Intel G3258 Heavensward Benchmark Score

Evening, as the title says trying to gauge how well the Intel G3258 will perform in Heavenswards; If you run the game on this CPU and have run the new benchmark would really appreciate it if you could tell me what score you got, what gpu you use and what kind of settings you currently play in. Thanks.

Alright.. I'm not using my internet atm, download ETA 30 min, I'll update in a bit :)

EDIT:

Okay, I find the results to be extremely humorous :D It's probably the resolution, but I couldn't get the benchmark to go into 1920 x 1080 for some reason, the highest it showed was 1770 x some odd resolution.

Anyway

This is my rig:

Intel G3258 (not OC'd atm)
Gigabyte R9 270 Overclock edition 2gb
8 gig of DDR3-1600 ram (2 x 4GB configuration) generic microcenter ram
Intel 740 SSD

Done without any other task at hand, single monitor. I figured you wouldn't be interested in any figures when it's in dual monitor with bunch of other things going on.. But on low graphics settings, it's perfectly playable.


Here is the result:

http://i.imgur.com/SvwEtrU.jpg


Also, during the actual benchmark, it said load time was 167.xx seconds, not sure if that's an important metric.

Here's the full text log

FINAL FANTASY XIV: Heavensward Benchmark
Tested on: 28/05/2015 22:23:32
Score: 8332
Average Frame Rate: 71.603
Performance: Extremely High
-Easily capable of running the game on the highest settings.
Loading Times by Scene
Scene #1 8.302 sec
Scene #2 41.257 sec
Scene #3 43.726 sec
Scene #4 46.826 sec
Scene #5 22.715 sec
Scene #6 4.939 sec
Total Loading Time 167.766 sec

DAT:s20150528222332.dat

Screen Size: 1600x900
Screen Mode: Full Screen
DirectX Version: 9
Graphics Presets: Maximum
General
-HDR Rendering: Enabled
-Wet Surface Effects: Enabled
-Occlusion Culling: Disabled
-LOD on Distant Objects: Disabled
-LOD Streaming: Disabled
-Real-time Reflections: High
-Edge Smoothing (Anti-aliasing): FXAA
-Transparent Lighting Quality: High
-Grass Quality: High
Shadows
-Self: Display
-Other NPCs: Display
Shadow Quality
-LOD on Shadows: Disabled
-Shadow Resolution: High - 2048p
-Shadow Cascading: Best
-Shadow Softening: Strong
Texture Detail
-Texture Filtering: Anisotropic
-Anisotropic Filtering: x16
Movement Physics
-Self: Full
-Other NPCs: Full
Effects
-Limb Darkening: Enabled
-Radial Blur: Enabled
-Screen Space Ambient Occlusion: Strong
-Glare: Normal
Cinematic Cutscenes
-Depth of Field: Enabled

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GenJoe

Alright.. I'm not using my internet atm, download ETA 30 min, I'll update in a bit :)

---

Thanks and thanks for the reply in the other thread too GenJoe, i saw it from my phone and couldn't properly reply.

Thanks for the update GenJoe, if its not too much trouble can you tell me what you get on DX11 at 1920x1080 with Desktop(High). Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shura

Thanks for the update GenJoe, if its not too much trouble can you tell me what you get on DX11 at 1920x1080 with Desktop(High). Thanks.

---

Didn't do a desktop high but I did just find the 1080p resolution and tried with Max
You'll be pleasantly surprised.

http://i.imgur.com/t0AcWhG.jpg



Did a Desktop High bench.
Scores weren't too different, but the loading times were, 19x seconds for the Maximum and 73 seconds for this one.

http://i.imgur.com/WdZpELl.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shura

Thanks for the update GenJoe, if its not too much trouble can you tell me what you get on DX11 at 1920x1080 with Desktop(High). Thanks.

---

GenJoe said he couldn't get his benchmark to run at 1920x1080. If you can wait a bit I can run the benchmark tomorrow morning on my desktop. i5-4690k with an R9 280x. I can disable 2 of the cores and give you a pretty good approximation of what the G3258 would perform at, and I can compare that with all 4 cores running as well if you'd like me to.

Edit: I just saw what GenJoe posted (he put it up as I typed this), I can still run it on mine for a comparison between 2 cores and 4 cores with the same gpu if you'd like.

Those load times....lol ouch ; ;

Yeah 167.xx load time is high, though that score is probably determined by CPU and HDD factors

probably the CPU, I have an SSD and my actual load time in game is quite fast (~3 seconds upon teleport) so in terms of playability, there's really not much issue.. In fact, I'm usually the one waiting for others to arrive after a teleport :p

Can't beat the price though, under $400 for the rig :D thinking of building an APU next, really curious how that would perform.. In fact, if anybody has a A10-7850k build and can share some benchmark info that would be awesome.

Thanks a lot for running the tests GenJoe, really appreciate it. KitanaiKoneko I'll take you up on your offer if its not too much trouble, interested to see how a R9 280X will perform on a dual core setting. Trying to build a PC for someone else who is on a budget, their main goal is this game, office, browsing and so forth so i don't really want to get something like 4690k if they don't plan on playing any other game, not to mention their budget; Plus with a G3258, since its on the Z97 platform, can always upgrade just the cpu to an i5 or i7 in the future if need be.

GenJoe it just so happens I actually have a A10-7850k in my HTPC, there is no discreet graphics and since its in a really small case, its not OC'd but I'll do a few tests for you in the morning(need to update the game on it overnight) if your interested in just the APU's stock performance in the game. Thanks a lot again guys.

Alright, ran the benchmark a bunch and here's the results:

Keep in mind that I'm running an i5-4690k at 4.4 GHz and an R9 280x. (HIS IceQ X^2 Turbo)

DirectX 9 on 2 cores.

http://i.imgur.com/jBihlMu.png

DirectX 9 on 4 cores.

http://i.imgur.com/BSWcNco.png

DirectX 11 on 2 cores.

http://i.imgur.com/7lrV0ie.png

DirectX 11 on 4 cores.

http://i.imgur.com/qyzChky.png

Interesting that there was such a massive difference in load times between 2 cores and 4 cores. These were load times off of 2 SSDs in RAID 0 so if they seem crazy keep that in mind as well.

Whoaa those load times..
No wonder people are saying my load times are high :D
That's about 9 times difference lol


To Shura:

Thanks for the benchmarks! Those are not bad at all by my standards :)
Main reason I've been looking at APU is because of the Antec ISK 110 Vesa case..

http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/up...2/IMG_0461.jpg

I could make something of a LAN pc with that and have a really portable low-end gaming PC..


As far as the G3258 goes, you may have some issues getting around in Mor Dhona, mainly just minor annoyances for me.. But remember that you can always overclock it if you want to get it proper cooling.

Ok did some tests on my HTPC, so I was mistaken, it's not a A10-7850k but rather its a A10-7800; mine has lower TDP but is also locked so can't OC. The TV it's hooked up too only goes up to 720p so all the tests are 1280x720 and this is running off the apu with no discreet graphics; If i remember right the APU has graphic capabilities similar to an R7 250.

DirectX 9 - 1280x720@Standard(Desktop)
http://i.imgur.com/pJm9qmr.jpg

DirectX 9 - 1280x720@Maximum
http://i.imgur.com/4dRkDi9.jpg

DirectX 11 - 1280x720@Standard(Desktop)
http://i.imgur.com/mmL3Kxr.jpg

DirectX 11 - 1280x720@Maximum
http://i.imgur.com/UbWh9zd.jpg

Finally a Custom setting at the TV's native resolution on DirectX9
http://i.imgur.com/ceSZS8Q.jpg

Few things i wanted to mention, the tests were done with the Manuel TDP settings option turned off, normally i limit the TDP to 45 when running it as an HTPC. Also the system has 8gb of AMD Gaming Memory running at 1800mhz, when it comes to APU i hear faster ram means significantly better performance, so the results will be different if the PC had 2400mhz or higher OC'd ram.


Thanks for running the tests KitanaiKoneko, was really helpful, still not sure if I should invest in the G3258, while its a great CPU I'm worried about in-game performance when around a lot of other people, I hear most people on dual cores are already using 100% on both cores when in highly populated zones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GenJoe

Thanks for the benchmarks! Those are not bad at all by my standards :)
Main reason I've been looking at APU is because of the Antec ISK 110 Vesa case..

I could make something of a LAN pc with that and have a really portable low-end gaming PC..


As far as the G3258 goes, you may have some issues getting around in Mor Dhona, mainly just minor annoyances for me.. But remember that you can always overclock it if you want to get it proper cooling.

---

If you end up going for the A10-7850 and OC it, with higher speed ram you'll probably get much better results. I have my APU in a Silverstone ML05, it's a bit bigger but small enough to not standout in the living room and has room for a single slot GPU; initially i was gonna add a discreet R7 250 and crossfire it with the APU but I mainly game on my PC so never ended up doing it. It's true the G3258 with proper Cooling and high OC might not have issues in highly populated zones but I'm wondering if it would just be cheaper to go with an i3 with Hyperthreading instead of spending that extra $60 on high end cooler or a used i5.

One nice thing about the G3258 is that you can get quite a good Overclock on it with just stock cooler. They are pretty safe running at temps around 90 C, but you can usually clock them around 4.4Ghz and stay under 80 C.

But that wont alleviate the FPS jumping around in highly populated areas. If you compare a Haswell i5 @ 3.4Ghz, it will typically use 70-80% of the CPU in those areas. So you could say that you would need a G3258 running around 7 GHz to perform the same, and that's only to get a steady 30-60 FPS.

One issue with the Benchmark when comparing hardware, is that it doesn't simulate the cities and highly populated areas very well, or even the Crystal Tower style dungeons.

Not to say that the G3258 wont play most aspects of the game well, but it usually leads to wanting something that plays things smoother lol.

Keep in mind that if you do go the G3259 route, that it can be overclocked on any 9 series motherboard from Intel, you don't need a Z series board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

One nice thing about the G3258 is that you can get quite a good Overclock on it with just stock cooler. They are pretty safe running at temps around 90 C, but you can usually clock them around 4.4Ghz and stay under 80 C.

But that wont alleviate the FPS jumping around in highly populated areas. If you compare a Haswell i5 @ 3.4Ghz, it will typically use 70-80% of the CPU in those areas. So you could say that you would need a G3258 running around 7 GHz to perform the same, and that's only to get a steady 30-60 FPS.

---

That's kind of what I'm worried about, many of the new games are optimaized use more cores/threads at lower speeds then less cores at higher speeds. This is espcially true in MMOs where CPU capabilities play a huge role, hence why I'm on the fence about the G3258; If only there was a dual core HT option that has an unlocked multiplier, sadly i think all i3s are locked ; ;

Yeah, all the i3's are locked, but I was just looking up results of the Hyperthreading performance on FFXIV and as far as I can tell without testing it myself, it scales almost as well as a quad i5.

So for $50 more than the G3258 I would say that the Intel Core i3-4160 would be an excellent option. You could even cheap out on the motherboard compared to the G3258 since you wont have to worry about Overclocking at all.

http://ca.pcpartpicker.com/p/fsQLLk

Here's a neat little build.

This 750ti doesn't even need a power connector since it only needs the amount supplied by the motherboard.

Ya I'm leaning towards an i3 4160 or the newer i3 4170, Would be interesting to see some benchmark scores for it to see the difference if any Hyper-threading makes in the game, too bad you can't change the thread title ; ;