FFXIV Hardware Requirements

[sruon]

Not to shit up this thread, but all this talk has me looking into upgrading my system, too, and I also want to make sure any advice I may have given is accurate. 2 slightly off-ffxiv-topic questions:

GeForce 400 series vs. ATI HD5800 series, which would you get assuming price was "equal" (or close enough)?
Also - does it matter what mobo you have when it comes to using nvidia vs. ati? I'm assuming yes, but only if you want to run 2+ cards. I've only ever had nvidia chipset stuff in the last 4 years, so I don't know exactly if this matters.
EDIT: Feel free to PM me a response instead of posting here

It doesn't matter which motherboard you use, unless as you pointed out, you want to multi-card in which case the motherboard needs the crossfire/sli thing.

If they were the same price I'd probably go with a 480 but as it stands 470 has a better ratio price/perf than its sister.

I don't know shit about ATI... maybe Celeras will pass by.

[Clauz]

In terms of speed the 480(fastest)>5870>470>5850(slowest). If the prices are within $75 for the 480vs5870 or $50 for the 470vs5850, I would get the Nvidia ones if not go for ATI.

[Eyedea-Seraph]

Not to shit up this thread, but all this talk has me looking into upgrading my system, too, and I also want to make sure any advice I may have given is accurate. 2 slightly off-ffxiv-topic questions:

GeForce 400 series vs. ATI HD5800 series, which would you get assuming price was "equal" (or close enough)?
Also - does it matter what mobo you have when it comes to using nvidia vs. ati? I'm assuming yes, but only if you want to run 2+ cards. I've only ever had nvidia chipset stuff in the last 4 years, so I don't know exactly if this matters.
EDIT: Feel free to PM me a response instead of posting here

The GFX card in the end will come down to your personal pref. I have used both in the past on multiple machines. I have pros and cons for each, now that being said certain companies are better suited I believe for ATI and others for Nvidia. Personally, I would get and Asus Mobo if it was a ATI gfx and an EVGA Mobo if it was Nvida gfx (again personal pref) I basis this on the amount of help each company gives for OC'ing. In the end if your going for and 400 series Nvidia get an EVGA and go I7, if your looking for ATI get Asus Mobo and grab that new 6Core AM3 AMD chip (about 20$ more then an I7-920) -6gigDDR3 (min. for both systems) and you'll be set for the next 3-4 years w/ the ability to upgrade if you like in the future.

[Kawfee]

Just upgraded my motherboard, cpu, and ram myself, got a EVGA X58 SLI ("A1" retail version), i7-930, and 6GB DDR3 1600 RAM. Got it all for $634 with tax at Microcenter (processor is on sale for a ridiculous $199) and they pricematched newegg on the mobo and ram. Video card upgrade can come later.

Probably best to run the passmark benchmark Click and rank your whole system, the thing is you can have a great GPU but if you have a crap motherboard and memory then your not guna get very far.

2145.0 on that benchmark.

CPU (i7 930 OC'd to 4015.9MHz (4Ghz)) - 8323.9
2D Graphics (8800GTS 684mb) - 556.2
3D Graphics (8800GTS 684mb) - 804.2
Memory (6GB OCZ Gold @ 1600MHz) - 2314.6
Disk - 707.9

[blythe]

PassMark Rating: 1874.0
CPU: 6072.3
2D graphics: 475.8
3D graphics: 1328.8
Memory: 1530.4

That's with:
Intel i7 920 2.67 GHz
8 GB memory
ATI HD 4850
Nothing overlocked, etc.

Realistically I'm not going to upgrade for this game...so I hope it's good enough *shrugs*

[Kawfee]

PassMark Rating: 1874.0
CPU: 6072.3
2D graphics: 475.8
3D graphics: 1328.8
Memory: 1530.4

That's with:
Intel i7 920 2.67 GHz
8 GB memory
ATI HD 4850
Nothing overlocked, etc.

Realistically I'm not going to upgrade for this game...so I hope it's good enough *shrugs*

You'll be fine for the launch at least. Down the line may wanna get a new GFX card.

[Aurelius]

GeForce 400 series vs. ATI HD5800 series, which would you get assuming price was "equal" (or close enough)?
Also - does it matter what mobo you have when it comes to using nvidia vs. ati? I'm assuming yes, but only if you want to run 2+ cards. I've only ever had nvidia chipset stuff in the last 4 years, so I don't know exactly if this matters.

GTX 480 is outperforming the Radeon 5870 in most categories, but it's consistently more expensive than the 5870 (due to being new and in short supply) and the 480s like to run HOT. (One of the first release PNY GTX480s is the first video card I've ever seen with a warning to let the card cool off for a while after operation before you try to handle it.) If you've got the cash to burn and are willing to look at aftermarket cooling options, I'd say the 480 would give you the best performance. If you're just looking for a strong contender in a DX11 card, you'll save a little money with a 5870 and not have to be too concerned about the temperature.

[Gulkeeva]

yeah its the reason I went with a 5870, for overclocking options that and I play for very long periods.. I don't want a thermal meltdown going on in my pc after 4-6 hours of gaming ;/

[Pikarya]

I don't want a thermal meltdown going on in my pc after 4-6 hours of gaming ;/

I like my eggs sunny side up. Something the 5870 could never offer.

http://i43.tinypic.com/nv9jqo.jpg

[Aurelius]

I like my eggs sunny side up. Something the 5870 could never offer.

That's pretty ballsy to do that to a $500 video card lol

My 5870 peaked at 82C with a Furmark burn test, but that was cooling under air with a sloppy re-install job on the stock cooling assembly when I was prepping the water cooling. I saw a 480 at 120C sustained with the nVidia test app and that's just insane. You could warm cold pizza in your average PC case with something cranking out that kind of heat.

That having been said, the 480s aren't expected to be running that hot for the full production life of the card. nVidia still needs time to tweak the architecture. I wouldn't recommend *against* a 480, but it's not something I would recommend without a stern warning about airflow and keeping an eye on temperatures under load.

[Jinko]

Consider how much electricity you are using aswell, Radeon cards are much cheaper to run especially in multi-gpu situations.

120c is crazy, this must have a pretty big impact on lastability of the card aswell.

[Hyan]

What do ya'll think about the new SSD disks? I hear they're ultra fast compared to normal hard disks, would they be good for gaming purposes? I was thinking of buying one and installing XIV on it, but due to it's price I dunno if it's worth the 'performance' increase, if there is any?

[Jinko]

Yea SSD are really good, I am planning to get one myself, would suggest to install Windows and just FF14 onto it (depending on the size of course) and you will have speedy loading.

[Hyan]

Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking.

It'll most likely make the zone loading times faster? I wonder if it affects anything else..

[Cautery]

Get a HD5970 and be ok forever! :D

[Celeras]

My 5870 peaked at 82C with a Furmark burn test, but that was cooling under air with a sloppy re-install job on the stock cooling assembly when I was prepping the water cooling. I saw a 480 at 120C sustained with the nVidia test app and that's just insane.

I can't in good conscious let such extravagant bullshit go uncontested, despite my initial intentions to stay out of this conversation completely.

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/8373/furmarkj.jpg

10 minute run. I personally use OC scanner for this, but I downloaded Furmark solely to cover up your possible escape hatch. That is with my overclock on stock cooling, mind you.

Would a 480 run hotter than a 470? Of course. Hotter than average? Certainly, by a FEW degrees. Not 40. 120'C is 15 above the cards MAXIMUM threshold for fucks sake. I don't think I could even hit 120 without my system shutting down completely, let alone SUSTAIN it like you claim. And no, I won't try.

[Hyan]

I dl'd furmark to see how my 5770 heats up and goddamn, 89 celsius..

Is there any way to lower it? 70c~ sounds good... but even with fan at 100% power it's still above 80.

[Eyedea-Seraph]

I dl'd furmark to see how my 5770 heats up and goddamn, 89 celsius..

Is there any way to lower it? 70c~ sounds good... but even with fan at 100% power it's still above 80.

You can get a GFX cooler, pretty much the only true way to really see much drop in temp imho other then messing with Fan/Clock settings. Your case will play a big factor over long periods of gaming for sure also, I think this is looked over a lot by people building systems. Make sure you do your research and get a proper case for all your valuable components, this will keep your over all temps down a ton with proper cooling also. I like to make sure i have an abundance of power with these new systems and i would go no less then 750w for PS either. All in all, L believe that 75-85 on load is fine so being at 89 might be the top i'd wanna sit at but i dont think it will hurt you any.

Your previous question of SSD, GET ONE! totally worth it in every way my WEI was capped at 5.9 due to my 7200rpm seagate barracuda and now with an ssd at 128g the HD scores 7.6 itself, i keep it pretty much empty but it holds my OS and sc2 beta right now lol, soon to be replaced by ffxiv (i hope).

I know it will be mass over kill but when FFXIV comes out i want to have 2 screens on a GTX 470 or 480 (pending on price/pref difference) get another 6gig of ram, grab a Noctua d14cpu cooler and go to 4.2ghz and be set in gold for the game, but i also will play other games maybe 2 that are more intensive then FFXIV will be so it makes sense for me.

[Aurelius]

I can't in good conscious let such extravagant bullshit go uncontested, despite my initial intentions to stay out of this conversation completely.

I spent some time trying to track down the screenshot of the card that was riding 120C for some time. Unfortunately, it was a while back that I saw it. I did, however, find this (I'm new to these boards and not sure if I can use url tags, so you can cut & paste this guy):

images.ncix.com/forumimages/6C60FB73-7229-4B9C-BA47627CB79E2CA3.jpg

107C is not 120C, I know...but it *is* higher than 105, and you'll note the settings in that benchmark are not heavy duty testing...they're standard benchmark. Furmark can push a card harder.

My purpose wasn't to deride the 480s. It was more a "buyer beware" type of thing that if you're going for a 480, you're going to want to make sure you've got adequate case ventillation and be prepared for some toasty temperatures. These temperatures will vary from brand to brand. GTX 480s *are* known for unacceptable heat levels in part due to the architecture, driver issues, and even sub-par thermal paste from the factory. They're a damn fine card performance wise, and they run hot.

I've done my homework on the issue. I would ask that in the future, before you fly off the handle, you do the same. Thanks.

[Aurelius]

What do ya'll think about the new SSD disks? I hear they're ultra fast compared to normal hard disks, would they be good for gaming purposes? I was thinking of buying one and installing XIV on it, but due to it's price I dunno if it's worth the 'performance' increase, if there is any?

I have an 80GB SSD that I use for OS and primary applications/gaming. It makes a very substantial difference. Load time into Windows 7 is ludicrous. Anything/everything I've thrown on it loads very, very quickly. SSD will have a significant impact on load times into games and between zones. The one thing about an SSD, however, is that the closer you push it to being full, the slower it gets. It's not an enormous performance decrease but if you're looking at SSDs, consider going for the largest one you can afford and don't make any concrete plans to fill it up ASAP.