The OFFICIAL FFXIV Benchmark & Beta Performance Thread

[Rakiel]

Just finished tweaking my new build, and finally got around to running the benchmark. Test was at 1920x1080 on my 40" LCD (test spoilered below) :

Spoiler: show

High:
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y18...VBenchmark.png




Low:
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y18...nchmarkLow.png

3789 on my machine is...acceptable, but I think I could do better. Once I get a new cooler on the CPU (i5-750), I will be looking to OC a little bit. As far as GPU overclocking, I've only played around a little with the EVGA Precision software, mainly to increase the fan speed, as the PNY GTX 470s seem to suffer from heat issues at load. If anyone has any OC recommendations, feel free to PM me, I've not tinkered with a new rig in years.

System Specs:

Mobo: ASUS P7P55D
CPU: Intel i5-750
RAM: G.Skill 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3-1600 PC3-12800
GPU: PNY GTX 470

[Izzy]

Is any other ATI user's lag back today? I'm jerking around Limsa Lominsa again.

[Podginator]

Is any other ATI user's lag back today? I'm jerking around Limsa Lominsa again.

Limsa has always been pretty bad for me, but I'm noticing lots of lag around tree's and plants. I was gonna chalk it up to the new graphics drivers released today. You using 10.7?

[Izzy]

Limsa has always been pretty bad for me, but I'm noticing lots of lag around tree's and plants. I was gonna chalk it up to the new graphics drivers released today. You using 10.7?

Yep.

[Buddy]

For what it's worth, I updated to 10.7 also and my benchmark improved a few hundred on a 5570. Still look like I'm going to have to fork out the cash for a better card though unless I always play with low res.

[Kyrra]

Put a new cooler($30-50) in there and OC your CPU, I get just 60 points shy if your setup with a dual core at 3.5ghz and a GTX 460 OC'd to 900mhz.

Hopefully SE will scrap this bench and come out with something new

If you have a 460, can you take a screenshot of your benchmarks and post them to this thread?

[Amele]

Re posting due to a misunderstanding.

When running the FF XIV benchmark I get a score of 1900 +/- on low res and a score of 1100 +/- on high res.

Here are my system specs:
- Intel Quad Core i7 720 QM
- 8 Gigabytes of DDR3 Ram
- ATI Radeon Mobility 5730 - 1 Gig
- Windows 7 Premium - 64 bit

Maybe I have no idea what I am talking about, but does anyone know why I am getting such low scores? I know that my video card is mid table for laptops but seriously, only 1900 on low res?

Somebody mentioned overclocking? I am not Mr. Computer but can you even overclock a laptop? Also somebody mentioned what is my bottlekneck? Well I am assuming they mean what is slowing my laptop down. That is exactly what I am trying to figure out.

Any ideas, comments or help would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers

it's the integrated graphics, you can oc a laptop if it has the right bios, but it's really not recommended...

I'm sure the bottleneck is the graphics.

[BlackheartX]

Played around with the HT a little bit and it seems raising it allowed me to clock higher a little bit over 2400 I think. (10.6 Drivers not touching 10.7 till more info comes out)
Low:

Spoiler: show

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/7...urelow6304.jpg

High:

Spoiler: show

This is pretty much the wall for me on the GPU without going higher on the voltage or buying a 5850 water jacket>.<http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/4...urehi5095x.jpg

[Zenshio]

Is any other ATI user's lag back today? I'm jerking around Limsa Lominsa again.

It is smooth for me, but I'm still using 10.4. I'll update to 10.7 when I get home though, I didn't have the time to try them.

[Elites]

Upgrading next week or so on a new rig, here's what I have so far. Trying to fit into a budget of 600 max.

1. CPU->AMD Phenom II x4 955 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819103808

2.MOBO-> ASRock 870 EXTREME3 AM3 AMD 870 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813157198

3. HDD-> SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822152185

4.GFX-> ASUS CuCore Series EAH5770 CuCore/2DI/1GD5 Radeon HD 5770 1GB 128-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814121363

5. PSU-> hec X-Power Pro 600 600W Continuous @ 40°C ATX12V V2.2 SLI Ready CrossFire Ready Power Supply
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817339025

Planning to use my Antec 900 case as it's still relatively new as well as my 4 gigs of DDR2 PC6400 G.skill ram. Though I heard DDR3 was the shit now but I need some confirmation if it's really going to make all that much of a difference for gaming between my 4 gigs of ddr to those, otherwise I don't want to waste dumping an extra 100 bucks for them. Any suggestions? Also I don't plan to OC anything, everything is staying at stock speed.

[Jojimbo]

I've just installed 10.7 myself, annoying it has increased my idle temps even further than when I was trying 10.5/6 (first card has gone from 38min, 42max idle to 53 degree c. Second card has only gone up my a cople of degrees though).

Sucks they had to increase idle clocks to 400/1250 (I OCed to 900/1250), still doesn't stop my vapor-x idling at 860/1200 on desktop though lol

[Chio]

Pretty happy overall. Only 4G of ram on this system(motherboard is kinda cheap and only supports 4). CPU not OC'd due to just having the stock fan and I'm afraid of an overheat with the 480 in there.

I'm not sure what brand of your 480 but usually there are software like EVGA Precision and MIS Afterburner that you can use to increases your clock speed even on stock cooling fan.

Is your clock at 700/701 right now?

[Cloud]

Thinking of upgrading my system.

I'm looking at getting something like a top spec i5 with a GeForce 460 or 470. For people with systems around that sort of level, how well does the Beta play? In areas with a lot of other characters lurking about, how well does it run?

If it's pretty shoddy even on high end systems now, I'd be tempted to hold off a year until hardware that can actually run the game is around.

FFXIV is quite CPU dependent, so you want at least a quad core.
You can see a huge jump in benchmark performance between a Duo, Quad, and Hex cores at the same Clocks.

In gaming it doesn't matter much if you have a C2Q or an i7 as long as you can match the clocks.

Low

Spoiler: show

High

Spoiler: show

8GB of RAM, I believe I have a 5870.

High settings was bigger than my monitor allows for so I'm not sure if that changes anything. Only a 233 score increase using low over high. I can't wait for this game, it looks very pretty on both tests.

What is your CPU clocked at, or is it stock?

[Questionable]

FFXIV is quite CPU dependent, so you want at least a quad core.
You can see a huge jump in benchmark performance between a Duo, Quad, and Hex cores at the same Clocks.

In gaming it doesn't matter much if you have a C2Q or an i7 as long as you can match the clocks.



What is your CPU clocked at, or is it stock?

So you're saying FF14 will utilize all the cores? I thought the game was not optimize for that and only uses 1 core?

What do you mean when you say the i7 vs CQ2 does not matter, just match the clocks? So if I OC a C2Q (8400) to 3.0G, the same as some i7 core @ 3G, it runs similar? Because I just tried last night to OC my 2.3G Duo core to 2.8G and it made almost no difference in beta or the bench at low res...

[Purrrfect]

So you're saying FF14 will utilize all the cores? I thought the game was not optimize for that and only uses 1 core?

It uses all, but not evenly. Usually focuses on one or occasionally 2 in my experience. The extras run about 25-35% at full load.

[Cloud]

So you're saying FF14 will utilize all the cores? I thought the game was not optimize for that and only uses 1 core?

What do you mean when you say the i7 vs CQ2 does not matter, just match the clocks? So if I OC a C2Q (8400) to 3.0G, the same as some i7 core @ 3G, it runs similar? Because I just tried last night to OC my 2.3G Duo core to 2.8G and it made almost no difference in beta or the bench at low res...

Right now it doesn't take advantage of Hyper Threading. It does take advantage of actual Physical Cores though.

Yes just match the clocks. In applications there is a HUGE difference between a C2Q and an i7, but for games there isn't much at all.
Only if you are using CF or SLI will a i7 rock a C2Q in games.

[SalehCoder]

I'm a bit turned down. I have a GTX 295 and my score is just 3500. I bought this GPU for around $500 6 months ago and it was the best in the market. Check it out:

High resolution (score 3506)
http://salehalsaffar.com/temp/testhq2.jpg

Low resolution (score 4200ish)
http://salehalsaffar.com/temp/testlq2.jpg

Anyone knows what's wrong with my system?

Here's my system specs:
CPU: i7 860 2.8GHz
Graphic: Nvidia 290 GTX
RAM: 6GB DDR3 PC1333
MOBO: MSI P55-GD80
OS: Windows 7 64bit

And OC is enabled by the motherboard.

[Evanos]

I'm a bit turned down. I have a GTX 295 and my score is just 3500. I bought this GPU for around $500 6 months ago and it was the best in the market. Check it out:

High resolution (score 3506)
http://salehalsaffar.com/temp/testhq2.jpg

Low resolution (score 4200ish)
http://salehalsaffar.com/temp/testlq2.jpg

Anyone knows what's wrong with my system?

Here's my system specs:
CPU: i7 860 2.8GHz
Graphic: Nvidia 290 GTX
RAM: 6GB DDR3 PC1333
MOBO: MSI P55-GD80
OS: Windows 7 64bit

And OC is enabled by the motherboard.

What is wrong is that it is a dual GPU card and the benchmark only uses one of your GPUs. I wouldn't worry about it, your system will be able to run the game just fine.

[alecrast]

The benchmark, at least, utilizes about 23% - I just eyeballed it, didn't do an in-depth analysis - of an i7 860 at stock speed (2.8GHz) with HT enabled (8 logical processors) on the "high" setting. That works out to 92% of a C2D at 2.8GHz before you include inefficiency for context switches and architectural changes between C2D and i7 so a C2D is likely to be pegged. C2Q gives you a little breathing room.

[Drakath]

High:
http://images.aftermathzone.com/kenk...qbenchmark.png

Low:
http://images.aftermathzone.com/kenkoart/lq.png


I originally made a post in this thread way back when the benchmark was first released with much lower scores (HQ: 2400 LQ: 4000). After seeing Saleh's post just above I noticed our systems were almost identical but his scores were much higher. The only big difference I could see was his driver so after updating mine I was pleased to see that my scores (especially HQ) have made a significant jump. If I could have the front page updated, if someone still keeps that up to date lol