18 replies to this topic

[Jdragon]

Hi guys

I'm just wondering if my FPS playing guild wars 2 is normal. Because I think my computer can still handle more  FPS but I think I'm just not able to use it yet.

My Computers Specs are:

Processor: Intel® Core™ i5 CPU         750  @ 2.67GHz (4 CPUs), ~2.7GHz

             Memory: 8192MB RAM
Available OS Memory: 8184MB RAM
    DirectX Version: DirectX 11


Card name: NVIDIA GeForce GT 230
       Manufacturer: NVIDIA
          Chip type: GeForce GT 230

Current Mode: 1680 x 1050 (32 bit) (60Hz)

My FPS on Max is 4 on LA. and on Best Performance is 21 FPS (this is currently what I use). If any one can help me out it will be much appreciated.

Thank You

[Ezendor]

Your GPU is really really old and not at all up to task for modern gaming.  Your CPU is good enough although you might want to try some overclocking.

[typographie]

Jdragon, on 20 November 2012 - 07:15 AM, said:

Card name: NVIDIA GeForce GT 230
   Manufacturer: NVIDIA
  Chip type: GeForce GT 230

This is the real problem. Someone else may correct me, but that card may not be much better than the game's minimum. But it sounds like its definitely worthwhile to invest in a new video card, the rest of that system looks pretty solid. At 1680x1050, you could probably get away with a ~$120 Radeon HD 7770, not much reason to go much faster than that at that resolution.

[aarka]

Graphics card is 4 generations old and a budget non-gaming version at that. CPU is a little slow which will cause issues in populated areas or WvW. But yeah, the graphics card is just really poor performer.

[Quaker]

A better video card - starting from a GTX-650 or HD7750 or better - would improve your fps considerably. The i5-750 will still hold back your fps in large events and WvW, but should run well enough in PvE.

[BlasBlas]

Quaker, on 20 November 2012 - 04:01 PM, said:

A better video card - starting from a GTX-650 or HD7750 or better - would improve your fps considerably. The i5-750 will still hold back your fps in large events and WvW, but should run well enough in PvE.

I disagree on your assessment.  His CPU is perfectly fine.  He could even have a worse video card then suggested and run this game on the highest detail in WWW.

Case in point, I built a super cheap rig for a friend that runs an i3, 4gb of ram, and has an ATI radeon HD 6850 and it runs the game on  the highest settings in WWW averaging 32 fps.

Matter in fact check out this article: http://www.tomshardw...ark,3268.html

[Quaker]

I checked out that article and it said:
"Sorry!
The page you requested couldn't be found"

However, since you like Tom's Hardware, check this out:

http://www.tomshardw...ock,3106-5.html

Note that the i5-750 is listed below the newer i3s in overall performance.

I suppose I should have noted that almost any CPU will struggle somewhat in WvW and large events. I have an i5-3570K and I also get about 30fps in WvW and large events. But I suspect that the i5-750 will be closer to 20fps under the same conditions.

[Ezendor]

Quaker, on 20 November 2012 - 04:35 PM, said:

I checked out that article and it said:
"Sorry!
The page you requested couldn't be found"

However, since you like Tom's Hardware, check this out:

http://www.tomshardw...ock,3106-5.html

Note that the i5-750 is listed below the newer i3s in overall performance.

I suppose I should have noted that almost any CPU will struggle somewhat in WvW and large events. I have an i5-3570K and I also get about 30fps in WvW and large events. But I suspect that the i5-750 will be closer to 20fps under the same conditions.

I have a 760 but I did oc mine from 2.8GHz to 3.8GHz, so I'm getting mid 30's in WvW GTX 670~

[typographie]

Ezendor, on 21 November 2012 - 01:19 AM, said:

I have a 760 but I did oc mine from 2.8GHz to 3.8GHz, so I'm getting mid 30's in WvW GTX 670~

i5-750 @ 3.6 GHz here, absolutely no complaints with anything, including WvW. I don't think I drop under 25 often, not enough to bother me anyway.

Core-for-core the Lynnfield chips may be slower than Ivy Bridge i3's, but having four physical cores and a lot of overclocking headroom might close up that gap pretty well in real-world gaming.

[Quaker]

Which is why I only suggested a video card upgrade.

There's no need to go down a CPU bunny hole.

[Jdragon]

Thank you so much for the input guys. I think ill just get upgrades for my old computer so any suggestions on what Video card i should get? I want to get a really good one so that i will have it for quite a while. Ezendor I would love to overclock my computer but scared to burn it any tips or tutorials you might have to help me achieve this task?

Thank you so much for the input guys

[Quaker]

A video card upgrade would depend upon your budget and the wattage of your power supply.

What you want to aim for is something around a GTX-660 (or better), if you have a 500watt or better power supply.

If budget is tight, the before mentioned GTX-650 is lower cost. If your power supply is less than 500watts, you may need to upgrade it as well, if you want to go better with the video card.

[Jdragon]

Thnx Quaker  ill take note of this. I can spare some money for my Graphics card, But I dont think i know what my power supply is. thank you so much for the input

[Quaker]

Open the machine up and look at the label on the power supply. It should tell you the "maximum power output" in watts (or some similar spec).
(The power supply is the box that the AC plugs into outside and has all the wires coming out inside the case.)

If the system is a typical pre-built, such as a Dell or HP, it's apt to have a relatively small 300-350 watt supply, which could only be expected to run a GTX-650 or HD7750 video card.

[typographie]

Jdragon, on 23 November 2012 - 10:57 PM, said:

Ezendor I would love to overclock my computer but scared to burn it any tips or tutorials you might have to help me achieve this task?

In my opinion, the real problem here is your video card. Once you get that taken care of I think you'll be a lot happier with your performance and may not feel you need to deal with a CPU overclock. I think your i5 is still "fast enough" to keep the CPU-heavy parts of the game playable at stock settings.

Edited by typographie, 25 November 2012 - 06:53 PM.

[Jdragon]

oh ok thanks for the heads up typographie was just blinded by the fps i would have ( because of the fps you guys are getting.). Thanks again

[Ezendor]

Jdragon, on 26 November 2012 - 12:00 AM, said:

oh ok thanks for the heads up typographie was just blinded by the fps i would have ( because of the fps you guys are getting.). Thanks again

GW2 just isn't optimized at all, so GW2 performance should not be a benchmark for your PC.  Games like Skyrim/Far Cry 3 would be a better test of your PC performance.

[Quaker]

Whether or not GW2 is "optimized" and how much, if any, gain you could get if it was "fully" optimized is basically irrelevant to people's performance issues. I mean, maybe it already is optimized or maybe it isn't - in either case, at this time it takes a lot of CPU power to run well during WvW and large events. This is not really surprising considering the number of objects (including players) that need to be tracked.

So, if you want to play GW2, it matters not at all how well your system plays Skyrim, WoW, or whatever.

[Jdragon]

I took your advice Quaker and got the GTX - 650 the change is humongous in terms of performance and quality running 30 fps max settings in LA which is not bad considering the huge boost from 8 to 30. thanks again man