[Dev] Overtaxation of PC Hardware

[AlexiaKidd]

I'm going to have to give that a try as I've got a HD6950 so hopefully I'll get the same little boost ^^

[Swev]

I have it on low settings and its ok for me so far and only have a 100 doller video card with an old quad core intel cpu and 4gb of ram. I do get crashes for playing along time and teleporting to new areas seems laggy. (game still looks very nice on low settings)

Right now first starting out game cpu useage is at 35% and 418mb memory used.

[SilvertearRen]

You guys don't get it. The average DirectX 9 game would only take under 75% load on a 5870. I've heard of examples where people have DUAL Radeon 6990's in crossfire -- that's four GPUs on one machine -- with the performance settings maxed out and with top-end custom cooling to achieve only 20% load distribution on FFXIV.

I don't think it would be fiscally feasible on Square's part to force people to buy the latest and greatest in PC hardware just to make the bloody thing run at 60FPS.

That's just retarded.

[MonsieurVerde]

This thread really isn't about anything anymore since they already responded and understood the point. >_>

[AuctionGirl]

ATI has done well with their recent drivers... FFXIV performance has improved greatly. I have not yet upgraded to the May Drivers yet, but every month, it has been only getting better and better.

Those who haven't upgraded drivers.. you should.

[Tiraelina]

Whatever this thread was about it's full of misinformation. When a game is actually using your CPU/GPU it's doing what it was designed to do properly. If something does burn out it won't be because of a game, it will be not cleaning out your case semi regularly and/or trying to overclock without sufficient cooling. Complaining Crossfire/SLI isn't scaling 100% isn't even related at all.

Before you say "oh but this <insert game here> burned out video cards!". Yeah they did burn out cards except that they had insufficient cooling to begin with straight from the manufacturer which doesn't fall on developers to design around, take it up with who you bought it from.

There's little reason to have General Drawing Quality above 8 when you can accomplish the same effect by turning on AA with far less of a performance hit. 60 FPS consistently is considered a luxury on high settngs in anything recent, ~30 FPS is more than playable on non FPS/twitch games.

[SilvertearRen]

Whatever this thread was about it's full of misinformation. When a game is actually using your CPU/GPU it's doing what it was designed to do properly. If something does burn out it won't be because of a game, it will be not cleaning out your case semi regularly and/or trying to overclock without sufficient cooling. Complaining Crossfire/SLI isn't scaling 100% isn't even related at all.

Before you say "oh but this <insert game here> burned out video cards!". Yeah they did burn out cards except that they had insufficient cooling to begin with straight from the manufacturer which doesn't fall on developers to design around, take it up with who you bought it from.

There's little reason to have General Drawing Quality above 8 when you can accomplish the same effect by turning on AA with far less of a performance hit. 60 FPS consistently is considered a luxury on high settngs in anything recent, ~30 FPS is more than playable on non FPS/twitch games.

Then, be a dear and explain why ArmA II, which is data-intensive and set to maximum graphics settings, runs my CPU and GPU at 50% load and runs great, while FFXIV runs my GPU at 99% load and causes my video card to reach borderline overheating temperatures unless I set the fan manually to full speed. Both of these games are DirectX 9 games.

It is obvious here that the client was not fully optimized for the PC platform, and is causing these performance issues.

You're trying to make a straw-man argument with insufficient cooling and poorly-built graphics cards as an excuse. Programmers know that even the best hardware can be destroyed by poorly written software. When a game is "actually" using the CPU/GPU, it may be functional, but there's a marked difference between "using the CPU/GPU efficiently" and "using the CPU/GPU like a retard".

Edit: My point will be proven when Guild Wars 2 comes out and uses my Radeon 5870's GPU workload up to only 75%.

[Tiraelina]

Then, be a dear and explain why ArmA II, which is data-intensive and set to maximum graphics settings, runs my CPU and GPU at 50% load and runs great, while FFXIV runs my GPU at 99% load and causes my video card to reach borderline overheating temperatures unless I set the fan manually to full speed. Both of these games are DirectX 9 games.

It is obvious here that the client was not fully optimized for the PC platform, and is causing these performance issues.

You're trying to make a straw-man argument with insufficient cooling and poorly-built graphics cards as an excuse. Programmers know that even the best hardware can be destroyed by poorly written software. When a game is "actually" using the CPU/GPU, it may be functional, but there's a marked difference between "using the CPU/GPU efficiently" and "using the CPU/GPU like a retard".

Edit: My point will be proven when Guild Wars 2 comes out and uses my Radeon 5870's GPU workload up to only 75%.

No it really is only poorly built GPU's that burn out, that or you are trying to stress test with FurMark. Everything ranging from VSync to having AA/AF on is going to change it, CPU/GPU interaction being a bottleneck will also change it.

All you are doing is making a big fuss over nothing, my old 4850's ran at 95-100c all the time under load and are still working after several years. Want to guess the thermal limit before the hardware failure? ~120c. 5870 will throttle itself back if it even gets near the danger zone of 100-105c which it won't do unless you have a very bad cooling arrangement/overclocking/FurMark.

Witcher 2 is DX9 and uses 99% of my own 5870, that doesn't mean its lifespan is getting shortened. It's working as designed

[Elkwood]

No it really is only poorly built GPU's that burn out, that or you are trying to stress test with FurMark. Everything ranging from VSync to having AA/AF on is going to change it, CPU/GPU interaction being a bottleneck will also change it.

All you are doing is making a big fuss over nothing, my old 4850's ran at 95-100c all the time under load and are still working after several years. Want to guess the thermal limit before the hardware failure? ~120c. 5870 will throttle itself back if it even gets near the danger zone of 100-105c which it won't do unless you have a very bad cooling arrangement/overclocking/FurMark.

Witcher 2 is DX9 and uses 99% of my own 5870, that doesn't mean its lifespan is getting shortened. It's working as designed

Except SE has come out and said that the game is not running on our PCs right because it is not optimized and that's why there heating up, I guess what part of them admitting the game is potentially doing damage was not understood?

[Tiraelina]

Except being optimized or not has nothing to do with heat, if anything it will run hotter because its doing more faster. Is there anyone that isn't talking from their own thought up facts? The game was and will never be doing damage unless its your own/manufacturers fault due to cooling failure, if someone neglects maintainence that long their card will burn or start shutting down when it gets that far.

This is like complaining that a video encode is using too much CPU.