Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Oldschool61

Anyone using i3-6100 or 6300 for Squad

Recommended Posts

Simple question.  Who's got an i3-6100 or higher series cpu running Squad?  Thinking of possible upgrading in near future.  i3 and i5 perform fairly closely in most games.  Many still only use one core with a couple threads. 

Lots of videos on youtube doing side by side comparison of the i5 vs i3 in many games.  Yes the i5 is slightly better in some games but the vast majority they are neck and neck.  I think the main difference between them is 2 cores less for i3 and smaller L3 and L2 cache which is what makes the biggest difference when clocked similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I3 6100, gtx 950, 4 gig ddr4 ram. 40-60 FPS at 1080p on 72 player server during intense fighting. It's a dream.

You won't notice any difference between the skylake i5 vs i3 if your playing on a single monitor at 1080p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40-60 FPS at 1080p on 72 player servers

I see people giving this range without caveating that it's closer to 40 FPS most of the time. It's the main reason I stick to 64p or less servers. Just personal preference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play on FX 6300, but i use R7 260x 2gb

On a full server i get around 30 fps or a bit less. 

On a less crowded server i get something around 50 fps

 

i play on 768p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using a FX 6300, but with a R7 260x, i get around 60 fps on a low populated server on 768p on almost everything on epic (textures MED, AA OFF, shadows resolution MED)
Don't know if update my GPU to R9, my CPU is gonna bottleneck the R9...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple question.  Who's got an i3-6100 or higher series cpu running Squad?  Thinking of possible upgrading in near future.  i3 and i5 perform fairly closely in most games.  Many still only use one core with a couple threads. 

Lots of videos on youtube doing side by side comparison of the i5 vs i3 in many games.  Yes the i5 is slightly better in some games but the vast majority they are neck and neck.  I think the main difference between them is 2 cores less for i3 and smaller L3 and L2 cache which is what makes the biggest difference when clocked similar.

 

Dude, if it does really important, why Intel Pentium G4500 (same architecture) does not achieve same performance as Core i3 in games?

I think count of cores is not just marketing trick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that with most setting on high??

 

With my old Core i3-550 almost doesn't matter what settings are...Animations - this is problem of performance and count of operations, what your CPU could "eat" is more important thing. IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What separates the i3 and the i5 on a core level is the difference in L2 and L3 cache.  This makes a huge difference in performance in gaming

as well as other cpu intensive operations.

i3 has 2x256kb L2 cache and 3 or 4 mb L3 cache depending on model.

i5 has 4x256kb L2 cache and 6mb L3 cache.

Aside from the obvious core count (i3-2 core/2 threads) and i5 (4 core/4 threads).

If you ran on one core and reduced the L3 and L2 cache to same levels of the i3 the i5 would be the same or nearly same in

performance as the i3.  Increasing the L3 cache is the trick intel and AMD use to boost performance in a chip line.

For basic computing its no bill deal but in cpu intensive game and video editing type programs the cache level makes a huge difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, if it does really important, why Intel Pentium G4500 (same architecture) does not achieve same performance as Core i3 in games?

I think count of cores is not just marketing trick.

A Pentium and a Core i3 have the same number of cores, but the i3 has Hyper-Threading which lets it do two threads per core, twice as many threads as the Pentium chip. That is why it performs noticably better in many games.

 

I've got an i3 4170, it runs Squad just fine. The 6100 will do a little better even, especially on power draw.

 

An i3 will bottleneck high end cards in more heavily taxing games, so get the i5 if you're going with a GTX970 or better. When paired with midrange video cards the i3 offers virtually the same performance as the i5 in any GPU bound game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see people giving this range without caveating that it's closer to 40 most of the time. It's the main reason I stick to 64p or less servers. Just personal preference.

The difference between 40 player servers and 72 player servers are night and day.  I wish we had more 40 player servers.  Right now, the servers and it's clients are literally CRYING in FPS PAIN if there are more than 40-50 players in a server.  40 player servers seem to be a sweet spot for this game at the moment.  70+fps stable on a 40 man server VS 45-50fps on a 72 man server.   Those that brag about having no problems playing this game are running on a beast CPU ahead of any of this years games potential benchmarks.  The issues are either server side or they nailed the head on the animation system.  You notice a huge difference when more players are in a server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to join a squad league team that plays an 18 player team.  I think this game really shines when you have 2 squads of 9 or 3 squads of 6 working together.  Much rather play those games than 4 squads of 9 with 2 confused squad leaders leading 8 plebs each. 18vs18 seems to be the competitive sweet spot for this game ATM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using a FX 6300, but with a R7 260x, i get around 60 fps on a low populated server on 768p on almost everything on epic (textures MED, AA OFF, shadows resolution MED)

Don't know if update my GPU to R9, my CPU is gonna bottleneck the R9...

 

Yes it will, I have an 8350 with an R9 Fury and my CPU bottlenecks the card big time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it will, I have an 8350 with an R9 Fury and my CPU bottlenecks the card big time.

big difference between your fury than his 260x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using a FX 6300, but with a R7 260x, i get around 60 fps on a low populated server on 768p on almost everything on epic (textures MED, AA OFF, shadows resolution MED)

Don't know if update my GPU to R9, my CPU is gonna bottleneck the R9...

Turn your settings to epic. tell me if you notice any fps difference. Im guessing you lose 5 fps.  This is a problem for all of us.  The scaling in the unreal engine is terrible.    It's unbelievable how you can set your game to low settings and gain 5 fps, yet the graphical fidelity looks like a 300% downgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to point out that the DEVS of this game are really amazing.  They know the problem and are working hard to fix it.  If you check out the number of posts I've made and the direction my fingers have been pointing, [right or wrong].  They haven't censored a single one of my posts.  They know what is wrong, and I have full faith they will take care of it when they are able to.  Cheers to you all!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×