AMD Ryzen 3900X

Fayman

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
133
Reaction score
18
Points
18
Another question: has anybody experience with stability on new CPUs, mainly on AMD Ryzen 3900X, Intel i9-9900K or any Xeon-System?

Has anybody "reallife experience" with MQ2 with EQ with one of these CPUs under Win10?
 

PeteSampras

Your UI is fucking you. Stop using it.
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
3,956
Reaction score
36
Points
38
So i mean you are just talking scalability. Even with the 88XX 8 core setup you can just assign cpu affinity for each EQ/MQ2. and you can get many instances on each cpu. so if you have 32 core your CPU can probably handle hundreds of instances. So then it comes down to RAM and graphics that will bottleneck you. if you can remove all the RAM and draw calls then you can probably still get 60+ instances with 128GB RAM and a 1080/2080 card.



There is also the issue of so many instances accessing the hard drive at the same time to write/read file when only one access command can happen at any give time. So the more things fighting for read /write time could possibly/maybe call issues.. but if you have NVME/SSD then there are so many read/writes that even 60+ instances might not be an issue.
 

dewey2461

Developer
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
1,779
Reaction score
149
Points
63
I've been thinking of replacing an AMD FX8320 8 core machine with one of the AMD 16 core CPU's so I'm very interested in what others care share.

Any of the new CPU's will have no problems running 12 eq instance with the only real optimization is using MQ2FPS to cut down the graphics calls for the background instances to 1 in 30.

If you are looking to run a full raid then you'll want to do some searching to dig up the "extreme optimization" threads where you setup the background support characters to use stick figures, remove resources so they don't get loaded, set the viewport to 1 pixel, etc.
 

Fayman

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
133
Reaction score
18
Points
18
The decision is a compatibility issue too. AMD is wellknown for being a bit more tricky in drivers and critical apps since decades. But the new CPU is partly faster e.g. Passmark and surpasses in some areas the i9-9900K and even a 10.000$ Xeon. I have also a chance on a Xeon.

At moment I am playing a raid with 2x18 toons per system which slows the system down at critical speed so that EQBC cannot correctly handle communication anymore. CPUs are with maxfps fg30 bg10 at around 80% if all other toons are inactive at fg30 bg1 (which is surely not useable). 12 cores of the latest generation would help.

I think the biggest ram-bottleneck will be graphics memory. The new system will have around 64GB of Ram. The GTX980Ti with 6GB has room for around 54 toons. A 2080Ti will boost that to the max of a raid. The 64GB Ram fits for it. Only the processor is now a potential problem.

Passmark (pure int benchmark as far as I remember) counts:

old CPU: 5539 (18 active toons)
i9-9900K: 20219 (scaled 72 toons)
AMD3900X: 31816 (scaled 108 toons)

So a AMD3900X would reach the raid limit as a single system. But I am not sure if the passmark cpu benchmark is a good measurement for it. The next bottleneck could be the ping of the provider or the reaction time of the LAN chips. A M.2-Samsung970EvoPlus with around 3,6MB/s datarate and around 560k-620k IOPS should be sufficient which is 5 times better then the current SSD generation - that makes the M.2 at around 90 toons in a possible raid config and maxes it.

Now I think about the PCI-Lanes. AMD may have PCIe4 but there is no real advantage as long as the current PCI4-devices are not really faster then PCI3-devices and AMDs graphics still sucks compared to Nvidias even with PCIe4 (despite NVidia has more Ram with 11GB). Intel i9-9900K works with 40 lanes. The Intel-X-CPUs go up to 68 and the Xeons are the same. So comparing all system parts and having the M.2 attached with full speed I wonder which of the CPUs does not go into 100%-mode while getting ultrafast data from a M.2 - which is the current problem even at highend CPUs. That means - if the CPUpower is wasted on transfering data from the M.2 then what is left for the raid power.

If anybody has real life experience with such a multicore-M.2-combo then this would be highly interesting. Perhaps I can test a dual xeon system with 128GB with a Quadro RTX4000 which corresponds to the 2080RTX. I will see.

In games the Intel is better in nearly every game. But never saw a test with EQ.

AMD3900X or i9-9900K - difficult question...
 

PeteSampras

Your UI is fucking you. Stop using it.
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
3,956
Reaction score
36
Points
38
i wouldnt have enough accounts to max out my desktop or laptop. even with only 16gb of ram, a 980m, and second gen SSD, and quadcore cpu i could get 14 instances on my old laptop (i had 14 accounts) bought 5 years ago. My current laptop and desktop would both smash the shit out of that number. Both have dual NVME raid 0, 64GB ram, 6 core (12 w/ HT), and 1080 Titan XP (desktop) or dual 1080s (laptop). I am fairly positive I could run a 54 man raid on either machine with this set up if i had the accounts, used the viewport for offscreen, limited background fps, and used stickfigure plugin. If you had twice as many, or 5 times as many CPUs then I have complete and total faith you could 54 man with all the current top end tech in a single machine.
 

William12

Leveling Since 1999!
Joined
Mar 20, 2007
Messages
2,615
Reaction score
109
Points
63
I run 10 groups on 2700x with AMD RX 580 and 64gbs of ram and that only brings the CPU to 65-75% usage.
 

dewey2461

Developer
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
1,779
Reaction score
149
Points
63
I run 10 groups on 2700x with AMD RX 580 and 64gbs of ram and that only brings the CPU to 65-75% usage.
What steps did you take to optimize the client to minimize cpu / gpu usage?