64-bit or 32-bit?

[nusse]

The i7-720QM can turbo-boost to 2.8GHz which it probably does since WoW is also probably single-threaded or at most uses 2 threads. The i7 is not the problem here. The graphics card is also not the problem. Wine is known to suck hard, especially with ATI graphics cards. Wine is also only 32-bit so it doesn't matter if your operating system is 32 or 64bit.
A Core2Duo SU7300 1.3GHz with a Geforce G105M runs WoW at 29,3FPS (1280x1024 high settings no AA and AF) on windoze for comparision.

Thanks for this by the way .. you are dead on in your assessment. The i7 is not some world beater by any stretch, but with the turbo boost being native to the BIOS on my 1645, it makes a HUGE difference and I am getting the same or better results now as to what you listed and am content ... I can play to my satisfaction now and that is all that matters.

Only drawback is that it seems a thread like this can't be started without 2 or 3 individuals bringing them down.

[blackshard]

Assuming it's a 1.6GHz mobile i7, I believe that's about 50% faster than my mobile i5, which is itself about 4x faster than my old Core Duo. So that probably makes it close to 10x faster than the typical CPU when WoW was released.

If WoW is CPU-limited on a system like that, then they've done something very wrong.

Are you kidding, aren't you?
mobile i7 is just a quad-core processor, i5 is dual core. On non-multithreaded processes it means that an i5 is just as fast as an i7.

Yes, an i7 has 50% more execution units than an i5, but it doesn't absolutely mean that it will really perform 50% faster. Absolutely!

An i5 is not 4x faster than a core2duo, except you were running a 500 Mhz core 2 duo on your previous notebook.

[WillyThePimp]

" I will simply say that in my case, I updated teh bios (BTW .. the BIOS update fixed a power throttling issue .. NOT A CPU ISSUE) and the tweaks I did were NOT CPU related"

the PCGH benchmark show that if you turn of the Hypertheating in the BIOS your system will be faster in WOW ! so HT is just an antitechniue.

"But thanks for trolling and ruining a thread anyway with your non-knowledge."

my non-knowledge is that the WOW engine is based on an 2003 pbuffer engine bottleneckt by the CPU on any system!

your 30-40fps status report for wine is a complete nonsence because an i7 2,8ghz make 30-40 fps on windows in the PCGH benchmark test.

so your point about an wine problem is invalid.

"I ignore yours."

yes ignore me you can do it just because your i7 is to fast to be a bottleneck.

Besides your terrible use of the english language, your "non-knowledge" (Whatever that means, I'm just guessing) is ridiculously wrong and silly. Could you please tell me how the hell you can recreate the bloom effect WoW has with a Pbuffer? If WoW uses Pbuffers, why does it use VBOs along FBOs? If you are so ignorant, why even bother commenting? Why? WHY?!!

[WillyThePimp]

Are you kidding, aren't you?
mobile i7 is just a quad-core processor, i5 is dual core. On non-multithreaded processes it means that an i5 is just as fast as an i7.

Yes, an i7 has 50% more execution units than an i5, but it doesn't absolutely mean that it will really perform 50% faster. Absolutely!

An i5 is not 4x faster than a core2duo, except you were running a 500 Mhz core 2 duo on your previous notebook.

4/2 = 2.

A core I7 has TWICE as much cores, not half the cores more. FYI

[movieman]

mobile i7 is just a quad-core processor, i5 is dual core. On non-multithreaded processes it means that an i5 is just as fast as an i7.

The 1.6GHz i7 clocks higher than my i5 in turbo mode, so it wins even there. And who'd base their CPU purchases on single-threaded performance these days?

Yes, an i7 has 50% more execution units than an i5, but it doesn't absolutely mean that it will really perform 50% faster. Absolutely!

The i7 has twice as many execution units, and actual, real benchmarks show it's 50% faster than my i5. Which isn't surprising as it runs about 30% slower when all four cores are active.

An i5 is not 4x faster than a core2duo, except you were running a 500 Mhz core 2 duo on your previous notebook.

You're right, I double-checked the benchmarks and it's only twice as fast. I think I was confusing it with being 4x faster than my old Pentium-4.

Either way, the 1.6GHz mobile i7 is faster than almost any other non-i7 Intel x86 CPU on the planet (desktop or mobile). So calling it 'mediocre' is bizarre.

[blackshard]

4/2 = 2.

A core I7 has TWICE as much cores, not half the cores more. FYI

So quote me where I said the opposite. I think you can't because I clearly said: "... mobile i7 is just a quad-core processor, i5 is dual core ..."

[devius]

3. Problem went away and am playing and getting comparable results to my AMD System which is of newer components

Just so you know, it's okay to be wrong. And in this case .. you are. I am not even remotely suggesting the i7 is some magical processor but it WAS NOT THE PROBLEM IN MY CASE and is not nearly the crap-proc you are trying to make it out to be.

Ahhh... so you met Qaridarium and it seems he likes you
"I have a 486DX2-66MHz that is faster than your "magical" i7!!! i7 is slower than the Z80 on my Master System!!"

BTW, you may also like Heroes of Newerth which is similar to WoW (As far as I can tell), has a native linux port and should run flawlessly on your system. Oh wait, that's right, your system is slower than a Gameboy so you're out of luck.

[blackshard]

The 1.6GHz i7 clocks higher than my i5 in turbo mode, so it wins even there. And who'd base their CPU purchases on single-threaded performance these days?

Not a coherent speak here. Nehalem-based processors got Turbo Mode not for joke, but to get optimized performance in poor threaded applications, expecially single threaded ones.

Lots of games, nowadays, are still single threaded.

Nothing to say about the rest.

[mirv]

I've not read the entire thread, so I could be talking about something completely off-topic, but just to point out that many people forget about RAM speed and associated latency.
Could power issues have been related to CPU clocking speeds? Another point to look at.
But, if the problem is fixed, then I guess this thread no longer has any point other than for comparing e-wang.

[WillyThePimp]

So quote me where I said the opposite. I think you can't because I clearly said: "... mobile i7 is just a quad-core processor, i5 is dual core ..."

"Yes, an i7 has 50% more execution units than an i5, but it doesn't absolutely mean that it will really perform 50% faster. Absolutely!" You said.

50% more cores of 2 is 1 more core. So, 1+2=3, not 4.

Got it?