The OFFICIAL FFXIV Benchmark & Beta Performance Thread

[Celeras]

New beta Nvidia drivers are out. Most noticeable thing about this one is it introduces the 3D Vision Surround. Guess I'll try 'em out when I get home on the bench.

http://www.fudzilla.com/graphics/gra...69-beta-driver

And it looks like AMDs Bulldozer chips will use AM3...but AMD3 r2. No word yet if the existing AM3 boards will be able to accept Bulldozer. So AMD fans, I suggest waiting on that new motherboard purchase until it's known.

http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/p...-to-use-am3-r2

Drivers don't offer any improvements outside 3D vision surround, and Bulldozer will at worst require a bios update to work on AM3 boards.

Also, fudzilla is trash.

[Ellimist]

@Ellimist: Your laptop isn't even close, no offense. The processor is too low in speed and your graphics doesn't even have enough memory. I'd suggest if you really want to run the PC FFXIV... get a new DESKTOP. Laptops would be too expensive to run FFXIV to be worthwhile, and who wants to play for hours on a small screen?

The specs for the PC version are as follows:

Windows XP/Vista/7
Intel Core 2 Duo 2GHz or AMD Athlon X2 2GHz
2GB of RAM
15GB HDD space
NVIDIA GeForce 9600 512MB or ATI Radeon HD 2900 512MB and DirectX 9.

Ok thanks. I have a PS3 so I'll just play on that, I was just wondering if I had a chance. Are you sure my processor is too low in speed though? My computer claims that it is 2.2GHZ with my duo processor. I got this laptop partly based on that for running music software.

[mintyice]

i'm wondering if my computer will run it at all.

[bluefan]

Drivers don't offer any improvements outside 3D vision surround, and Bulldozer will at worst require a bios update to work on AM3 boards.

Also, fudzilla is trash.

Oh I know, beta drivers I usually just test then switch back.

And I can't say I agree with the Bulldozer comment. Some sound arguments out there. The discrete GPU could require a wider lane then the current AM3 provides, no one knows.

Just telling it like it is. You're speculation is just one of many.

[Celeras]

Oh I know, beta drivers I usually just test then switch back.

And I can't say I agree with the Bulldozer comment. Some sound arguments out there. The discrete GPU could require a wider lane then the current AM3 provides, no one knows.

Just telling it like it is. You're speculation is just one of many.

There is no discrete GPU with bulldozer. Ontario and Llano are the fusion hardware, bulldozer is just a CPU.

[bluefan]

There is no discrete GPU with bulldozer. Ontario and Llano are the fusion hardware, bulldozer is just a CPU.

Ah, you are correct.

But that makes it all the stranger. Why would they announce a AM3-R2 socket then?

[Celeras]

Not entirely sure they did, Fudzilla tends to get a whiff of something and then run around crazy with it. Almost as bad as semiaccurate.

[LD]

Kinda interesting how the CPU reqs went down by 0.4 Ghz but the GPU went up by about a series. Guess they're getting better with balancing the load?

When I compared my GeForce 240M to a 9600 GT, the 240M seemed roughly the same except for twice the memory, 100 less core clock mhz and 415 less shader clock mhz.

Will this be an obvious difference or is it too close to matter?

[Celeras]

8800GT is faster than a 9600GT. They lowered the required specs all around.

[LD]

8800GT is faster than a 9600GT.

I really hate that.

Why do they do that?

Anyway, the other thing.

[mintyice]

8800GT is faster than a 9600GT. They lowered the required specs all around.

so i should be able to play this? haha

[Celeras]

The main difference between the 8000/9000 series chip is the die size, 8000 is 65nm and 9000 is 55nm. They're both the same chip otherwise outside minor optimizations.

First number is basically the series marker, whereas the second relates to the power. And since both series are essentially the same chip, 800 > 600.

[mintyice]

this pleases me

[LD]

The main difference between the 8000/9000 series chip is the die size, 8000 is 65nm and 9000 is 55nm. They're both the same chip otherwise outside minor optimizations.

First number is basically the series marker, whereas the second relates to the power. And since both series are essentially the same chip, 800 > 600.

I see, that makes slightly more sense.

So at any rate, my play should be smoother. From what I can see, 240M is just barely hitting the minimum, but beta will make this all clearer.

[Gulkeeva]

There is a big difference between "able to play" and can play...

Its like saying win7 "able" to run on a P4 1.5ghz with 256MB ram but you won't be enjoying it...

you will want to choke someone after a few times, or punch holes in a wall at how slow it is

I don't think I could play a game at 1-5fps...

[mintyice]

dude i'd put up with it even i have to run at 800x600 just to have a 6 month advantage over ps3 players.

[Liminality]

dude i'd put up with it even i have to run at 800x600 just to have a 6 month advantage over ps3 players.

^This. A 6-8 day start over a standard FFXIV buyer isn't much, but an entire 6 months over a PS3 player? That's a huge difference. Although, I do agree with Gulk. I'd shoot myself @ 5fps. I'll personally be buying both versions, cause I'm a total FF fanboy and if something happens to one of my systems, lol

@Ellimist: Sorry, I musta been looking at something else. Your processor could possibly run the game, but it wouldn't be able to do much else besides run it on low settings. You definitely need a graphics card update.

As for me, I'll have to be able to do other things besides FFXIV. Like if I don't like the music I'll turn it on mute and run iTunes or online radio in the background and what-not, or pull up the Firefox to Wiki something. That's just me, though.

[Akiyama]

Redid my low benchmark after a nice reboot/driver update.

Still pretty meh, though.
http://i45.tinypic.com/jh34eh.jpg

[LD]

There is a big difference between "able to play" and can play...

Its like saying win7 "able" to run on a P4 1.5ghz with 256MB ram but you won't be enjoying it...

you will want to choke someone after a few times, or punch holes in a wall at how slow it is

I don't think I could play a game at 1-5fps...

If it didn't bother me in the alpha it won't bother me in the beta, I haven't been spoiled by higher spec'd systems. Though I guess we'll see. If the Beta at lowish settings isn't worth playing on my system, I'll just get Cata (or The Secret World, whenever that comes out) and call it a net win.

[Zane]

Have a favor to ask for someone who is obviously much more tech savvy than I.

Would someone be able to give me a rough idea of what I should be looking to get to optimize a gaming PC for XIV spending no more than $800? I have a bit of computer knowledge, but not nearly enough to build one myself from scratch, so I'm having a friend come over and help me order parts and build it. I'd like to give him a rough draft of what I want in the PC since he knows nothing about FF XIV and I'd like something more specifically tailored to optimize XIV rather than a general purpose gaming machine.

I'm also going to need enough to upgrade my current PC/build a second PC, but looking to spend as little as possible while keeping it "playable". So... just a little above minimum specs.

What I have to work with for the second PC:

1 Monitor
600w Power Supply
1.5gigs of RAM
Radeon X1300 Graphics Card
Unless otherwise noted, the rest of the parts are from the 838GM Media Center Gateway desktop. Processor is Intel Pentium 4 Processor 630.

Yes, that PC is from 2005 and I planned on replacing it, but now I need a second PC for my girlfriend to play on until PS3 release in March so I don't want to invest tons of money on this. I also assume this would be easier to upgrade than her current Acer Laptop.