What PC do you use for playing Warframe smoothly?

[(PSN)ChiefStevy]

I play on the PS4 but I can already admit that PC players have a lot of advantages over console players, such as the increased population and Warframe.market, so I want to try out the experience of playing on it. I didn't have much trouble picking which PS4 to buy since there's only one version, but there are just hundreds of variety in choosing what kind of PC to get and I've been think about buying a new one with the same issue of deciding. So, PC players, what kind of computer do you own? Desktop, Laptop, gaming-specific, bought in parts and assembled by hand, bought in full?

Also, try not to throw some numbers at me that I may or may not understand, my current budget is $1100 but preferable one around $400, include the monitor if that's important, and let's not start any PC-console wars.

[Phasedragon]

http://pcpartpicker.com/list/hNTJxY

 

This is my setup. Way overkill for Warframe. Biggest thing for me is running at 144hz because I play PVP primarily. This does so easily, gets anywhere from 200-300 fps. However, since Warframe is mostly CPU-bound, that Graphics card is only really used at 50% at most. I have a friend who can do the same framerate for half the price total, primarily because his graphics card is significantly cheaper. He also has a mini PC, the Gigabyte BRIX, that is basically designed to be nothing more than a media machine, and it runs Warframe at 60fps. I don't know which one exactly, but he got it used for about $200. Warframe is just really easy to run well, and just as easy to run very well.

 

If you're looking to build a PC specifically for Warframe, you could get away with pretty cheap. $1100 is going to get you something that will be so powerful you'll never want to even look at your PS4 again. Never again will you endure 30fps!

 

And if you really want actual builds that you can use, check out reddit.com/r/buildapc or reddit.com/r/buildapcforme for a lot more help. Just make sure to follow the format!

[bowiespoon]

Warframe isn't a particularly hard game to run, I use an alienware mk14 at max settings and get a solid 60 fps, but my brother uses a much weaker pc and gets the same results at max settings.

[Urlan]

You might want to check the website, partspicker as they have guides and part breakdowns for many applications. I must echo bowiespoon, the game isn't demanding for a modern title but it is still more sore than back in 2013. The game puts most of its load on the graphics card. Budget allows, your graphics card is probably going to be the main focus of any upgrade price wise right now, but depending on the other games you intend to play, an nvidia 960 might be right up your ally, or older options like the 760 and 770 series. AMD and Nvidia though are coming out with a new series right now, so try to keep an eye on them and the price comparisons between the new and older tech.

[DatDarkOne]

I play on a custom rig that I built myself. 

AMD FX 6300 Black Edition 6 core CPU with MSI 970 Gaming mobo.  16gb of ram.  Current video card is AMD 6850 Black Editon which will be replaced by AMD r9 card for future DirectX 12 gaming.  You don't need any of this to play as the game isn't as intensive as something like Shadows of Mordor or Witcher 3 on max settings.  If it helps, I got my CPU, Mobo, and ram all on Amazon for just above $200.  I priced a damn good Radeaon R9 video card in the 250 range.  You can switch any of those to your chosen brand (Intel/Nvidia) with similar results.  Building your own PC is considerably cheaper than getting a pre-built one.  Not that you have to do that to have a great gaming experience.  Good look fellow Tenno and I hope this helps you.  :D 

 

Spoiler

Just in case you're wondering why I went with the slightly older CPU.  That specific processor has been overclocked and tested to 6 ghz stable without extreme cooling being used.  :D

 

[Troll_Logic]

It's the video card.  Buy the best you one can afford.  If you are going to spend over $300 (GTX 970) on the card, then don't buy anything other than GTX 1080. 

[taiiat]

Warframe is generally relatively efficient overall, so getting consistent performance isn't unnecessarily expensive.
assembling a Computer yourself is very easy to do, everything basically only goes together one way, so it's always my recommended course of action. especially since it saves a notable amount of cost.

here's a ballpark example of a high end entry level system (missing a Case but that totally varies pending personal preferences - also missing a Monitor if you must get one, this would do fine), that is capable of playing most any Video Game, not just Warframe.
http://pcpartpicker.com/list/QPdD3F
and once you're looking for more, or even when the (pretty old but good enough for the time being) aging Architecture means you need to replace Motherboard, CPU and probably Memory - many of the things here can be kept, for all future computers you use for upwards of the next 20 years. Power Supply being the key example.

however if you're serious about keeping costs down, buying used parts is where to go. just check whatever user listings websites are popular in your region.

 

 

i don't represent what's practical, but since you ask, i play Warframe (and whatever else) on this. http://pcpartpicker.com/user/taiiat/saved/8fLQzy
just like any other system that has removed as many bottlenecks in Warframe as possible, my performance averages ~100FPS in the heaviest situations(like 4 Player Survival with 50+ Enemies on the map), upwards to ~120 where it is most of the time, which is where i have it capped.
once board partner GTX1070's are out, i'll probably be grabbing one.

 

 

critical information though - Warframe is completely CPU bound.
anyone that tells you otherwise has no idea what they're talking about and should not be helping people with technical stuff related to Warframe.

 

Edit:

16 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

It's the video card.  Buy the best you one can afford.  If you are going to spend over $300 (GTX 970) on the card, then don't buy anything other than GTX 1080. 

you forgot to mention how irrelevant high end GPU's are for Warframe(but not in general). so that the one looking for the information knows what to do.

Edited June 9, 2016 by taiiat

[Troll_Logic]

16 minutes ago, taiiat said:

critical information though - Warframe is completely CPU bound.

I don't believe that for a second.  So I can get a 6700k CPU with a crappy video card and it'll look as good and run as well as my high speed video card with old cpu?  I don't think so.

17 minutes ago, taiiat said:

you forgot to mention how irrelevant high end GPU's are for Warframe(but not in general). so that the one looking for the information knows what to do.

My point was that if he was going to spend over $300 on a video card then buy the GTX 1080.  Everything else between the two is waste of money.  The GTX 1080 is in a class by itself with it's revolutionary performance and bang for buck.

[taiiat]

3 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

I don't believe that for a second.

still true anyways. you can be like the other uninformed Consumers and think otherwise, but Warframe is completely CPU bound.
you have the freedom to be incorrect, doesn't bother me any. unless people try to start misinforming others with it.

5 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

My point was that if he was going to spend over $300 on a video card then buy the GTX 1080.  Everything else between the two is waste of money.  The GTX 1080 is in a class by itself with it's revolutionary performance and bang for buck.

but that's also misinformed. we don't know how it compares to other products that it's going to compete against (like R9 400?).
buying any GPU from the new series of either side currently is a waste of money (or a big gamble, close enough). but then ofcourse buying something that isn't from the new series of either side is also then technically a waste as well.

[Phasedragon]

21 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

I don't believe that for a second.  So I can get a 6700k CPU with a crappy video card and it'll look as good and run as well as my high speed video card with old cpu?  I don't think so.

My point was that if he was going to spend over $300 on a video card then buy the GTX 1080.  Everything else between the two is waste of money.  The GTX 1080 is in a class by itself with it's revolutionary performance and bang for buck.

Absolutely. I don't know what CPU he has, but that friend of mine is running 200+ FPS in warframe on an HD 7970. 

And no, not really. There are still plenty of options between. The GTX 1080 is definitely the best at its price point, but that's to be expected. You can still get very good performance for the money at almost all price points leading up to it.

[Troll_Logic]

30 minutes ago, taiiat said:

still true anyways. you can be like the other uninformed Consumers and think otherwise, but Warframe is completely CPU bound.
you have the freedom to be incorrect, doesn't bother me any. unless people try to start misinforming others with it.

Sorry, it isn't.  If it was, then it Warframe would be the very first eye-candy game that was completely CPU bound while the video card didn't matter.  My rig stays over 100 fps at 2560x1600 and you're telling my my 2nd gen i5 is pushing that?

Sorry.  It doesn't works like that.

[Troll_Logic]

17 minutes ago, Phasedragon said:

And no, not really. There are still plenty of options between. The GTX 1080 is definitely the best at its price point, but that's to be expected. You can still get very good performance for the money at almost all price points leading up to it.

But I think it would be a waste of money.  My point is that up to about $300, a player can get very good performance for that money.  However, once a player goes to $400 or more, they are buying "the expensive performance cards that are the last generation."  If they are going to $400 or more, they should buy the new generation.

[Phasedragon]

5 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

Sorry, it isn't.  If it was, then it Warframe would be the very first eye-candy game that was completely CPU bound while the video card didn't matter.  My rig stays over 100 fps at 2560x1600 and you're telling my my 2nd gen i5 is pushing that?

Sorry.  It doesn't works like that.

Well, running at higher resolution does put a bit more onto the GPU, yes, but I think you would be surprised. Check out your GPU usage ingame (actually ingame, not liset) with something like afterburner. What GPU do you have, anyway?

[taiiat]

1 hour ago, Troll_Logic said:

My rig stays over 100 fps at 2560x1600 and you're telling my my 2nd gen i5 is pushing that?

yep, because almost the entire load is CPU bound.
because almost the entire load is world state, AI, Et Cetera. Warframe is obnoxiously efficient GPU side.

[Troll_Logic]

13 minutes ago, taiiat said:

yep, because almost the entire load is CPU bound.
because almost the entire load is world state, AI, Et Cetera. Warframe is obnoxiously efficient GPU side.

Bull.  Anyone that says a minimally capable DX11 card will push the exact same framerates with the exact same max video config settings at the same high resolution as a GTX980 is delusional.

[(PSN)ChiefStevy]

I've tried to prevent a PC-console war... Instead I've caused an internal PC war. Lol thanks everybody, for your answers. I'll be taking everything into account in getting a new PC.

[Troll_Logic]

22 minutes ago, (PS4)ChiefStevy said:

I've tried to prevent a PC-console war... Instead I've caused an internal PC war. Lol thanks everybody, for your answers. I'll be taking everything into account in getting a new PC.

No war.  Just a disagreement.  Happens all the time.  Post back with what you get and how it works.  :)

[DatDarkOne]

26 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

Bull.  Anyone that says a minimally capable DX11 card will push the exact same framerates with the exact same max video config settings at the same high resolution as a GTX980 is delusional.

actually I noticed an improvement of Warframe after changing my mobo, CPU, and ram. The video card stayed the same. By that same token, I got slightly better frame rate on my work PC by adding a dedicated video card. The larger improvement was with the upgraded CPU. Not knocking anyone. Just giving a little more information.

[taiiat]

34 minutes ago, (PS4)ChiefStevy said:

Instead I've caused an internal PC war.

you didn't cause anything, it's not your fault.

[Troll_Logic]

3 minutes ago, taiiat said:

you didn't cause anything, it's not your fault.

Let's all turn on DatDarkOne.  He's the problem!

 

GO!  GET HIM!!!!!!

[DatDarkOne]

19 minutes ago, Troll_Logic said:

Let's all turn on DatDarkOne.  He's the problem!

 

GO!  GET HIM!!!!!!

LOL.  :D    

[Phasedragon]

1 hour ago, Troll_Logic said:

Bull.  Anyone that says a minimally capable DX11 card will push the exact same framerates with the exact same max video config settings at the same high resolution as a GTX980 is delusional.

Fine, I'll do it myself.

This is a GPU usage graph of my GTX 980 while playing with unlocked framerate, 1080 resolution, highest settings (except disabled post processing crap like blur and depth of field) alongside an i5-4690k running at 3.5GHZ.

 

As you can see, it jumps up and down a few times at the start because of loading screens, and then being in the liset it's high. This is because the CPU has nothing to do in the liset, so it maxes out and reaches 350+ FPS.

Then, I started a survival mission. usage dropped for the loading screen, then went back up when I was on an empty map. It was still very high at this point because there were no enemies. It was around 250-300 FPS here. 

Once I started the mission, enemies spawned, and the CPU had to start working, so the GPU wasn't allowed to run free anymore. As such, it started dropping down to only 50% usage, and stayed there for most of the mission, still pumping out between 170 to 200 FPS.

From this, we can conclude that the GPU is only really being used at 50% for the most part in an actual game. There are cases where it will go higher, but those are only when nothing is happening. This means that a graphics card that performs half as well as the GTX 980 should achieve approximately the same results. This is also supported by my friend, who runs at the same resolution and framerate as me, with an HD 7970, and if you were to look at benchmarks, that card consistently performs just over half that of the 980.

 

Even then, this is a fairly minimal amount of load. This was the first 2 minutes of a pluto survival mission. In other missions where there are more enemies for the CPU to process, it is likely that the GPU would be limited even more, and probably drop down to 30-40% usage. Even then, this was solo, without anything happening. Other players, powers, large amounts of death, particle effects, etc. would mostly be handled by the CPU, and the GPU would be barely put to the test at all. A high end GPU is simply unnecessary to play Warframe at 1080p, or even higher resolutions like 2560, if there are more than a trivial amount of enemies.

Edited June 10, 2016 by Phasedragon

[Urlan]

15 hours ago, taiiat said:

Warframe is generally relatively efficient overall, so getting consistent performance isn't unnecessarily expensive.
assembling a Computer yourself is very easy to do, everything basically only goes together one way, so it's always my recommended course of action. especially since it saves a notable amount of cost.

here's a ballpark example of a high end entry level system (missing a Case but that totally varies pending personal preferences - also missing a Monitor if you must get one, this would do fine), that is capable of playing most any Video Game, not just Warframe.
http://pcpartpicker.com/list/QPdD3F
and once you're looking for more, or even when the (pretty old but good enough for the time being) aging Architecture means you need to replace Motherboard, CPU and probably Memory - many of the things here can be kept, for all future computers you use for upwards of the next 20 years. Power Supply being the key example.

however if you're serious about keeping costs down, buying used parts is where to go. just check whatever user listings websites are popular in your region.

 

 

i don't represent what's practical, but since you ask, i play Warframe (and whatever else) on this. http://pcpartpicker.com/user/taiiat/saved/8fLQzy
just like any other system that has removed as many bottlenecks in Warframe as possible, my performance averages ~100FPS in the heaviest situations(like 4 Player Survival with 50+ Enemies on the map), upwards to ~120 where it is most of the time, which is where i have it capped.
once board partner GTX1070's are out, i'll probably be grabbing one.

 

 

critical information though - Warframe is completely CPU bound.
anyone that tells you otherwise has no idea what they're talking about and should not be helping people with technical stuff related to Warframe.

 

Edit:

you forgot to mention how irrelevant high end GPU's are for Warframe(but not in general). so that the one looking for the information knows what to do.

You are incorrect about the CPU prioritization. Simple testing shows the game can run ably on processors as old as the Q6600 with no problems as long as the graphics card is capable. The game is mostly focused on the GPU. The main issue will be your motherboard in such a situation not allowing newer cards to run at full efficiency. The CPU bottleneck on the PCI channels would be annoying on CPU oriented games like Metro Last Light Redux which would probably throw up its hands just seeing the Q6600 but Warframe will be fine in such a situation.

[Sloan441]

What PC you use for gaming is dependent on a lot of things.

The most important is what resolution are you planning on playing at and if you're looking at an upgrade to that resolution during the PC's lifetime. Playing at 720p isn't going to require nearly the resources as playing at 4K. The bleeding edge in this case if referring to bleeding cash all over your box.

What I use is probably not what you're going to be using. I play other games more demanding that WF and I play (presently) at 2560x1600, but I have an eye out for upgrading to 4K in the not too distant future (mostly depending on better panels coming out and where NVidia goes with Pascal). So, I need pretty high end components to get what I want out of my machines.

This game, in my personal experience, doesn't seem either GPU or CPU bound, but there is a threshold on what you can do in regards to the GPU. Higher resolutions and more post-processing effects will require a more powerful GPU unless if you can forgo all those checkboxes and 1440p 144hz displays. Both sides of the number crunching equation need to be relatively balanced and up to date (I did--briefly--try to run the game on a very old machine, an i750/260GTX, and the results were rather grim--basically 20-30fps on medium at 1920x1200).

I run two machines to play WF at present. They're fairly similar, but one is quite old (approaching 7 years) and the other is quite new (around six months). I play on 30" 2560x1600 displays, so they need to be rather strong running boxes (and they are and the game looks fantastic at this resolution). One is a 2500K/TitanX and runs the game very well--it'll easily hit 300fps under ideal circumstance, though the monitor is locked at 60hz (so, yes, I run v-sync). The other is a 4790K/TitanX and it runs it quite well (duh) and in fact I have a hard time telling much difference between the two machines other than load times, since the 4790 has a very large SSD where everything is installed on it (and, yes, you want this if you can swing the cost of admission...it's nice).

So there it is. Need drives the gear train. In this case it'll largely depend on what resolution you decide to play at and what you can afford in future proofing.

 

[Urlan]

I can agree with that Sloan; very well said.

[taiiat]

7 hours ago, Urlan said:

The game is mostly focused on the GPU.

The main issue will be your motherboard in such a situation not allowing newer cards to run at full efficiency.

The CPU bottleneck on the PCI channels would be annoying on CPU oriented games like Metro Last Light Redux

oh, more popcorn time. always makes my day happy to slap down people that don't know what they're doing.
because Computers matter and misinformation does nobody any good.

• Warframe is still completely CPU bound.
• PCI-E x16 2.0 is already not a bottleneck for Graphics Cards (PCI-E x16 1.0 was only a bottleneck with high end GPU's at high Refresh Rates).
  to get a noticeable performance reduction, you need to go below PCI-E x8 2.0. zero performance difference between PCI-E x16 2.0 and 3.0 - there simply just isn't enough data that needs to be transmitted. 2160p@120Hz maybe... but only time will tell once GPU's are actually capable of reaching those points, since they aren't currently.
• Metro: Last Light is a completely GPU bound game. you chose the wrong random pulled out of the air example for this, Metro: Last Light is a GPU destroying game. it's brutal on them.

this is just so hilarious.

Edited June 10, 2016 by taiiat