Anybody still using Core2 Quad cpu?

[Sindorin]

First, let's try to reestablish the premise of this thread. It's to ask if others, who have similar hardware, are encountering difficulties with playing the game. It's not about measuring the superiority of E/Q series processors versus Ivy or SB processors. On that premise, I have demonstrated that having a Core2 Duo processor, coupled with say, 4-8 GB RAM and a decent graphics card (for the sake of this thread, we'll say the 560 Ti, which is what I and the OP have), the game runs fine and is not hampered by the processor at all. You're attempting to counter that, by using an argument that you are criticizing me for allegedly using: the processor alone.

 

I'm well aware of how a computer functions together with all of it's various hardware components, and I'm also aware of how easy it is to dismiss something you disagree with as "uninformed". It's not something I heard on CNN. It's something I've dealt with, first hand. Sorry it clashes with your fancy statistics.

[Kilora]

It sounds more like your i7 has some 5400rpm "eco friendly" HDD. Honestly, everything from Sandy Bridge (i5 and better) and newer will smoke Core 2 architecture processors. I had Core 2 Duo E8400 before I upgraded to SB 2600K @ 4,3 GHz (now have 3770K @ 4,3 GHz though) and it's probably needless to say E8400 offered half the performance in many games. It also just couldn't cope when capturing gameplay video and in pure number crunching (video encoding) the speed difference was staggering. GTX 570 at that time was seriously bottlenecked by it. Obviously though, quad core Core 2 would have done better. You shouldn't underestimate the speed difference between dual and quad core unit these days.

 

This game isn't optimised at all for quad core CPUs, I have feeling that it's barely multi threaded judging by the cpu usage. This game also hates SLI, enabling it will only degrade performance. Not quite sure who to blame, NVIDIA, BioWare or both...

 

For the first part -- amen.

 

I have an 3770k as well -- @3.9Ghz right now while I figure out cooling situation. But my setup is:

• i-7 3770k @ 3.9 Ghz
  
• 32GB DDR3 1600 (G.SKILL Z Series)
  
• MSI 7870 Twin Frozr 2GD5/OC
  
• Mobo w/ UEFI Bios and 6.0g/s sata
  
• WD Black 1TB 7200RPM
  

First upgrade, obviously, is to add an SSD -- as my HDD is easily the worst part of this setup. But, on max settings I average over 70fps (even on fleet).

 

Before upgrading my graphics card, I maxed 30fps on max settings (With a GTS450), significantly less on fleet.

Before upgrading my processor, I couldn't run max settings.

 

As for the last part -- Crossfire/SLI in itself is fairly bad, as you aren't actually getting the power of both cards. However, SWTOR doesn't help at all. Blame them both!

[evodude]

im using intel core 2 quad q9650 3.0ghz and am having no problems at all

[Kilora]

First, let's try to reestablish the premise of this thread. It's to ask if others, who have similar hardware, are encountering difficulties with playing the game. It's not about measuring the superiority of E/Q series processors versus Ivy or SB processors. On that premise, I have demonstrated that having a Core2 Duo processor, coupled with say, 4-8 GB RAM and a decent graphics card (for the sake of this thread, we'll say the 560 Ti, which is what I and the OP have), the game runs fine and is not hampered by the processor at all. You're attempting to counter that, by using an argument that you are criticizing me for allegedly using: the processor alone.

 

I'm well aware of how a computer functions together with all of it's various hardware components, and I'm also aware of how easy it is to dismiss something you disagree with as "uninformed". It's not something I heard on CNN. It's something I've dealt with, first hand. Sorry it clashes with your fancy statistics.

 

Nowhere did I see him say that you COULDN'T run the game with the series of CPUs you're talking about. He is merely stating that, recommending a purchase like that to someone, is rather short sighted.

 

Which it is. If you're going to go through the trouble of upgrading your processor, you should stick with a Core i-5, preferably SB or later. There is a marked performance improvement that is noticeable with (almost) everything you do.

 

I DOUBT your game isn't hampered by your processor at all. Being able to run the game doesn't mean the processor isn't holding it back.

 

TL;DR - No one said the Core2 series wasn't decent enough to run the game. But if you're upgrading anyway, go with something much newer and better.

[Sindorin]

The best CPUs for the game are Sandy Bridge i5s or better

 

He is merely stating that, recommending a purchase like that to someone, is rather short sighted.

 

That's the comment I specifically dispute. For the money, I'd wager you'd be happy with a Core2 Duo quadcore and save a considerable amount of money. Rushing out to get a late i5 or i7 series seems to be a little on the salesmanship side. Chances are he doesn't really play or use any game or program that would require the need for such an investment.

[Malastare]

That's the comment I specifically dispute. [Reference: Suggesting a Sandy Bridge i5 or better] For the money, I'd wager you'd be happy with a Core2 Duo quadcore and save a considerable amount of money. Rushing out to get a late i5 or i7 series seems to be a little on the salesmanship side. Chances are he doesn't really play or use any game or program that would require the need for such an investment.

 

Let's look at the money, then: the best of the common Core2 Duo "quadcore" line (what Intel calls: Core2 Quad) is, I believe, the Yorkfield Q9550. Searching around the web, the best price I can find for that is around $220. For the same price, you can get a Haswell (better than Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge) i5-4670K. Ironically, the i5-2500K seems to sell for an even higher amount, But you can get a roughly-equivalent Ivy Bridge chip for $180.

 

Lesson #3: Old CPUs are not necessarily cheaper than brand new CPUs.

 

Supply is an issue. Finding a Core2 Quad that is in boxed condition (or trustworthy refurb) is not easy, and the prices reflect that. For the best price/value, you usually want to look at the previous generation of CPUs, in this case: Ivy Bridge. Of course, if replacing the CPU requires you to replace a motherboard and RAM, the higher price might be worth it. Still, the Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, and Haswell lines are drastically better than the Core2 line, which is quite old now.

 

Notice: I'm not suggesting that people buy shiny new Haswell chips. There's nothing they provide that really helps SWTOR. The big jump in performance comes with the Sandy Bridge line, and the Ivy Bridge line is slightly cheaper due to greater stock levels at the moment. The Core i3/i5/i7 (Penryn/Westmere) chips that came between Core2 and Sandy Bridge are noticeably better than the Core2's, but because of various characteristics (mostly motherboard availability and heat, if I recall correctly), they're rather unpopular now.

 

If you have a Core2 motherboard (LGA775 socket) and don't want to upgrade, then the best you can do is Yorkfield Core2 Quads (Core2 Quad 9x50s), and those should do just fine. Wolfdale CPUs (Core2 Duo E8x00s) should work fine, too. They're not great, but they should be fine. However, "upgrading" to either of those CPU's from a lower chip is only a small upgrade in performance, for the same price as a much, much better CPU. Expect to pay $200 for the CPU with no guarantee of warranty.

[Kilora]

That's the comment I specifically dispute. For the money, I'd wager you'd be happy with a Core2 Duo quadcore and save a considerable amount of money. Rushing out to get a late i5 or i7 series seems to be a little on the salesmanship side. Chances are he doesn't really play or use any game or program that would require the need for such an investment.

 

"Investment"?

 

If you're going to view it as an investment, why on earth would you opt to save less than $100 in the short-term, only to spend more in the long-run?

 

If his current Core2 is working fine, no reason to upgrade. If it isn't, why on earth WOULDN'T you upgrade to something more recent, like a Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge? I'd recommend against Hazwell -- as it is too new, and still has a premium price tag.

 

Building a PC should be about walking a fine line between future-proofing your rig, while keeping price as low as possible. The Q6600 is still a decent CPU, absolutely -- especially if you can OC it. But you're getting to the point where you will be bottlenecked by Ram, GPU, etc. And considering it's LGA775 -- you can't exactly upgrade the Mobo to anything spectacular.

 

An unlocked SB would give you more power (between much better OCing, hyperthreading support, and newer architecture) and you'd get more bang for your buck. I think Malastare was coming from the same place as I am -- if you were asking what processor to buy now, it would be SB I-series. If you were asking if the Q6600 can run the game, absolutely. Maybe not as well -- but certainly more than just lowest settings (depending on other things).

[Sindorin]

Supply is an issue.

 

Lesson #4: Generosity is common.

 

I have my old MoBo and processor at home. It's sitting and collecting dust. I'll ship it to the guy if he wants it. All he needs to do is message me privately. Argument invalidated. Have a nice day.

[jsmc]

Using an E8400 and 5870. Haven't had any issues, yet.

[AndasKastor]

Lesson #4: Generosity is common.

 

I have my old MoBo and processor at home. It's sitting and collecting dust. I'll ship it to the guy if he wants it. All he needs to do is message me privately. Argument invalidated. Have a nice day.

 

Come on. Argument invalidated? His (or her) argument was that if they were going to pay to upgrade it would make more sense to get something better.

 

If I have an old car and I decide that I need to replace it - it does not make sense to get the same model year if a newer model would be the same or cheaper. However if someone offers me a better auto as a replacement that happens to be better and the same model year it does not invalidate the original argument that a newer model would be a better choice if you were going to pay to replace it.

[Sindorin]

Come on. Argument invalidated? His (or her) argument was that if they were going to pay to upgrade it would make more sense to get something better.

 

If I have an old car and I decide that I need to replace it - it does not make sense to get the same model year if a newer model would be the same or cheaper. However if someone offers me a better auto as a replacement that happens to be better and the same model year it does not invalidate the original argument that a newer model would be a better choice if you were going to pay to replace it.

 

And my argument is that the value of an item that is free, is better than one you pay for, if it improves your overall experience. I meant what I said, in terms of my offer.

 

I just hate it when people act smug, hence Lesson 4.

Edited August 8, 2013 by Sindorin

[Fadmotherbucker]

First, let's try to reestablish the premise of this thread. It's to ask if others, who have similar hardware, are encountering difficulties with playing the game. It's not about measuring the superiority of E/Q series processors versus Ivy or SB processors. On that premise, I have demonstrated that having a Core2 Duo processor, coupled with say, 4-8 GB RAM and a decent graphics card (for the sake of this thread, we'll say the 560 Ti, which is what I and the OP have), the game runs fine and is not hampered by the processor at all. You're attempting to counter that, by using an argument that you are criticizing me for allegedly using: the processor alone.

 

I'm well aware of how a computer functions together with all of it's various hardware components, and I'm also aware of how easy it is to dismiss something you disagree with as "uninformed". It's not something I heard on CNN. It's something I've dealt with, first hand. Sorry it clashes with your fancy statistics.

 

Yes, that'd be great if we could get back on topic here, primarily trying to find a common factor between those of us that are having issues.

[Malastare]

I just hate it when people act smug, hence Lesson 4.

 

So... your goal isn't to provide accurate, factual information, its just to feel like you've won some argument.

 

Yeah, I'm not interested in that. My goal here is to help people understand and get the information they need to make decisions. Your anecdote ("A Q9550 is a faster CPU than a Core i7") is patently false, as proven by theory, benchmarking, and real world testing by dozens of people who have better training than you. If you want to make another anecdote ("My CPU is a better value than a Core i7 because I'll give it away for free") that's just fine. Neither anecdote is useful to anyone else in the world, and in most cases, provides them with inaccurate information that will make them more likely to make worse decisions and be less satisfied with their computers.

 

If you prefer your own feeling of correctness over the satisfaction of everyone else in the world, then you've done quite well and I won't steal that from you. I, however, would rather spend my time helping people understand the positives and negatives of a decision so they can make the best decision for their situation and be happy with what they've purchased. In my opinion, it's far more useful to help people understand the aspects of certain hardware that impact game performance. Tossing out anecdotes with conclusions based on a lack of analysis or understanding undermines that goal.

[morfius]

You said:

 

 

 

An i5-430m is not a Sandy Bridge chip. It is the lowest of the Arrandale series, which was the weakest of the mobile chips for the Core i5 series.

 

 

 

I said:

 

 

 

Emphasis added by me.

 

Most Sandy Bridge mobile i5's are sufficient to run the game. I never said "all i5's" nor "all SB i5's". Intel usually makes low-power versions of most of their chips, and they have notably lower game performance. Even then, the i5-2430, one of the more common low-end mobile Sandy Bridge i5's still outperforms the desktop E8600. It's close, but the Sandy Bridge mobile chip is still better.

 

 

 

And you're still wrong. A Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge dual-core, such as the i5-2430m mentioned above, has enough power to run the game, with just two cores at 2.4GHz. That 2.4GHz chip outperforms a desktop Core2 Duo which is running at 3.3GHz.

 

Now, neither the i5-2430m nor the E8600 would be my recommendation for playing the game, but both are suitable. You'll likely get some stutter in crowded areas, but the game will be playable. What I take issue with is your unsupported declaration that there is something special about the 3GHz clock speed, implying that an E8600 (2008 @ 3.3GHz, CPUMark: 2424) would have good performance while an i5-4570S (2012 @ 2.9GHz, CPUMark 6625) would struggle.

 

Maybe add Apple g7 or Intel Xeon in comparison to have full mess?

Let see tread name again - quad core series ... those (QC and DC) above 3GHz will handle it well.

Any other CPU means change whole PC ... I don't see any of QC / DC users posted here to ask - what new PC I need to buy.

My recommendation for those with QC / DC is to do cheap upgrade on their CPU to DC at 3 GHz and above... if they don't want to buy whole new PC. Or you could put i5 on QC MoBo?

(i5-2430m works on 2.9 - 3 GHz in game not on 2.4 it is normal to OP oldest CPU at similar frequency)

Let just stop with new CPU and return to QC / DC here... if someone need new PC, we could think about them.

[morfius]

"Investment"?

 

If you're going to view it as an investment, why on earth would you opt to save less than $100 in the short-term, only to spend more in the long-run?

 

If his current Core2 is working fine, no reason to upgrade. If it isn't, why on earth WOULDN'T you upgrade to something more recent, like a Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge? I'd recommend against Hazwell -- as it is too new, and still has a premium price tag.

 

Building a PC should be about walking a fine line between future-proofing your rig, while keeping price as low as possible. The Q6600 is still a decent CPU, absolutely -- especially if you can OC it. But you're getting to the point where you will be bottlenecked by Ram, GPU, etc. And considering it's LGA775 -- you can't exactly upgrade the Mobo to anything spectacular.

 

An unlocked SB would give you more power (between much better OCing, hyperthreading support, and newer architecture) and you'd get more bang for your buck. I think Malastare was coming from the same place as I am -- if you were asking what processor to buy now, it would be SB I-series. If you were asking if the Q6600 can run the game, absolutely. Maybe not as well -- but certainly more than just lowest settings (depending on other things).

 

For less than 100$ I got new boxed Core Duo and 4 GB of RAM ... just check stores for old but still unopened items.

Same PC is already 7 years old ... 3 upgrades and still serve us well.

To build a new one with same scheme (I have 3xHDD RAID 5 for data, 1 faster HDD for OS/Games/Torrents, above middle class GPU & 750W quality PSU) I have to prepare at least 1500$ ... prices here are not as those in USA.

So let say with all upgrades Total Cost of Ownership goes to 2000$ (actually it is not but to be easyer) over 8 years - 250$ per year.

If you follow common advises and change whole PC for 1500$ at 4 years ... you will pay 3000$ for same period... or 500$ per year.

Short sighted yes...

 

Let try to help QC / DC users to get most of their PCs, not just tell them - go buy new one or don't play.

[ShadessaWayland]

i stil run on my very trusted Duel Core E8400 3.0 GHZ

 

stil 1 of the best made cores

i think i have him 5 years now and stil going strong

[WarbNull]

One of my older PC's still has a Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 2.4GHz and a pair of 8800GTS 640 Mb GPU's. It runs this game alright enough to play SWTOR. I really do not use it for this game or much of any other game anymore. I have since upgraded and it now is basically used for Web Surfing and Streaming, with the occasional messing around with 3D Graphics or other creative things along those lines.

 

Nothing wrong with using old hardware. I still have a BetaMax and Laser Disc sitting around here somewhere.