Minimum pc for 5 box

[Ualaa]

I was using a Q6600 system, quite a while back.
And regularly having follow break on epic ground mounts in battlegrounds.
Or having 280% speed flyers, break follow when flying anything other than a straight line...
That prompted my upgrade.

Could have probably played on lower settings.
My main is usually around 3/4's of the eye-candy on, and the slaves around 1/4.

[Jeremiah]

Simple answer, no.

I haven't encountered any other boxers who run on iMac but I wouldn't really advise it for 5 boxing.

I run 3 accounts on an i5 iMac with 12gb ram in Mac OSX with a key cloner only.

OSX is great for boxing and I'd like to see a complete suite like ISBOXER for it.

The problem with the iMac is HEAT! The iMac i5s and i7s are easily powerful enough but because of their compact design, the fans fail when you run 3-5 clients, hence I only run 3.

Also, you cannot assign memory using OSX and as far as I'm aware, you can't assign the memory in fusion ware which is a critical part of boxing.

Mac for fun but for owning in boxing, go for a PC (Can't believe I'm advocating buying a PC /cry)

[Peli]

I was using a Q6600 system, quite a while back.
And regularly having follow break on epic ground mounts in battlegrounds.
Or having 280% speed flyers, break follow when flying anything other than a straight line...
That prompted my upgrade.

Could have probably played on lower settings.
My main is usually around 3/4's of the eye-candy on, and the slaves around 1/4.

I've never had an issue with it breaking follow on epic ground mounts (except when those massive Elekk asses get hung up on low flying airplanes and whatnot, but that's not a system performance issue...) My shaman are only level 60, so I can't comment on epic flyers. The system will have to do for now, though, since although it is 4 years old, I don't think I could convince the wife that I need an upgrade just yet. Like I said, I just used the default slider bar and set the master to High (one from best) and the slaves to Low (one from worst).

Anyone know if getting a dedicated sound card would fix the sound stuttering issue and maybe free up some breathing space for my processor?

[zer0patches]

The rule of thumb that I currently go by is that if an SSD uses a Marvell controller then, it's probably safe; and if it
uses a SandForce controller, beware. However, OCZ just released a new line of drives that use an Indilinx controller
rather than SandForce and Intel's new 520 SSDs that were rumored to use SandForce might be using something
totally different (Anobit?).

I think sandforce has gotten a bad rap from all the pr and issues with the newest drives based off sandforce. I have been using (RAID0) 4x ocz 80gb vertex 2's (sandforce) for over a year with no problems.

SSD's in general including intel and others have always battled issues with firmware bugs etc. It's not just a sandforce issue. You can avoid a lot of the compatibility issues if you do a little research before hand.

Even though the first gen sandforce drives do not support trim in raid I have yet to see a very noticeable drop in performance athough the numbers below I just benchmarked were slightly lower than a fresh install.

Originally on a fresh install with new drives I was getting writes around 950 MB/S Write and 1325 MB/S Read but honestly I can;t really tell much of a difference. =p

Small file performance for files less than 64k is supposed to be much improved on the newer chipsets but It hasn't really held back the performance that much. From post to desktop was about 14 to 18 seconds in windows 7 x64 on a new install.

I would like to upgrade to 4x vertex 3's at some point. =p

[Ughmahedhurtz]

Originally on a fresh install with new drives I was getting writes around 950 MB/S Write and 1325 MB/S Read but honestly I can;t really tell much of a difference. =p

Good lord. I really need to look into upgrading to newer drives. I've been happy with these but damn...those speeds...



And my single-drive (backup drive) in that same system:


And my normal HDDs in raid0 on the other PC (same exact system, just HDDs different):


Still much better than platter drives but nowhere near yours, especially on write speeds.

[Nindenumene]

Hi all.
Im using a Q66002.4ghz@ 3.65ghz watercooled. With a ATI HD 5870. Atm I have 8gbs of ram running at 1600 6.8.6.24 CAS. My sound is controlled by creative xfi-elite pro which has its own memory and prosessor to handle sound. My harddrives are watercooled SAS scsi drives 2x15k in raid 0.

(This is an old computer , but it was very good when i bought it and build it. As for performance in wow

In singel account playing i have around 150fps on ultra settings 1900x1086(or what it is)

My discoveries: I found in the Catalyst program settings of the AMD card, that in advanced section , if you have those settings at max, this will slow down wow to an extent that you will be doing 15-20 fps...even on my system... when I lowered the settings to performance mode the fps went up to 150+.

These settings are not ingame---these settings you need to adjust in the g-cards own program. Put youre card to performance mode...
The cards settings is often in the middle by default. When I lowered those settings I could still have the settings on full ingame..but just with 150+ more fps.

Boxing 5 chars: Settings on low, with fair/good view distance.
Im boxing 5 chars now, and iam around 50-60 fps (maxed by fps limiter). in crowded cities ..like orgrimmar - i have around 20-30 fps.


So just my tip, check youre grapich cards own program and check for performance mode. (right click desktop>properties>advances>youre cards program>performance