FFXI Vana'diel Bench 3 Challenge!

[Phryn]

Wow, i was surprised how my computer did, i built it last november, though most of the things in it were brand new then, so i guess it makes sense.


CPU: Intel E6850 Core 2 Duo 3.0ghz
Ram: Crucial Ballistix 2Gb DDR2 800
Video: MSI NX8800GT 512Mb
MB: Abit IP35 Pro
OS: Windows XP Professional SP3

High: 9940
Low: 11,685

[Mizango]

CPU: AMD Athlon XP 2500+/1.83 GHz
Mem: 1.5 GB
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 6200/256 Mb
OS: XP SP2

Test 1: 2193
Test 2: 2087

Oh man I'm so sorry Q_Q

Yeah i'm with you Izzy, some of these (especially this one) make me feel bad. I have dumb terminals here at work that are more loaded. Not slamming anyone intentionally, I'm just sayin'.... playing Solitaire in Vegas style should not crash your PC.

Q.Q

QQ i was otw to the gym with my camera phone

You know something Res? You aren't the only one, I thought this was some sort of FF bench-pressing competition for about 2 seconds lol. I immediately thought "Oh I'm soooo doing this!", I'm glad to see that I was not the only one caught off guard by my assumption.

[Purrrfect]

CPU: Intel P4 2.8ghz
Video: NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GS (AGP)
RAM: 1gb Kingston DDR400 (PC3200)
Mobo: ASUS P4P800
OS: XP Pro SP2

Score: 3332-H

It's a pretty old rig (most components are 4+ years old now), and while I thought my score would be higher, it does run the game rather decently. I run it with most settings high (2048x2048 background, smooth environmental animation, uncompressed textures, mip mapping = 6), but do need to turn shadows off full time and weather effects during heavy rain/dust/wind storms. I get 29fps in almost all areas until about 5-10 PCs are on-screen, then I drop down to the low 20s. Dynamis and Whitegate AH bring down into the teens/high single digits though.

On a side note, WoTG zones rape my FPs by about 10 for no apparent reason. Battalia-S and Sauromuge-S seem to be the main culprits. Even with myself as the only PC onscreen, nowhere near any Campaign battles, no NPCs, and no special weather affects, I dip down to like 19-20 FPS. Doesn't make any sense to me.

I haven't spent much time in wotg, but I've noticed for a long time that in the main area in Norg I drop fps like that. Not sure what it is about that zone, but I get a fps lag there that is like being at the wg ah. I'll run this on my pcs this weekend to see what i get.

[Snowknight26]

Thanks for your useful post. Everyone knows FFXI is more CPU dependent.

There has been a lot of talk lately about what video cards are best for FFXI and if processing speed matters more than your GPU speed.

Statements are contradictory right there.

[iobane]

I like it when people go looking for an argument.

[diony]

Q6600 Intel Quad-core @ 3.00ghz (Normal is 2.40ghz)
2 x 1 GB Crucial Ballistix Tracers, PC6400 4-4-4-12 timings
MSI 8600GTS
Western Digital 150 gb Raptor X HD.

11419 @ Low resolutuion
9110 @ High resolution

[Izzy]

Thanks for your useful post. Everyone knows FFXI is more CPU dependent.

There has been a lot of talk lately about what video cards are best for FFXI and if processing speed matters more than your GPU speed.

Statements are contradictory right there.

FFXI is not COMPLETELY dependent on your processor. In light of all the nVidia driver issues, I would say that the GPU does have something to do with FFXI wouldn't you say so? This thread was put here so people could figure out what is better.

[ClassicRed]

Main Desktop~

CPU: Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.20GHz (HT)
MB Brand : Asus
MB Model : P4P800
Video: Radeon X1650 Series
RAM : 1024 MB DDR Dual Channel

About 3-4 yrs old Only recent update was the video card and it wasnt even that great of an update 9800Pro to X1650~


H - 4736 ._. meh~ It takes such pretty SS's tho!

Currently working to build a nice lil AMD Athlon 64X2 with nVidia 640MB 8800GTS and 4 gig-o-ram tho >:3 Cant wait!

Laptop ~ ($900 Special from Dell)

CPU: Genuine Intel CPU T2300 @ 1.66GHz
MB Brand : Dell
MB Model : 0KG266
Video: nVidia GeForce Go 7400 (Pretty much fried this card, go go random squares and boxes)
RAM : 1024 MB DDR2 Dual Channel

H - 5683 (Somethings wrong here.... -.-)

[Mojo]

It seems every PC with an Intel Core Duo CPU has scored remarkably high. Those paired with the nVIDIA 8800 seem to be out performing any ATI card I've seen in the thread thus far. Also, one thing that intrigued me.

CPU: Intel E6850 Core 2 Duo 3.0ghz
Ram: Crucial Ballistix 2Gb DDR2 800
Video: MSI NX8800GT 512Mb
MB: Abit IP35 Pro
OS: Windows XP Professional SP3

This PC is almost identical to mine although there are a few differences. His video card is slightly faster(660 MHz core compared 650), but my RAM is better(1066 MHz bus speed vs 800 MHz). We have different motherboards but they both utilize the same chipset. He has XP Professional, I have XP Home. Our CPU is exactly the same. His set up outperformed mine by around 200 on the high resolution benchmark. Although there are obviously many small differences that could have caused this, I believe it's mostly because I have my OS and FFXI installed to an IDE hard drive while he has an SATA. The gap is very small but it's interesting to note that it did actually make a difference.

[Ezrael]

CPU: E8400 (OC'd to 3.6 GHz FSB: 1600)
Mobo: Asus P5E-VM HDMI (Yep.. SFF PC baby!)
RAM: G. Skill PC6400 4GB (Yes I know...) Timings: 4-4-4-12
Video: EVGA 8800GTS G92 (512mb)
Driver version: Modded 174.74
Windows XP w/ SP2

L: 12109
H: 10234

edit: wrong SP for XP... sorry

[Taolynn]

Core 2 Duo E6700
4GB Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800
ATi X1950XTX 512mb
Vista Business w/SP1

Nothing Overclocked

9265-L
7930-H

Should be able to try the benchmark on this setup in the next few weeks:
C2D E8400
ATi 4850 512MB
4GB DDR2-1066

[Ferien]

Nothing impressive:

6566-H

Card - EVGA 7800 GS 256 AGP
Chip - Core 2 Duo E6420 2.13 GHz (stopped OCing after I blew out my old P4)
RAM - 2x1GB Corsair DDR2-1066
XP Pro SP2

Also, ambient temperature is 80+, doubt that shit helps.

[Stiker]

CPU: AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 6000+ 3.01 GHz
RAM: 2047 MB
Card: VisonTek Radeon X1650 Pro
OS: Windows Vista Ultimate

Test 1: Ran with a couple background applications up - 5299
Test 2: Turned off all background applications, turned off Vista's Sidebar - 5425
Test 3: Same as 2, Ran in Windows XP compatibility mode - 5715
Test 4: Updated Card Drivers, Set Settings for full "Quality" on Card, Firefox Running, XP compatibility - 5420
Test 5: Same as 4, changed card settings for full "performance" on card - 5605

I had my G15 running performance monitor the whole time as well. RAM stayed at 47% the whole time and my dual core never even reached 50%, meaning 1 core was never 100% used. I have a feeling if I could get more juice going from my processor, it would probably go up. I know FFXI isn't multi threaded though, so I doubt I could really get too much more than I already have.

[TeancumMemsochet]

CPU: AMD Athlon XP 2500+/1.83 GHz
Mem: 1.5 GB
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 6200/256 Mb
OS: XP SP2

Test 1: 2193
Test 2: 2087

Oh man I'm so sorry Q_Q

Yeah i'm with you Izzy, some of these (especially this one) make me feel bad. I have dumb terminals here at work that are more loaded. Not slamming anyone intentionally, I'm just sayin'.... playing Solitaire in Vegas style should not crash your PC.

Q.Q

It's not that bad. I can run FFXI w/ 1024x1024 background res, but only get about 17 fps outside my MH. If I run it at 512x512 background res I get 25 fps average in non-busy areas. Not only that, but in non-intensive areas my process time can drop to below 50%. Which is low enough to face a wall in the aery in between windows and turn on some anime w/out any lag.

[Mizango]

Nah, I'm just sayin'......

[Reality]

XP scores are, so far, higher than all vista systems with identical or nearly identical hardware

in other words, what we already know holds true. the current nvidia drivers & windows vista will cause FFXI to perform at a lower framerate than an identical setup with Windows XP

i'd really like to see how the benchmark performs with full shadows enabled instead of the medium shadows setting it currently uses

when I had my Radeon 1950XT 512MB installed, even with full shadows on Windows Vista, my performance was MUCH higher (like, over 10 frames/sec) than when using an 8800 GTX + Windows Vista. Nvidia will most likely never solve these performance issues with this game coupled with Vista as the game isn't popular enough to warrant a specialty scenario to adjust drivers, unless SE acknowledges the obvious decrease in performance between the two operating systems and has Nvidia address the issues specifically

[arshesney]

CPU: Q6600 2,4GHz
MB: P5K asus
RAM: 4x1GB Kingstone (had to set @ 677MHz or Vista would crash every 30 secs)
Video: ATi radeon HD3870 512MB
OS: Vista x64

Score: 6704

WTF!?!?

edit: right DDR speed

[netz]

MacBook Pro 3.1
Windows XP Pro SP3
Intel Core 2 Duo T7500 2.2GHz (800MHz FSB)
2GB DDR2-SDRAM (PC2-5300, 667MHz, 5-5-5 timings)
NVIDIA 8600M GT (ForceWare 167.63)

High: 6172
Low: 8617

[Raiine]

XP scores are, so far, higher than all vista systems with identical or nearly identical hardware

in other words, what we already know holds true. the current nvidia drivers & windows vista will cause FFXI to perform at a lower framerate than an identical setup with Windows XP

I dual boot my laptop with Vista Home Premium SP1 and XP Pro SP3

HP Pavilion dv9334us Notebook
Intel Core 2 CPU T5300 @ 1.73GHz 2048 Level 2 Cache
Motherboard Quanta 30BD 66.42
Memory 2048 MB 266MHz DDR2
NVIDIA GeForce Go 7600 512 MB

XP - 5563
Vista - 3769

I was surprised by the difference, even knowing how bloated Vista is, that the same machine could turn in such different scores.

Even my XP score was lower than I thought, I run 1440x900 @ 2048x2048 very clean and smooth. Oh well, works fine for me.

[Builttolast]

CPU: Q6600 2,4GHz
MB: P5K asus
RAM: 4x1GB Kingstone (had to set @ 677MHz or Vista would crash every 30 secs)
Video: ATi radeon HD3870 512MB
OS: Vista x64

Score: 6704

WTF!?!?

edit: right DDR speed

A few things you can do.

1) CPU isn't overclocked, those do 3.4ghz on stock HSF
2) your ram would crash @ 1066 because of the voltage and perhaps timings. Set the DRAM voltage manually to what is specified by kingston on the information panel of the ram module.
3) you can probably overclock your GPU if you haven't already. There are so many guides out there for safe CPU and GPU overclocking, as well as software like rivatuner or atitool.

Though vista seems to have the most performance dropoff since vista itself is such a resource whore.