Budget PC - tests are quite good

[unknown]

Okay, since the cat just deleted the first this will be short-er

If anyone is interested, you probably read this alsewhere, but I am kinda
chuffed
mainly because I am getting something upscale later ,
we needs it, for work , yes we does :-)

I got Dad a i3-4130 2 core+HT @3.4GHz
8G ram @ 1600
Win7 64bit on SSD on Sata3.0/6Gbps, copy of WOW running off SATA 3.0 HDD
CPU has onboard HD 4400
These are going for like $AU500 in standard case
without the SSD and some extras I added for ruggedising.

So it isn't high end, it isn't even a HD4600 the 4570 has let alone a card
but it should do for mail and skype and internet browsing :-).
I got that cpu because heat and dust buildup is a problem, this has low
demand.
It idles at 2C above ambient 25C with the MSI clock control
It adjusts clock down to ~500MHz and ramps up to full nicely when needed.

So I had to stress test it, and what better than a WOW trial account?
since I haven't actually played wow for ages , saving the real one for SOR
when I have time :-)

Keep in mind this runs faster off the SSD, but wow is off the HDD
running around stormwind it is only using 3G ram + half a gig for the GPU
so not much should be the SSD except boot

Load time from the character select screen, which should be same-ish for
zone changes
after a few other loads, the first load is kinda slow.
5 seconds
running 1920x1080 (HDMI connect ) windowed fullscreen
at the docks looking back at the city in FPS as ctrl-r shows
using the stardard selects no tweaks
Ultra 24
High 38
Good 48
Fair 120
Low- who cares?
Running from docks to bank with moderate population
Ultra 24-20
High 38-40
Good 50-55
Fair 90-110
Low- who cares?
- there was a crowd of dragons waiting for a boat when I did the docks
but the ranges are fairly consistent, no real spikes

Not really that bad :-) for a lower end cpu/gpu even if the latest
generation.
It runs Wow in HD with 50% cpu and 45-48C with 25C ambient
of course the GPU is flatchat all the way

Ulra does tend to be a bit laggy and jerky around crowds, but I didn't try
any of the tweaks
ping is 250ms anyway by the game, which is kinda whoohoo for here.
It used to be 500-700 ms+ most of the time, and we won't even talk about
satellite ping
must be the high capacity pipes under the Pacific.

[unknown]

Post by unknown
after a few other loads, the first load is kinda slow.
5 seconds
running 1920x1080 (HDMI connect ) windowed fullscreen
at the docks looking back at the city in FPS as ctrl-r shows
using the stardard selects no tweaks
Ultra 24
High 38
Good 48
Fair 120
Low- who cares?
Running from docks to bank with moderate population
Ultra 24-20
High 38-40
Good 50-55
Fair 90-110
Low- who cares?
- there was a crowd of dragons waiting for a boat when I did the docks
but the ranges are fairly consistent, no real spikes

Load from character screen off SSD 3 seconds, graphics much the same
This is with no addons.

[unknown]

Post by unknown

Post by unknown
after a few other loads, the first load is kinda slow.
5 seconds
running 1920x1080 (HDMI connect ) windowed fullscreen
at the docks looking back at the city in FPS as ctrl-r shows
using the stardard selects no tweaks
Ultra 24
High 38
Good 48
Fair 120
Low- who cares?
Running from docks to bank with moderate population
Ultra 24-20
High 38-40
Good 50-55
Fair 90-110
Low- who cares?
- there was a crowd of dragons waiting for a boat when I did the docks
but the ranges are fairly consistent, no real spikes

Load from character screen off SSD 3 seconds, graphics much the same
This is with no addons.

after a couple of hours with tweaks I don't know that you really need
anything else
unless you are really picky and loaded

Ultra lags in places and is jumpy but in High everything is smooth 35-45
FPS
And when you logoff, there is the temp 45-43-40-38-36 in about the time it
takes to read

So, stress tested quite well, no cooking, the fans barely ticking over
if you are a bit doubtful or strapped for cash you don't need $300 cards
in $1500 systems anymore
at least to get around in WOW quite nicely

So now I need another reason to buy the big stuff , so sad :-)

[Urbin]

Post by unknown
So now I need another reason to buy the big stuff , so sad :-)

we needs it, for work , yes we does :-)

Cheers
Urbin

[Peter T.]

Post by unknown
Load time from the character select screen, which should be same-ish for
zone changes
after a few other loads, the first load is kinda slow.
5 seconds

SSDs are just porn. When I got my samsung 840 256GB earlier this year
I'm usually one of the first toons who enters a raid in LFRs. I see the
raid grid getting cluttered slowly. :)

Post by unknown
running 1920x1080 (HDMI connect ) windowed fullscreen
at the docks looking back at the city in FPS as ctrl-r shows
using the stardard selects no tweaks
Ultra 24
High 38
Good 48
Fair 120
Low- who cares?
Running from docks to bank with moderate population
Ultra 24-20
High 38-40
Good 50-55
Fair 90-110
Low- who cares?
- there was a crowd of dragons waiting for a boat when I did the docks
but the ranges are fairly consistent, no real spikes

The interesting question is: and 25 man raids? Elegon in MSV uses
graphic effects that brings down many older video cards to 2-10 fps even
at low settings and in 10man.
Intel's HD video is quite strong. My old cpu (i7-2670) with a HD3000
gives pretty nice fps in pve environment. But when it comes to dungeons
or raids I prefer my geforce 540 mobile which handles even 25 man quite
fine despite a single spike or 2 in a boss fight. When that is said - I
havent tested the HD3000 in dungeons or raids.

[unknown]

Post by unknown
Load time from the character select screen, which should be same-ish for
zone changes
after a few other loads, the first load is kinda slow.
5 seconds

SSDs are just porn. When I got my samsung 840 256GB earlier this year I'm
usually one of the first toons who enters a raid in LFRs. I see the raid
grid getting cluttered slowly. :)

Most things are twice as fast off the SSD, which means the memory and HDD
are really fast anyway :-)
The other mail I used SSD, it can be 1 second for zone changes.

Post by unknown
Running from docks to bank with moderate population
Ultra 24-20
High 38-40
Good 50-55
Fair 90-110
Low- who cares?
- there was a crowd of dragons waiting for a boat when I did the docks
but the ranges are fairly consistent, no real spikes

The interesting question is: and 25 man raids? Elegon in MSV uses graphic
effects that brings down many older video cards to 2-10 fps even at low
settings and in 10man.
Intel's HD video is quite strong. My old cpu (i7-2670) with a HD3000
gives pretty nice fps in pve environment. But when it comes to dungeons
or raids I prefer my geforce 540 mobile which handles even 25 man quite
fine despite a single spike or 2 in a boss fight. When that is said - I
havent tested the HD3000 in dungeons or raids.

At this point in time it seems you spend about $100 per man.
It is subjective, some people can't tolerate less than 50FPS, I got
comfortable with 7FPS on a good day :-)
So, $500 you can do 5 man, 25man raid a $2500 system will do really well
with full sparkle.
For all that,once you have got over the detail mostly you are just looking
at buttons and icons anyway, not the delightful coruscating mists.
Tuning to decrease spikes becomes more important and that just needs the
graphics to be 'good enough'.
Again with the subjectives :-)

I would expect this one to be absolute rubbish in larger dungeons, raids,
world boss fights.

Of course it has slots you could put a $50-$500 card in, although a proper
550W+ supply and cooling would be needed for the upper end. And then we get
into liquid coolers and multiple fans on the way to $2-3000.
Once you get above $1000 it is into serious diminishing returns.
A ~$250 2Gig card will trounce the HD4400 by about 10x, bucketloads more
sparkle.

A 4440 cpu or 4570 cpu will also do better plus has better onboard graphics.
It also pushes the total system cost towards $800 -1000 range, $1200 with
say a GTX 660 or whatever the magic number for the latest equivalent.
[ all prices are in constant flux, and this is Oz prices ]

I am reporting a new budget desktop can do really well, far better than I
expected straight off the shelf.
So if anyone was longing for a fresh dose but their system is long in the
tooth then it is easy.
Not $1500, not $1000, you can roam in the world in visual and responsive
comfort on an unstressed stock machine for $500, at the moment.

It may also mean new players on their average desktop.
I logged into my middle population old realm and even with crossrealm there
were about 3-6 others leveling up that I saw , moving through the same
starter quests at the same time, on a weekend. 4 had heirlooms.

[Lewis]

Post by unknown

Post by unknown
Load time from the character select screen, which should be same-ish for
zone changes
after a few other loads, the first load is kinda slow.
5 seconds

SSDs are just porn. When I got my samsung 840 256GB earlier this year I'm
usually one of the first toons who enters a raid in LFRs. I see the raid
grid getting cluttered slowly. :)

Most things are twice as fast off the SSD, which means the memory and HDD
are really fast anyway :-)
The other mail I used SSD, it can be 1 second for zone changes.

Post by unknown
Running from docks to bank with moderate population
Ultra 24-20
High 38-40
Good 50-55
Fair 90-110
Low- who cares?
- there was a crowd of dragons waiting for a boat when I did the docks
but the ranges are fairly consistent, no real spikes

The interesting question is: and 25 man raids? Elegon in MSV uses graphic
effects that brings down many older video cards to 2-10 fps even at low
settings and in 10man.
Intel's HD video is quite strong. My old cpu (i7-2670) with a HD3000
gives pretty nice fps in pve environment. But when it comes to dungeons
or raids I prefer my geforce 540 mobile which handles even 25 man quite
fine despite a single spike or 2 in a boss fight. When that is said - I
havent tested the HD3000 in dungeons or raids.

At this point in time it seems you spend about $100 per man.
It is subjective, some people can't tolerate less than 50FPS, I got
comfortable with 7FPS on a good day :-)
So, $500 you can do 5 man, 25man raid a $2500 system will do really well
with full sparkle.

My 2012 Mac mini does just fine in 25 man raids at "Good". The only
change I made to it from stock was putting in 16GB of RAM. I should put
in an SSD, but it's a pain in the ass so I haven't done it.

[unknown]

"Lewis" <***@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote in message news:***@mbp55.local...
.

Post by Lewis

Post by unknown

Post by Peter T.
Intel's HD video is quite strong. My old cpu (i7-2670) with a HD3000
gives pretty nice fps in pve environment. But when it comes to dungeons
or raids I prefer my geforce 540 mobile which handles even 25 man quite
fine despite a single spike or 2 in a boss fight. When that is said - I
havent tested the HD3000 in dungeons or raids.

At this point in time it seems you spend about $100 per man.
It is subjective, some people can't tolerate less than 50FPS, I got
comfortable with 7FPS on a good day :-)
So, $500 you can do 5 man, 25man raid a $2500 system will do really well
with full sparkle.

My 2012 Mac mini does just fine in 25 man raids at "Good". The only
change I made to it from stock was putting in 16GB of RAM. I should put
in an SSD, but it's a pain in the ass so I haven't done it.

Put it this way, with SSD this booted in 9 seconds clean, loaded with
software it slows way down to 12 seconds
The SSD doesn't make that much difference, IF the rest is pretty fast anyway
Only when loading a lot of small packets it matters
about half the speed for load screen but little FPS difference or stalls
ingame.

They are only ~$1 A gig, 8 Gig ram or 120G SSD, about the same.
I would go for a 120G SSD over 8G more ram, if you already have enough ram,
but it doesn't matter than much.
It depends how much is 'enough' for you, and they will be cheaper next month
anyway :-)

Here base mac mini $AU689, just for comparison
thats off Kogan webpage, maybe it is an old page
a.. 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5
b.. 4GB memory
c.. 500GB hard drive1
d.. Intel HD Graphics 4000
e..
f.. So yeah, you can get quite useable for quite cheap if you don't need
the sparkles.
Decent PCs aren't $3k anymore. Hardly suprising since they double every
couple of years
twice as much for 2/3 the price.
a.. It is common for games that instead of content graphics quadruples
yet again
b.. Here lies an unknown 4770/GTX770, killed by an eyecandy xpac
b2013-d2014

[Lewis]

Post by unknown
.

Post by Lewis

Post by unknown

Post by Peter T.
Intel's HD video is quite strong. My old cpu (i7-2670) with a HD3000
gives pretty nice fps in pve environment. But when it comes to dungeons
or raids I prefer my geforce 540 mobile which handles even 25 man quite
fine despite a single spike or 2 in a boss fight. When that is said - I
havent tested the HD3000 in dungeons or raids.

At this point in time it seems you spend about $100 per man.
It is subjective, some people can't tolerate less than 50FPS, I got
comfortable with 7FPS on a good day :-)
So, $500 you can do 5 man, 25man raid a $2500 system will do really well
with full sparkle.

My 2012 Mac mini does just fine in 25 man raids at "Good". The only
change I made to it from stock was putting in 16GB of RAM. I should put
in an SSD, but it's a pain in the ass so I haven't done it.

Put it this way, with SSD this booted in 9 seconds clean, loaded with
software it slows way down to 12 seconds
The SSD doesn't make that much difference, IF the rest is pretty fast anyway
Only when loading a lot of small packets it matters
about half the speed for load screen but little FPS difference or stalls
ingame.

Well, I think your machine has SATA-II, which is limited to 3.0Gbps,
well under the peak speed of a decent SSD, so that is quite a limiting
factor.

Post by unknown
Here base mac mini $AU689, just for comparison
thats off Kogan webpage, maybe it is an old page
a.. 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5
b.. 4GB memory
c.. 500GB hard drive1
d.. Intel HD Graphics 4000
e..
f.. So yeah, you can get quite useable for quite cheap if you don't need
the sparkles.

For $200 more you can got to a quad core i7 and 1TB drive. The drawback
to the HDs in the mini is that they are 5400rpm drives, so an SSD really
would be a significant step up.

Post by unknown
Decent PCs aren't $3k anymore. Hardly suprising since they double every
couple of years

It's hard to spend more than $2000 on a gmaing machine, really. Not
unless you want to get stupid, and there are plenty of options well
under $1000 that will work fine. Heck, the mini even handles Parallels
well enough to play most PC games (the kids play Skyrim, KSP, Minecraft,
Civilization V, and several others in Parallels).

The Intel HD 4000 is nothing to write home about, but it does a fine job
for most things.

[unknown]

Post by Lewis

Post by unknown
Put it this way, with SSD this booted in 9 seconds clean, loaded with
software it slows way down to 12 seconds
The SSD doesn't make that much difference, IF the rest is pretty fast anyway
Only when loading a lot of small packets it matters
about half the speed for load screen but little FPS difference or stalls
ingame.

Well, I think your machine has SATA-II, which is limited to 3.0Gbps,
well under the peak speed of a decent SSD, so that is quite a limiting
factor.

It was sata 3.0 which is 6Gbps, it clocked 350 MB/sec in subjective
stopwatch transfers ,
write is 200MB/s but read isn't too bad, more than sata II
I checked to be sure it wasn't a lemon.

6Gbps = about 500MB/s once you hit real hardware using what you send out

the boot was from power on, 6 or so seconds until the bios screen went away,
starting windows..done
granted it wasn't the top end SSD but nice for a budget
http://www.storagereview.com/plextor_pxm5s_ssd_review
http://vr-zone.com/articles/plextor-m5s-128gb-review/44863.html/4
not too bad

but that is besides the point, given this was extra to the basic machine
it doesn't make a 'totally must have' difference anymore
just a really nice to have difference

Post by Lewis
It's hard to spend more than $2000 on a gmaing machine, really. Not
unless you want to get stupid, and there are plenty of options well
under $1000 that will work fine. Heck, the mini even handles Parallels
well enough to play most PC games (the kids play Skyrim, KSP, Minecraft,
Civilization V, and several others in Parallels).

once you get way up there about 1/3 goes just on keeping the little gems
cool enough
and that heat is costing you 50c/Kwh, which would be fine in winter or cold
climates
Why have a heater running when you can game instead?

..and then they add even more cooling to overclock the things,
a $1500 dollar rig and they add $500 cooling to get 30% more out of a $200
processor
rapid rampup diminishing returns
hmm, maybe thats why so few pro gamers come from hot countries? they melted
:-)

Post by Lewis
The Intel HD 4000 is nothing to write home about, but it does a fine job
for most things.

The thing to write home about is the price for what it does :-)

When you are talking $500 for a budget pc, that does a fine job
$300 for extra cpu/motherboard, $250 for card $150 for more
power/case/cooling
more than doubles the price, no longer budget

[unknown]

Post by Lewis
It's hard to spend more than $2000 on a gmaing machine, really. Not
unless you want to get stupid, and there are plenty of options well
under $1000 that will work fine. Heck, the mini even handles Parallels
well enough to play most PC games (the kids play Skyrim, KSP, Minecraft,
Civilization V, and several others in Parallels).
The Intel HD 4000 is nothing to write home about, but it does a fine job
for most things.

on a 4570 with HD4600, rates were about 20% up on the 4400
With tweaking down clutter and the items listed 'significantly degrade' to
~fair it was 45-60FPS
on High running around and at the table outside stormwind with a blizzard of
chars hopping around.
Turn away and it got to 80.
Went into stockade, thinking it may slightly emulate a higher man instance,
not likely, 150 FPS.
Anyone wanna run me through stockade? just a bit, for science, honestly
:-)
Graphics was peaked , 1 core was at 80% and the others at ~10%.
Running a HD video recode , just to see, barely glitched wow.

The 4000 is VERY competitive actually in this range, particularly since the
difference is easily soaked up by ground clutter and
view range.
If you can 'see' clearly out to your engagement range that is all you -need-
or pay attention to most of the time.
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/mid_range_gpus.html
lists 4000 at 460
4400 499
4600 612 - which is inline with 20% or so on straight FPS, it does
slightly better eyecandy as well
The last card I really played wow on rates 128, it was dying on sub 10FPS
just standing
The first card I played wow on , and it ran quite well at the time ,
rates...brrrrrr...7...tish
I think there have been a few eyecandy xpacs since then :-)

Most of the demanding graphics are in discardable detail that you mostly
don't see when you are looking at cooldowns, situation alert text, solid
colour bars.

[Peter T.]

Post by unknown
on a 4570 with HD4600, rates were about 20% up on the 4400

Thats what I read too when I check benchmarks of the intel gpu.

Post by unknown
Most of the demanding graphics are in discardable detail that you mostly
don't see when you are looking at cooldowns, situation alert text, solid
colour bars.

True. But there arent much info about
HD3000/4000/4200/4400/4600/wutever when it comes to raids and dungeons.
The only real WoW benchmark I have found was a test by flight over
Burning Steppes. Seriously... :)

[unknown]

Post by Peter T.

Post by unknown
on a 4570 with HD4600, rates were about 20% up on the 4400

Thats what I read too when I check benchmarks of the intel gpu.

Post by unknown
Most of the demanding graphics are in discardable detail that you mostly
don't see when you are looking at cooldowns, situation alert text, solid
colour bars.

True. But there arent much info about HD3000/4000/4200/4400/4600/wutever
when it comes to raids and dungeons. The only real WoW benchmark I have
found was a test by flight over Burning Steppes. Seriously... :)

you probably don't need these numbers, but if anyone cares here they are
(I am not fixated, I am merely...okay maybe I am)

for 4600
Via the flight npc stormwind-ironforge-storm
Burning steppe was better than Elwyn area in all of them, maybe there are
other areas that kill it when random flying
but random fligh isn't repeatable
I suppose I should do each going the same way...or I could get a life :-)
1920x1080 windowed fullscreen, for some reason it loses the mouse in true
fullscreen
Typically it also clobbers the refresh rate
I did try it on some more modern games that don't support the diversity of
players.
On their Utlra setting it just ran under the bed and refused to come out.

Ultra Defaults - I expected lousy, and bits were getting way down
Leave SW 34
16 goldshire..yeah
25 northshire
35 the high valley
40 BS entry
45 altar, up to 50
33 bloodchar
44 pyrox
50 firewatch
38 Dun Morogh
25 frostmourne
38 at Ironforge gates
78 inside ironforge
78 after landing at npc
Then switch to true fullscreen.....43..
It was pretty smooth, just watching the fps yoyo, no lags
the numbers are the lowest I saw at the areas, there may have been
lower while I was jotting them down.

High defaults, people were talking at me so less data.
Burning steppe was better than Elwyn area
BS was 35-65, mostly 50-55
Elwyn mostly 45-ish, down to 30 in parts, just before Stormwind down to
32, then up to 75 at the landing

Good default, these passed in the reverse order listed, direction of sight
does change things
97 SW at fp staring at wall
45 northshire
57 the high valley
62 BS entry
62 altar
72 bloodchar
78 pyrox
69 firewatch
70 Dun Morogh
92 frostmourne
70 at Ironforge gates
105 inside ironforge
85 after landing at npc
Then switch to true fullscreen.....48

I think the fullscreen may be refresh rate limited, but it is a pain to
experiment without a mouse and I just don't care that much :-)

It isn't the best graphics by a long shot but it isn't useless, at least for
getting around wow and since it comes with the processor I suppose it is
'almost free'.


(disjoined or repeated text is the result of cutnpaste and undo disasters
after a catstrike on the keyboard)

[unknown]

Post by Lewis

Post by unknown
At this point in time it seems you spend about $100 per man.
It is subjective, some people can't tolerate less than 50FPS, I got
comfortable with 7FPS on a good day :-)
So, $500 you can do 5 man, 25man raid a $2500 system will do really well
with full sparkle.

My 2012 Mac mini does just fine in 25 man raids at "Good". The only
change I made to it from stock was putting in 16GB of RAM. I should put
in an SSD, but it's a pain in the ass so I haven't done it.

Ah I see,
if a HD4000 is "good" for 25 man a 4400 or 4600 should handle good or high.
Then there is always res tweaking, HD res isn't necessary, nice but not
necessary.

As power approaches 50c/Kwh it is getting so you could take the card price,
and figure it will cost that to run it for a year.
Not that it matters much, 15 cents an hour is cheap entertainment.

[Lewis]

Post by unknown

Post by Lewis

Post by unknown
At this point in time it seems you spend about $100 per man.
It is subjective, some people can't tolerate less than 50FPS, I got
comfortable with 7FPS on a good day :-)
So, $500 you can do 5 man, 25man raid a $2500 system will do really well
with full sparkle.

My 2012 Mac mini does just fine in 25 man raids at "Good". The only
change I made to it from stock was putting in 16GB of RAM. I should put
in an SSD, but it's a pain in the ass so I haven't done it.

Ah I see,
if a HD4000 is "good" for 25 man a 4400 or 4600 should handle good or high.
Then there is always res tweaking, HD res isn't necessary, nice but not
necessary.

To be fair, there are things that I turn down from "good" (or Ultra)
that probably impact the graphics, but I turn them down because I want
them turned down. Ground Clutter, for example, I set as low as possible.

And by "fine in 25 man raids" I mean that I can do them, the computer
doesn't get completely throttled, I don't get disconnected, and I can
follow the raid warnings. It's not ideal.

OTOH, turning the graphics down to Fiar or even low doesn't make much
difference in boss fights. The game looks a bit worse, but performance
really doesn't change that much.

[Peter T.]

Post by Lewis
To be fair, there are things that I turn down from "good" (or Ultra)
that probably impact the graphics, but I turn them down because I want
them turned down. Ground Clutter, for example, I set as low as possible.

I run all graphics on absolutely low (except View Distance which is set
to ultra) on my geforce 540M card. But first time I did Malkorok on
flex in SoO I had to adjust article Density from low to good so I could
see his cone on the floor. I got killed by it the first two times and
everybody said "why dont you move your french popo away from the
shite?". "What shite?" I asked. :) I dont feel any decrease in fps
despite the adjustment.
Liquid Detail also has to be set to Fair or a very few quests cant be
done because the texture makes it impossible to see specific quest objects.
so there are drawbacks in the game when everything is set to low.