Priceless... WOW is 3x Faster in OSX... hahahaha

MacProGuy

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 16, 2006
137
0
Ok... so.. everyone knows the benchmarks I was getting in OSX with World of Warcraft...

and I'd had many requests to benchmark it in Windows XP...

So... I finally installed it... and....

MAX FPS IN ANY SITUATION is 64FPS...

muahahahahaha

Apparently, after doing a little research... there is a bug that Blizzard has yet to address in the windows crowd:

It doesn't matter HOW fast your CPU is, HOW GREAT your video card is... if you are using a DUAL CORE CPU, you are "capped" at 64FPS...

I think I'll be playing it happily on the OS X side, thank you very much :D :D :D :D :D :D

Gotta love it ;)
 

ZoomZoomZoom

macrumors 6502a
May 2, 2005
767
0
Question though -

What about minimum FPS? I wouldn't mind playing in XP if I could get a steadier FPS, and a higher minimum FPS. I don't think I would really notice anything playing at 100 FPS anyways :p

Thanks for all the benchmarking!
 

phytonix

macrumors 6502
Jan 26, 2006
377
6
i used to suffer ~20 fps with everything set to lowest in PB
now I can enjoy avg 60 fps with everything maxed out at 1920x1200 in OS X
so i won't bother to run it in Windows
 

flyakite

macrumors newbie
Mar 11, 2005
23
0
Chicago
MacProGuy said:
Ok... so.. everyone knows the benchmarks I was getting in OSX with World of Warcraft...

and I'd had many requests to benchmark it in Windows XP...

So... I finally installed it... and....

MAX FPS IN ANY SITUATION is 64FPS...

muahahahahaha

Apparently, after doing a little research... there is a bug that Blizzard has yet to address in the windows crowd:

It doesn't matter HOW fast your CPU is, HOW GREAT your video card is... if you are using a DUAL CORE CPU, you are "capped" at 64FPS...

I think I'll be playing it happily on the OS X side, thank you very much :D :D :D :D :D :D

Gotta love it ;)
Well if you knew anything about FPS, you'd know the human eye doesn't really perceive a difference with anything over 60fps. So in reality the GPU is doing much more work in OS X than it needs to, which creates more heat etc. There's absolutely no point in having it run higher all the time. Many screensavers and graphically intensive apps have an option to cap FPS at 60. Wonder why? :p
 

darkcurse

macrumors 6502a
Nov 5, 2005
538
0
Sydney
Well, depends on the game really. In the FPS(First Person Shooter) realm 60fps is like the absolute minimum that is needed for people who play in like the WCG championships. Things are much smoother at frame rates higher than 60 so that they can react much faster.
 

MacProGuy

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 16, 2006
137
0
flyakite said:
Well if you knew anything about FPS, you'd know the human eye doesn't really perceive a difference with anything over 60fps. So in reality the GPU is doing much more work in OS X than it needs to, which creates more heat etc. There's absolutely no point in having it run higher all the time. Many screensavers and graphically intensive apps have an option to cap FPS at 60. Wonder why? :p

Well, I'd beg to differ... I can tell a HUGE difference in a FPS @ 60fps and one at 400fps (i.e., Unreal Tournament)...
 

admanimal

macrumors 68040
Apr 22, 2005
3,531
2
Are you sure that there is not a setting somewhere in Windows that is forcing the frames to sync with the vertical refresh, which would cap the frame rate at 60Hz or ~60fps?

Edit: nevermind, read about the dual core bug.
 

fall3n

macrumors 6502
Aug 17, 2006
393
0
MacProGuy said:
Well, I'd beg to differ... I can tell a HUGE difference in a FPS @ 60fps and one at 400fps (i.e., Unreal Tournament)...
I agree to that one. Even thought the human eye can't tell anything past around 32 fps, you CAN still notice some lag/delay if it's lower then say 60. Don't ask how, you just can. At least I can. It's FAR smoother when you get 60+ constant, so of course you'd love to have 140fps
 

Mav451

macrumors 68000
Jul 1, 2003
1,657
1
Maryland
admanimal said:
Are you sure that there is not a setting somewhere in Windows that is forcing the frames to sync with the vertical refresh, which would cap the frame rate at 60Hz or ~60fps?

Edit: nevermind, read about the dual core bug.
Judging by the tone and diction used, I think the OP will find out sooner or later. Probably later.
 

darkcurse

macrumors 6502a
Nov 5, 2005
538
0
Sydney
Mav451 said:
Judging by the tone and diction used, I think the OP will find out sooner or later. Probably later.
Didn't the OP already say that it was a bug with blizzard and core duo chips?
 

Swarmlord

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2006
535
0
I question the FPS number generated within WoW. I have moments where the FPS is lower and yet the motion is smooth and other times when it is at 60 fps and the character jerks depending on what's going on around me. Then there's the server connection bar which I've seen stay green while the motion is jerky or be yellow and yet the motion is smooth. My performance within BWL, Naxx and AQ is always worse partied with 39 other guildies than it is in say UBRS or Strat or soloing.

With my setup whether I use my Mac or my Windoze mahine, my WoW performance is dependent more on my Internet connection than my OS or hardware.
 

Chrispy

macrumors 68020
Dec 27, 2004
2,126
1
Indiana
My PC runs it at a constant 60FPS and it runs smooth as silk at that rate. Also, my graphics card does not get too taxed so my system fans don't kick up a notch like they do in UT 2004. I will take the 60FPS cap over increased heat/noise.
 

mdntcallr

macrumors 65816
Aug 1, 2000
1,445
120
phytonix said:
i used to suffer ~20 fps with everything set to lowest in PB
now I can enjoy avg 60 fps with everything maxed out at 1920x1200 in OS X
so i won't bother to run it in Windows
What kind of computer are you guys using to get this kind of mac performance?

doesnt sound like an imac or macbook pro. maybe a 24" with optional graphics card.
 

gloss

macrumors 601
May 9, 2006
4,811
0
around/about
flyakite said:
Well if you knew anything about FPS, you'd know the human eye doesn't really perceive a difference with anything over 60fps. So in reality the GPU is doing much more work in OS X than it needs to, which creates more heat etc. There's absolutely no point in having it run higher all the time.
Not true. There are entire articles on this. We don't view things purely in terms of FPS, though even by that measure we can see well over 60 frames of motion per second.

Mainly, though, in a first person shooter, higher FPS is much, much better because the more often the screen is updated, the more accurate your mouse motions are going to be represented in the game. It's not just a matter of being able to see things moving smoothly, it's a matter of being able to play smoothly.

But then, in WoW, who cares?
 

Chrispy

macrumors 68020
Dec 27, 2004
2,126
1
Indiana
gloss said:
Not true. There are entire articles on this. We don't view things purely in terms of FPS, though even by that measure we can see well over 60 frames of motion per second.

Mainly, though, in a first person shooter, higher FPS is much, much better because the more often the screen is updated, the more accurate your mouse motions are going to be represented in the game. It's not just a matter of being able to see things moving smoothly, it's a matter of being able to play smoothly.

But then, in WoW, who cares?
This is true. That is why laser mice have been selling so well lately. It gives those people with crazy fast gaming machines that much more of an edge. And yeah... in WoW it is not quite as important as it is in UT or other FPS games.