPM Western Digital
    Motherboard: ASRock B75M-DGS
    OS: Windows 8 Pro
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • WheeeeWheeee Join Date: 2003-02-18 Member: 13713Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    what is your budget
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ritualsacrificeritualsacrifice Join Date: 2012-11-14 Member: 171148Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited March 2013
    Probably still won't be able to run it very well.. I have a 3.2ghz quad core i5 and a 550ti and I routinely drop to 30-40 fps in combat and that's with all settings on low running at 1280x720 :/

    I mean, it'll be playable on low settings, but you're not going to be getting a constant 60fps
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • FrothybeverageFrothybeverage Join Date: 2003-02-15 Member: 13593Members
    Why are you guys running at such low resolutions?
    I found that with my computer(Before it blew up), there was no difference between running at 1080p, or at 1024x768.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ritualsacrificeritualsacrifice Join Date: 2012-11-14 Member: 171148Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    I get 120 early game at 1280x720 dropping to 30 only in the worst late game situations, I get 90 early game when running at 1980x1020 dropping as low as 20 late game, sometimes lower.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • YMICrazyYMICrazy Join Date: 2012-11-02 Member: 165986Members
    edited March 2013
    ^Frame rate varies from game to game. It's easy to test though just make a 5 min demo and play your game at both res while benchmarking with fraps. Then see if it drops that low by looking at min fps on your graphs. A 550 ti with everything on low should let you increase that horrid resolution and maybe a few settings on high. Unless your monitor's max is 1280x720.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    PunchinDonkeys wrote: »
    how about this 'used' system?

    Processor: Intel Core i3 3220 (dual hyperthreaded 3.30GHz)
    Graphics: HIS Radeon HD 7770
    Memory: 8GB DDR3-1600
    Hard Drive: 1TB, 7200RPM Western Digital
    Motherboard: ASRock B75M-DGS
    OS: Windows 8 Pro

    This is a good CPU. I think that you would get about 60% of performance that I and derwalter get. So you an expect 60 fps on average and down to 40 during heavy combat. (because of no overclocking)
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • Zomb3hZomb3h Join Date: 2011-01-27 Member: 79241Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    God, this game needs to beef up performance. I don't understand how NS2:C can run faster than NS2, even in late-game. I find it hard to believe infestation to be the culprit.

    You're gonna be stuck playing in lower resolutions
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • FrothybeverageFrothybeverage Join Date: 2003-02-15 Member: 13593Members
    Resolution has a negligible affect on framerate, from my understanding most of the problem is the way the game logic is handled(which is the CPU, not the GPU).

    I guess this is why I got a pretty constant 30-40 FPS regardless of resolution.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    I tried disabling 2 cores and I see that there is only a 5% fps drop when going from 4 to 3 cores (175 fps vs 165 fps) and 33% drop when going from 4 to 2 cores (175 fps vs 130 fps).
    So I guess you would get about 45fps on average and 30 during heavy combat with i3 3220.
    (30% performance drop with slower clock and another 30% with having 2 cores instead of 4 so 50% total)
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ScatterScatter Join Date: 2012-09-02 Member: 157341Members, Squad Five Blue
    Zomb3h wrote: »
    God, this game needs to beef up performance. I don't understand how NS2:C can run faster than NS2, even in late-game. I find it hard to believe infestation to be the culprit.

    You're gonna be stuck playing in lower resolutions

    Cysts

    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • FrothybeverageFrothybeverage Join Date: 2003-02-15 Member: 13593Members
    Resolution has next to no impact on performance, assuming you're above minimum spec.
    Off Topic 1Disagree Agree Awesome
  • Marshall_DrumminMarshall_Drummin Join Date: 2012-12-04 Member: 174115Members
    @pmnox

    What gpu and resolution are you running at?

    I'm running i7 3770k @ default, gtx 570, @ 1600x900 with everthing off and low.
    I am still getting fps drops during mid game combat.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ScardyBobScardyBob ScardyBob Join Date: 2009-11-25 Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    PunchinDonkeys wrote: »
    how about this 'used' system?

    Processor: Intel Core i3 3220 (dual hyperthreaded 3.30GHz)
    Graphics: HIS Radeon HD 7770
    Memory: 8GB DDR3-1600
    Hard Drive: 1TB, 7200RPM Western Digital
    Motherboard: ASRock B75M-DGS
    OS: Windows 8 Pro

    http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/comment/1967881/#Comment_1967881
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • NeokenNeoken Bruges, Belgium Join Date: 2004-03-20 Member: 27447Members, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Playtester
    edited March 2013
    That CPU is most likely gonna be the problem. I have a Phenom II X4 955@3.4Ghz that is bottlenecking my GTX560Ti. I play NS2 at 1600*900 resolution with all settings but textures and AF on low/off, and I get a good 60 fps average during the early game. Late game, with a lot of action it can dip down to 25-30 fps though.

    I could perhaps squeeze out some more fps if I lowered resolution a bit more.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • BentRingBentRing Join Date: 2003-03-04 Member: 14318Members
    I remember reading somebodys tests in the late beta that equated to lowering resolution could increase fps so I did and got used to it this way. If it's all been a placebo effect, then oh well.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    I have gtx 670 and I'm running with 1920x1080. Gpu usage is at like 40-50% most of the time even at 120-150 fps.
    The lowest fps that I have seen in the late game was like 65 fps on a server with 24 players. Without overclocking my cpu the fps was dropping to like 40 or so.

    If I turn on high textures + anti aliasing to high + anisotrophics filtering on high then gpu usage gets 90-100%. That limits my fps to like 120 instead of 160. It doesn't matter in the late game since I'm cpu limited.

    I use MSI afterburner to check the GPU usage. You should try this, if will work with all NVIDIA gpus.

    You are certainly limited by your cpu running at stock speed 3.5GHz. You can safetly overclock it to 4.5 GHz. You should notice the difference.

    I had gtx 480 I replaced it with GTX 670. I don't get more fps, but at least the gpu is quiet even under full load.
    GTX 480 has temps reaching 95c under full load. Though my GPU was never under full load with NS2.
    GTX 670 has temps staying at about 70 under full load.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    for example when I start start with no players on docking I can get 195fps on 1280x720 with 55% gpu load.
    With 1920x1080 on lowest settings I can up to 180 fps and my load is close to 100%.

    During live game it's like 120 fps with 100% load (when looking at base with lots of buildings, etc.)
    or like 120 fps with 60% load around the map in random placed.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ScardyBobScardyBob ScardyBob Join Date: 2009-11-25 Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    pmnox wrote: »
    I have gtx 670 and I'm running with 1920x1080. Gpu usage is at like 40-50% most of the time even at 120-150 fps.
    The lowest fps that I have seen in the late game was like 65 fps on a server with 24 players. Without overclocking my cpu the fps was dropping to like 40 or so.

    If I turn on high textures + anti aliasing to high + anisotrophics filtering on high then gpu usage gets 90-100%. That limits my fps to like 120 instead of 160. It doesn't matter in the late game since I'm cpu limited.

    I use MSI afterburner to check the GPU usage. You should try this, if will work with all NVIDIA gpus.

    You are certainly limited by your cpu running at stock speed 3.5GHz. You can safetly overclock it to 4.5 GHz. You should notice the difference.

    I had gtx 480 I replaced it with GTX 670. I don't get more fps, but at least the gpu is quiet even under full load.
    GTX 480 has temps reaching 95c under full load. Though my GPU was never under full load with NS2.
    GTX 670 has temps staying at about 70 under full load.
    I have a 2600k @4.7GHz paired with a stock HD 6950, which actually bottlenecks the GPU (i.e. 'waiting for GPU' >10ms) when I turn on all the graphical options. So the GPU can be what's limiting your fps, but it typically has to be from pretty mismatched specs.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • pmnoxpmnox Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183543Members
    edited March 2013
    ScardyBob wrote: »
    pmnox wrote: »
    I have gtx 670 and I'm running with 1920x1080. Gpu usage is at like 40-50% most of the time even at 120-150 fps.
    The lowest fps that I have seen in the late game was like 65 fps on a server with 24 players. Without overclocking my cpu the fps was dropping to like 40 or so.

    If I turn on high textures + anti aliasing to high + anisotrophics filtering on high then gpu usage gets 90-100%. That limits my fps to like 120 instead of 160. It doesn't matter in the late game since I'm cpu limited.

    I use MSI afterburner to check the GPU usage. You should try this, if will work with all NVIDIA gpus.

    You are certainly limited by your cpu running at stock speed 3.5GHz. You can safetly overclock it to 4.5 GHz. You should notice the difference.

    I had gtx 480 I replaced it with GTX 670. I don't get more fps, but at least the gpu is quiet even under full load.
    GTX 480 has temps reaching 95c under full load. Though my GPU was never under full load with NS2.
    GTX 670 has temps staying at about 70 under full load.
    I have a 2600k @4.7GHz paired with a stock HD 6950, which actually bottlenecks the GPU (i.e. 'waiting for GPU' >10ms) when I turn on all the graphical options. So the GPU can be what's limiting your fps, but it typically has to be from pretty mismatched specs.
    I also get low performance when I turn on all the graphical options. I was talking only about game on 1920x1080 with the lowest settings.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • CiroCiro Join Date: 2013-01-09 Member: 178392Members
    PunchinDonkeys wrote: »
    how about this 'used' system?

    Processor: Intel Core i3 3220 (dual hyperthreaded 3.30GHz)
    Graphics: HIS Radeon HD 7770
    Memory: 8GB DDR3-1600
    Hard Drive: 1TB, 7200RPM Western Digital
    Motherboard: ASRock B75M-DGS
    OS: Windows 8 Pro

    The used system looks better. I'd take the used system; better cpu, more ram, current gen video card.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
Sign In or Register to comment.