AMD Threadripper 2950X versus i9 line?

[Kayley]

Hiya

I actually agree in that some things don't add up. So I backed up my config, deleted WoW, reinstalled and did the same tests (stricter).

Sorry Mirai I thought I made it clear (I failed) that I had my main running along with the 'slaves' (not this time). I tried my best to close down any other programs that might intefere with the testing. 30 accounts running, 20fps background, settings 1, triple buffering disabled, reduce input lag disabled, msaa none, multisample alpha Enabled, Post-process AA none, resample quality none, Graphics API DX11, physics interaction player only, UI scale on max. Here I let it 'record' via hwinfo for 7 mins so you can get the idea of the averages etc. CPU0 is being used by windows to manage everything I assume. No WoW processes are attached to it.

This is my Main, I changed the resolution to 2986x1680 to match yours. Settings are 10, everything enabled except Vertical Sync. Here
I said I would chug down to 45-55fps in boralus usually, same time of day, same crowded area... yet after the reinstall I have 79-85 fps and my 980ti is being utilized more. I can only assume I had changed a config file in the past and forgotten about it. Double and triple checked everything was on the highest ingame setting.

It's monday and I'm at work etc now, but the coming weekend I can do what wowbox40 suggested and film it externally with the usage monitors up. Until then I dunno.

*pagefile*
haha, before when I let windows assign the pagefile size my PC would eventually BSOD due to lack of Memory with 21 accounts + me on my main. I dedicated a SSD to it (pagefile) and now I run 30 accounts with my main + a stupid amount of random crap and it says I have 10gb RAM spare. It's insane.

*second edit*
We have two data entries Mirai. Yours and mine. Is there any standardised benchmarking tools we can use to simulate this mboxing load?

*third editzzzzzzz*
Can I please have a HWinfo report like the one I gave so I can see what your power draw, VRAM usage (etc) is like too? Just 5 mins standing around a crowded boralus (if alliance) or you wailing on a turnip in dalaran. tyty.

You helped build this pc years ago and I really don't mind you remote logging in to poke around at some point.
My ISBOXER profile is basic-- I literally just set the cpu wizard to no strategy then assigned the 'slaves' the bottom half of the CPU and the main the top half.

[MiRai]

We have two data entries Mirai. Yours and mine.

We have plenty of data from over the years since BFA didn't increase the hardware requirements all that much more than what was needed in Legion. Throughout that time, myself and others have helped numerous people build computers for multiboxing—both new multiboxers and already established multiboxers who began to realize that their current machine could no longer perform up to their expectations—and if someone came to me and told me they wanted to run 30 game clients (you originally wanted to run 10), I would never recommend that they attempt to do so on a single machine with modern day hardware.

You helped build this pc years ago and I really don't mind you remote logging in to poke around at some point.

I don't want to remote log in, I want you to share your ISBoxer profile.

My ISBOXER profile is basic-- I literally just set the cpu wizard to no strategy then assigned the 'slaves' the bottom half of the CPU and the main the top half.

Then why not just share it? I've asked two times now for you to share your profile, but for some reason, you aren't (or won't).

[Kayley]

Then why not just share it? I've asked two times now for you to share your profile, but for some reason, you aren't (or won't).

Because of two reasons really.
1) A little paranoia after being wrongfully banned.
2) I just didn't want to. But since you've gone all passive aggresive on me.. here you go. BORING AND BASIC SETUP FOR FARMING. (pastebin wouldn't let me post something so 'large'. I had to use a pastebin alternate).

Now i'm going to go over what I said originally once more, just to make sure you have followed along.

A Single 980 ti running my 30 'slaves'.
A Single 980 ti running my Main.
One screenshot showing the CPU and GPUs in action (stress testing with the main in Boralus, alts in Dalaran). - https://imgur.com/JCu8EH0
You helped fix it for me. it wasn't working as it did in Legion - https://www.dual-boxing.com/threads/...-dedicated-GPU
We had to rename the cards in order for World of Warcraft client to split the load properly.

So 4 cores, 8 HT runs the 30 accounts. Nvidia GPU #2 in the first screenshot.
The remaining 4 cores, 8 HT runs my main/windows/twitch etcetc with no throttling or bottleneck. Nvidia GPU #0.

C:/PassiveAggresive/Behaviour.exe /disable =]

You said you did a similar test in Silvermoon with your 5 clients and this was the result - https://i.imgur.com/wNgZ140.png
Your second GPU is at 0 because you aren't rendering your main right? the 5 clients are on settings 1 (etc) to mimick my 30 slave setup?

I was originally posting about the CPU differences and what they can achieve in WoW based on some testing I did with different hardware, I was bored at work one day.

This is my personal experience, yours may vary....
I have that same processor, same video card - great processor (although I retired it a couple years ago, so it's sitting around somewhere). I was able to run max 12x or 13x wow instances (13th just sat minimized). I had another machine next to it that ran 12 or 13x instances. For a total of 25/26 (The 26th acct was for phasing purposes - so it was just doing nothing). But I had to split them between the two machines. (Very cool innerspace/isboxer can do that!)

I tried running more than 12x actively and it s... the bed. on that machine. So I had to buy another machine. And I ran at like a 3 graphic level. 45 max frame rate, 12 on slaves in background.

Even with my i9-7980XE 18/36 core,, overclocked to ~4.2ghz, 64 gigs ram, with raid 0 NVMe drives. 1080ti's etc... it's really not possible to run more than 26 instances with Isboxer USING the built in FTL - you run out of the 6 key combos that make it possible - an issue I ran into. Maybe you could open more instances and use some other method to do FTL that would work? No clue.

With 10 characters, using graphics level 3 on my i9-7980xe (18/36 core), with a 1080ti using only a single 3440x1440 Ultrawide, I get about 45 FPS in town. Note the ~52 fps doing nothing - with no one around, and that's a 1080 ti card - at 3 graphic level. 60 foreground/15 background.
Although the main window is big. I will say it's still silky smooth, just not capped FPS wise - with 10 instances of wow at graphic level 3.

Hiya Kicksome
I appreciate some extra data with the X-series processors. 'Not built for gaming' my butt amirite. Yeah the FTL running out of key combinations is funny (to me anyway). Run your followers on Settings 1, dedicate a single 1080ti to it, then dedicate your second gpu to your 'main' client only. Mirai showed me how to get it to work for BFA correctly. Do it all on one PC <3

Post some HWINFO logs after it runs for 5-10 minutes people
I want to see evveerryyyttthhiiinnngggg.

[mbox_bob]

C:/PassiveAggresive/Behaviour.exe /disable =]

Hey, I've been following along and appreciate the extra info. You're right it started to get a little pass/agg, but that is mainly because what you are saying is rather outside of the realms of others experiences with their hardware, so much so that they seem a little unbelievable, and if it is really possible to get away with more limited hardware, then hey, we've been steering others the wrong way with some of their questions about what they need, and it would be really good to have some concrete data about what you can do with what hardware, and with what limits. Please don't take the prior incredulousness the wrong way, it was more the jaw hitting the floor type moments.

p.s. as we worked out the other day, ISBoxer's FTL can have upto 63 combos. The WoW macros can work with left and right modifiers of the same key, so leftshift + rightshift actually works, which opens up a bunch of extra settings that the default wizard currently excludes by default; yes it limits to 26 currently, but you can always fix up the remaining ones.

[MiRai]

I just didn't want to. But since you've gone all passive aggresive on me.. here you go.

It's as bob stated—you were saying things outside of the realm of anything we had heard, or personally experienced before, and I just didn't believe it.

When people are asking for help in building a computer for multiboxing, it's only fair that I provide accurate information when I give them an answer, especially since I tend to dabble in this area of hardware. Now, if someone is saying that they can multibox 30 game clients on a 4C/8T CPU with a 980 Ti, well... that sets off an alarm, not only because I regularly speak to people who struggle to run five game clients at a lower resolution on hardware that's just a few years old, it's wildly different than anything I've personally experienced throughout the several hardware configurations I've used over the years. However, I had a sneaking suspicion of what was actually happening, for which your profile would reveal, and as I suspected, it contains the answer.

Whenever you are running a large amount of game clients, you are running them at a minuscule resolution, and this vastly reduces the overall load required from your hardware. So, let's break this down...

You have two configurations where you're running 30 game clients:

1. (573 x 240) = 137,250 Pixels (x 30) = 4,125,600 Total Pixels (21:9 Layout)
2. (426 x 240) = 102,240 Pixels (x 30) = 3,067,200 Total Pixels (16:9 Layout)

To put this into perspective:

Display Size

1920 x 1080 Display = 2,073,600
2560 x 1440 Display = 3,686,400

3440 x 1440 Display = 4,953,600

3840 x 2160 Display = 8,294,400

Multiboxing Setups
(1920 x 1080) = 2,073,600 Pixels (x 5) = 10,368,000 Total Pixels
(2560 x 1440) = 3,686,400 Pixels (x 5) = 18,432,000 Total Pixels
(3840 x 1630) = 6,259,200 Pixels (x 5) = 31,296,000 Total Pixels (My Setup)
(2752 x 1152) = 3,170,304 Pixels (x 10) = 31,703,040 Total Pixels (Kicksome's Above Layout)

Looking at these numbers, you can see that the total pixel count being driven by your GPU, when multiboxing 30 game clients, is less than the actual total pixels of the 21:9 display itself. The same applies for your 16:9 setup, where you're pushing less pixels than the actual 25x14 display. So, naturally, this would be a very light load for the system to handle. In addition, the game clients in your 21:9 setup are running at a resolution of 573x240, which is nowhere near the 3840x1630 that I'm running mine at. As you can see above, both Kicksome and myself are driving a very similar pixel count, with the same GPU, and our hardware usage is probably also similar (in-game settings can differ).

This is why your numbers are wildly different than others—you aren't running 30 game clients at 3440x1440, you're running 30 game clients at 573x240, and they just happen to be on a 3440x1440 display.

Mystery solved; case closed.