Performance mods

[carlon89]

This is my current set up:
AMD Ryzen 1800X Eight core 3.6 - 4.0 GHz/20MB Cache, 16GB Corsair DDR4 2666MHz 2 x 8GB, Asus Prime X370-Pro DDR4 6GB/s, 11 GB GeForce GTX 1080 Ti.

I am currently playing on max settings all around and only issues I have is if there are like 6 or more full stacks in my battle but it’s not like lag because my camera moves around just fine it’s the actual units kind of derping out a little. What causes this?

I don’t really know how good my PC is so was wondering if I download some graphics mods how likely is it to affect my performance on this set up? Also any recommendations for nice graphics mods if my PC can run them.

[Hurricane]

Why buy a ryzen with a 1080ti??? Mind boggling... i mean its a tiny bit cheaper than an i7 really? You deserve what you get in every game you play. Jesus christ some people.

[Decomposed]

Originally posted by Hurricane:

Why buy a ryzen with a 1080ti??? Mind boggling... i mean its a tiny bit cheaper than an i7 really? You deserve what you get in every game you play. Jesus christ some people.

It's a weird decision, but it's not uncommon. Seen it plenty of times.

[carlon89]

It was a preset build from PC specialist plus I don’t know a lot about what goes well with what. How much better is an i7 compared to the ryzen?

[Hurricane]

Originally posted by carlon89:

It was a preset build from PC specialist plus I don’t know a lot about what goes well with what. How much better is an i7 compared to the ryzen?

In warhammer games alone the i7 is just miles miles miles better.

This is why you research before spending big money on a top end pc. The i7 is better in everyway.

I hate to see people mess up like this. Prebuilds are bad always use forums on pc sites for help if you are new. I always get idiots trying to build pcs that just dont work.

What a shame really. You could of chucked a 1070 in there and saved money.

[carlon89]

Well I am assuming I can just upgrade and get a new CPU put in if I want? If that’s so I will probably get an i9 when some more have come out. Can anyone answer the question of when there are like 6 fills stacks in a battle and the units seem to slow down what causes this?

[Hurricane]

Originally posted by carlon89:

Well I am assuming I can just upgrade and get a new CPU put in if I want? If that’s so I will probably get an i9 when some more have come out. Can anyone answer the question of when there are like 6 fills stacks in a battle and the units seem to slow down what causes this?

The slow down will be your cpu.

You cant just upgrade cpu... ull need new motherboard and cooler too. That's like half the hardware.

The 1080ti will be bottlenecked like crazy in some games i dunno why they would even have it in a prebuild combo? Well seems for people like you who dont understand hardware.

Anyway i cant feel sorry for you. Its like a 1.5k pc you should of done research.

If you need help with the game screenshot your settings and post them here ill help u

[Æsir]

Originally posted by Hurricane:

Why buy a ryzen with a 1080ti??? Mind boggling... i mean its a tiny bit cheaper than an i7 really? You deserve what you get in every game you play. Jesus christ some people.

Attitude please. Be helpful, not condescending. His CPU is fine anyways (most of the time..). Even if i definitely know and understand what you are pointing at.

[Kurnous]

Hang on Hurricane...Ryzen IPC is within 5-10% of Intel generally and so are the clock speeds. Why is Ryzen such a horrible CPU for Warhammer Total War if that is the case?

[Siku]

Originally posted by Decomposed:

Originally posted by Hurricane:

Why buy a ryzen with a 1080ti??? Mind boggling... i mean its a tiny bit cheaper than an i7 really? You deserve what you get in every game you play. Jesus christ some people.

It's a weird decision, but it's not uncommon. Seen it plenty of times.

Why do so many people still have this weird stigma about AMD CPU's still? Them having a first gen does hurt a lot, but grouping just Ryzen in general is a hella outdated perception.
I'm running a Ryzen 5 3600x , with a 1080 and they pair perfectly if a game uses equal CPU and GPU. With Med-Ultra on settings generally have over 80 FPS on the map and never below 90 in battles running in 1440p. Easy 120+ at 1080p. This game is pretty demanding though.

However I will say their are games that run drastically better or worse depending on the CPU and archetecture, and can't help but feel this one prefers intel.

[pascal.difolco]

Originally posted by Hurricane:

Originally posted by carlon89:

It was a preset build from PC specialist plus I don’t know a lot about what goes well with what. How much better is an i7 compared to the ryzen?

In warhammer games alone the i7 is just miles miles miles better.

This is why you research before spending big money on a top end pc. The i7 is better in everyway.

I hate to see people mess up like this. Prebuilds are bad always use forums on pc sites for help if you are new. I always get idiots trying to build pcs that just dont work.

What a shame really. You could of chucked a 1070 in there and saved money.

Looks like pretty gratuitous declarations, a 1800x and 1080ti makes for a good balanced rig, and play well even in 1440.... Going i7 would maybe raise non graphical performance a notch but that's all. A better GPU will give some more fps but the proc will then be bottlenecked.

[Gwyd1on]

Necro

[pascal.difolco]

Originally posted by Gwydion:

Necro

oops indeed ...

[Zane87]

Originally posted by Siku:

Originally posted by Decomposed:

It's a weird decision, but it's not uncommon. Seen it plenty of times.

Why do so many people still have this weird stigma about AMD CPU's still? Them having a first gen does hurt a lot, but grouping just Ryzen in general is a hella outdated perception.
I'm running a Ryzen 5 3600x , with a 1080 and they pair perfectly if a game uses equal CPU and GPU. With Med-Ultra on settings generally have over 80 FPS on the map and never below 90 in battles running in 1440p. Easy 120+ at 1080p. This game is pretty demanding though.

However I will say their are games that run drastically better or worse depending on the CPU and archetecture, and can't help but feel this one prefers intel.

Necro aside....
Usually because strategy games have issues utilizing many cores equally. It is a long-standing issue which is not easy to solve and also bound to engine and type of game. (seriously, coding meaningful multi-threading, with which I mean you actually gain more performance from using multiple threads than you lose from constantly synching those threads, is a hella pain).

Because of that, CPU with higher single core performance would run those games significantly better and Intel had the lead there for.... ages. The newest Zen architecture AMD CPU though seem to have seriously upped their game in that department and while they lose their price leadership (compared to overall performance), first benchmarks saw single core performance increase by up to 40%, which is pretty huge.
/Necro and OT ^^

[Professor H. Farnsworth]

Originally posted by Zane87:

Originally posted by Siku:

Why do so many people still have this weird stigma about AMD CPU's still? Them having a first gen does hurt a lot, but grouping just Ryzen in general is a hella outdated perception.
I'm running a Ryzen 5 3600x , with a 1080 and they pair perfectly if a game uses equal CPU and GPU. With Med-Ultra on settings generally have over 80 FPS on the map and never below 90 in battles running in 1440p. Easy 120+ at 1080p. This game is pretty demanding though.

However I will say their are games that run drastically better or worse depending on the CPU and archetecture, and can't help but feel this one prefers intel.

Necro aside....
Usually because strategy games have issues utilizing many cores equally. It is a long-standing issue which is not easy to solve and also bound to engine and type of game. (seriously, coding meaningful multi-threading, with which I mean you actually gain more performance from using multiple threads than you lose from constantly synching those threads, is a hella pain).

Because of that, CPU with higher single core performance would run those games significantly better and Intel had the lead there for.... ages. The newest Zen architecture AMD CPU though seem to have seriously upped their game in that department and while they lose their price leadership (compared to overall performance), first benchmarks saw single core performance increase by up to 40%, which is pretty huge.
/Necro and OT ^^

Never gonna get any better xD. Heck, it's hard enough for most games to surpass 4 core support. It gets extremely iffy having code running on multiple threads as they need to sync up at some point to prevent hang ups. To put it very simple.

That said... A lot could be done for this game if the DB schemas in this game were handled... better.
Looking through something as simple as characters and their skills it quickly becomes apparent - looking through several db schemas and there's bound to be thousands of entries for the same things. It's really not particularly.. Efficient. Cleaning up that mess would do a heap of good for the game. It screams that there are several people working on the game in complete and utter disconnect really.

Do like necros.

[Zane87]

Originally posted by Professor H. Farnsworth:

Originally posted by Zane87:

Necro aside....
Usually because strategy games have issues utilizing many cores equally. It is a long-standing issue which is not easy to solve and also bound to engine and type of game. (seriously, coding meaningful multi-threading, with which I mean you actually gain more performance from using multiple threads than you lose from constantly synching those threads, is a hella pain).

Because of that, CPU with higher single core performance would run those games significantly better and Intel had the lead there for.... ages. The newest Zen architecture AMD CPU though seem to have seriously upped their game in that department and while they lose their price leadership (compared to overall performance), first benchmarks saw single core performance increase by up to 40%, which is pretty huge.
/Necro and OT ^^

Never gonna get any better xD. Heck, it's hard enough for most games to surpass 4 core support. It gets extremely iffy having code running on multiple threads as they need to sync up at some point to prevent hang ups. To put it very simple.

That said... A lot could be done for this game if the DB schemas in this game were handled... better.
Looking through something as simple as characters and their skills it quickly becomes apparent - looking through several db schemas and there's bound to be thousands of entries for the same things. It's really not particularly.. Efficient. Cleaning up that mess would do a heap of good for the game. It screams that there are several people working on the game in complete and utter disconnect really.

Do like necros.

I agree, that's why I wanted to point out the issues with implementing multithreading (cause otherwise it sounds too much "lazy dev" alike which was not my intention XD).

And yeah, the database system of this series is.... Functional? But that's about it XD That TW has still some room for optimisation we saw from the potion of speed update, fingers crossed that CA does a few more optimisation passes in the future too.

But regardless, the upcoming AMD chips really seem to be a major leap in single threading performance, since I love strategy games who usually are limited by 1 major thread this is great news.