I've been doing a research for the last week or so getting ready to put a new machine together to play this game at 1080p.
One topic I haven't seen addressed is wether or not D3 will rely more on the CPU or GPU? Does anyone have any specific data to support the question?
I'm looking at either investing in a G850 Pentium CPU which would give more room in my budget to invest in a better GPU and then upgrade later on when Ivy bridge launches/matures.
Or going with a i5-2500k now and getting a lesser GPU card and potentially running it with my existing 9800GT.
I notice a lot of people complaining about lag from recent patches and I've been reading the game isn't optimized yet, so perhaps it's too early to tell. Would a SSD drive help with load times especially in multiplayer?
I don't have concrete proof on whether D3 requires more CPU or GPU power but I can assure you and SSD is not needed. The load times on my WD Blue 7200 are approximately 2 seconds. Don't know if that number is going to raise come retail but, honestly, it's not going to be more than 5 seconds.
And that's just one load screen for the entire game and possibly between the Acts.
Yea, for the SSD, I was thinking when it's loading textures, maps, etc during multiplay or loading in between zones. But you're right, 7200rpm SATAII might cut it.
Diablo 3 definitely leans hardest on the GPU. I've tried on several computers and the GPU makes all the difference. RAM amount, storage speed, CPU speed... all don't seem to have much effect (within reason; an Atom CPU with 1GB of RAM won't do it...)
Blizzard wants everyone to be able to play, so you're not going to need a monster card for this game. Any modern $150-or-more GPU should be able to play the game with all the quality levels at "high" with a 1080p screen.
I've found RAM and GPU to be the hardest for diablo 3. Less than 2GB of RAM and you'll notice some stuttering as it swaps out to pagefile. You want a GPU that is at least Radeon 6850 performance, preferably a little higher. Here are some cards that will run 1080p:
Got all my parts in for the "new" setup. went with the new Ivy Bridge 3.4ghz i5 and an ASRock Z77Pro-4 mobo w/ 8GB of Ram. Sticking with my older 9800GT for now to see how it looks when I get D3 installed. Will look at cards after that if I don't think it performs well enough.
My specs:
CPU: AMD Phenom II x4 965 Black Edition @3.40 Ghz
GPU: XFX Radeon HD 4890 1GB
RAM: 8GB G-Skill 1066 mhz
Windows 7 64 bit
In the beta stress test, I was getting 45-60 fps with everything on hing, except shadows on medium. High shadows setting dropped me to 30-40 fps. This rig is several years old and ran D3 with ease. The beta graphics were not optimized yet, so the retail release will run even better. No need to go out and spend lots of cash to play this game. Unless you just want to, of course.
Got all my parts in for the "new" setup. went with the new Ivy Bridge 3.4ghz i5 and an ASRock Z77Pro-4 mobo w/ 8GB of Ram. Sticking with my older 9800GT for now to see how it looks when I get D3 installed. Will look at cards after that if I don't think it performs well enough.
1080p will be a struggle for your 9800GT. Lowering details (shadows especially) might be enough to make it a good experience, but I think a new GPU will be needed if you want to sustain 60 FPS.
Your CPU choice is solid; you won't have to worry bout CPU bottlenecks for years
I haven't bought the 1080p monitor yet, still have a Dell 22" 1680x1050 so I will have to see how it does. Might stick with this monitor for a while, now that I'm using again, I don't mind it
Yea, for the SSD, I was thinking when it's loading textures, maps, etc during multiplay or loading in between zones. But you're right, 7200rpm SATAII might cut it.
Not might. Will. SSD's are great but they're in no capacity necessary as all games being developed currently are still being designed with HD's in mind. I have a 7200rpm drive that's bursting at nearly 75% full and I was still getting instant-loads. I wouldn't even say two seconds. Just keep it de-fragged.
Spend the money on a GTX460-550 instead, you'll thank me later.
Not only that, but consumer grade SSD's have a very high NVRAM failure rate unless you buy specific vetted brands. I have no idea why.
Also, I wouldn't buy anything from Dell. It's just my own case, but there was a large run of monitors they sent out with bad video driver chips. Mine was one of them. They wouldn't even cover it under warranty even though hundreds were on their forums writhing about it. Oh, except laptop users. Theirs got fixed, because they can't replace theirs themselves, or something. People who had the desktop version of the same monitor just got F*cked.
Your 9800 will handle the game comfortably. Also there isn't a huge difference between low/high short of lightning and particle effects. The game is designed to look good either way. I was running it on low with an 8600 that isn't even supported and it was handling fine. Just for testing purposes.
Right now the 8800-9800 of their generation are the gtx460 (offering the best value at the cheapest price) and the 550 (offering a considerable performance jump worthy of it's price difference). Regardless, you can get either for under $200 and they'll both blast almost any game out of the water paired with an awesome processor like that. You chose goodly much correcting right.
I've found RAM and GPU to be the hardest for diablo 3. Less than 2GB of RAM and you'll notice some stuttering as it swaps out to pagefile. You want a GPU that is at least Radeon 6850 performance, preferably a little higher. Here are some cards that will run 1080p:
One topic I haven't seen addressed is wether or not D3 will rely more on the CPU or GPU? Does anyone have any specific data to support the question?
I'm looking at either investing in a G850 Pentium CPU which would give more room in my budget to invest in a better GPU and then upgrade later on when Ivy bridge launches/matures.
Or going with a i5-2500k now and getting a lesser GPU card and potentially running it with my existing 9800GT.
I notice a lot of people complaining about lag from recent patches and I've been reading the game isn't optimized yet, so perhaps it's too early to tell. Would a SSD drive help with load times especially in multiplayer?
Appreciate whatever feedback I can get, thanks!
And that's just one load screen for the entire game and possibly between the Acts.
Ha. Bagstone.
Yea, for the SSD, I was thinking when it's loading textures, maps, etc during multiplay or loading in between zones. But you're right, 7200rpm SATAII might cut it.
Blizzard wants everyone to be able to play, so you're not going to need a monster card for this game. Any modern $150-or-more GPU should be able to play the game with all the quality levels at "high" with a 1080p screen.
GTX 460
GTX 560
Radeon 6850
Radeon 7770
GTX 550 Ti (with lower settings)
Radeon 7750 (with lower settings)
As far as CPU, as long as it is at least 2.4GHz it will have no problems.
What kind of GPU do you have?
HIS Radeon 7770, OCed to 1100 MHz core and 1300MHz memory. Newegg is doing a sale right now $119.99 with free shipping.
Oops, the sale ended yesterday You can get the 6850 for $120 free shipping though, it's about the same performance.
Got all my parts in for the "new" setup. went with the new Ivy Bridge 3.4ghz i5 and an ASRock Z77Pro-4 mobo w/ 8GB of Ram. Sticking with my older 9800GT for now to see how it looks when I get D3 installed. Will look at cards after that if I don't think it performs well enough.
Installing Win 7 now!
CPU: AMD Phenom II x4 965 Black Edition @3.40 Ghz
GPU: XFX Radeon HD 4890 1GB
RAM: 8GB G-Skill 1066 mhz
Windows 7 64 bit
In the beta stress test, I was getting 45-60 fps with everything on hing, except shadows on medium. High shadows setting dropped me to 30-40 fps. This rig is several years old and ran D3 with ease. The beta graphics were not optimized yet, so the retail release will run even better. No need to go out and spend lots of cash to play this game. Unless you just want to, of course.
Your CPU choice is solid; you won't have to worry bout CPU bottlenecks for years
I haven't bought the 1080p monitor yet, still have a Dell 22" 1680x1050 so I will have to see how it does. Might stick with this monitor for a while, now that I'm using again, I don't mind it
Not might. Will. SSD's are great but they're in no capacity necessary as all games being developed currently are still being designed with HD's in mind. I have a 7200rpm drive that's bursting at nearly 75% full and I was still getting instant-loads. I wouldn't even say two seconds. Just keep it de-fragged.
Spend the money on a GTX460-550 instead, you'll thank me later.
Not only that, but consumer grade SSD's have a very high NVRAM failure rate unless you buy specific vetted brands. I have no idea why.
Also, I wouldn't buy anything from Dell. It's just my own case, but there was a large run of monitors they sent out with bad video driver chips. Mine was one of them. They wouldn't even cover it under warranty even though hundreds were on their forums writhing about it. Oh, except laptop users. Theirs got fixed, because they can't replace theirs themselves, or something. People who had the desktop version of the same monitor just got F*cked.
Your 9800 will handle the game comfortably. Also there isn't a huge difference between low/high short of lightning and particle effects. The game is designed to look good either way. I was running it on low with an 8600 that isn't even supported and it was handling fine. Just for testing purposes.
Right now the 8800-9800 of their generation are the gtx460 (offering the best value at the cheapest price) and the 550 (offering a considerable performance jump worthy of it's price difference). Regardless, you can get either for under $200 and they'll both blast almost any game out of the water paired with an awesome processor like that. You chose goodly much correcting right.
Any of those cards will max this game at any resolution. You're bonkers.