Bottlenecking

[Bluntwrapped]

I would be tempted to pick up a 4790k, maybe a nicely binned one if you can find one for a decent price. Slap a half decent cooler on it, overclock it and be happy for a few more years

 

[Vir]

So I was just reading this thread...
Not to hijack or anything, but when I play PUBG with my 980Ti @ 2560x1440 - gsync 144hz I get a lot of times that GPU usage in afterburner is 65 - 80 percent.
Now I don't know, would that be CPU bottlenecking or just bad programming... or both

CPU Xeon X5670 @ 4Ghz 6c12t

 

[Dirk Diggler]

So I was just reading this thread...
Not to hijack or anything, but when I play PUBG with my 980Ti @ 2560x1440 - gsync 144hz I get a lot of times that GPU usage in afterburner is 65 - 80 percent.
Now I don't know, would that be CPU bottlenecking or just bad programming... or both

CPU Xeon X5670 @ 4Ghz 6c12t

What usage is the CPU at when GPU is that low? What FPS is the monitor at when GPU usage is so low?

 

[LeMson]

4790k + 1180 + 1080p + 60fps

meh who cares about bottlenecking

 

[Kaapstad]

I would be quite happy to use a 4670k with my Titan V (about 30% faster than the 1180 is likely to be) for gaming as it is better than the 7980XE that it is often paired with.

Haswell is a really nice architecture for gaming.

 

[3lackMamba]

So, I overclocked to 4.1 (best stable clock I could get considering my cooler) re-downloaded afterburner and according to the graphs, my GPU didn't go over 70% whilst my CPU is completely maxed out the entire time I was playing BF1.. My friend had the same CPU but with a 970 and he claims he was able to run BF1 at a constant 60fps at medium settings whereas I'm getting drops down to 30-35fps at LOW settings.. Am I missing something? Would VRAM be playing a big part here?

 

[Radox-0]

So, I overclocked to 4.1 (best stable clock I could get considering my cooler) re-downloaded afterburner and according to the graphs, my GPU didn't go over 70% whilst my CPU is completely maxed out the entire time I was playing BF1.. My friend had the same CPU but with a 970 and he claims he was able to run BF1 at a constant 60fps at medium settings whereas I'm getting drops down to 30-35fps at LOW settings.. Am I missing something? Would VRAM be playing a big part here?

You can monitor VRAM usage within MSI AB, could be 2GB is not sufficient, but you have toned down settings and 1080p means less VRAM usage compared to higher resolutions. Combined with the fact you say the CPU is completely maxed tends to suggest its CPU related, but would take a look at GPU VRAM Usage, could well be a factor.

 

[Marak]

My friend had the same CPU but with a 970 and he claims he was able to run BF1 at a constant 60fps at medium settings whereas I'm getting drops down to 30-35fps at LOW settings.. Am I missing something? Would VRAM be playing a big part here?

What people claim and what reality is are often two very different things.

Are you running vsync on but he is running vsync off?

 

[Shaz12]

Battlefield 1 is heavily CPU dependant. When my 970 was paired with a FX 8350, I would get constant drops to the forties. Then I upgraded to the 7700k and FPS doesn't drop below 70 in any scenario and the game still manages to almost max out all the 7700k cores in some maps.

 

[3lackMamba]

Hmm, maybe I’ll have to rethink this and upgrade my CPU now and GPU later, because if it’s struggling with BF1 what’s it going to be like with BFV

 

[Vir]

What usage is the CPU at when GPU is that low? What FPS is the monitor at when GPU usage is so low?

CPU usage I have on is the average of the 6c/12t it's most of the time between 25 - 45%. FPS dips, I mean it's different in different scenarios. Let's say I'm looking at an open field and turn and start lookign at a big city/village then I will start see the GPU usage drop. Also, and this is the cause of me dying a lot... once the shooting starts I get little dips as well, fps drops. It goes down and back up. Almost causing stuttering.

And I'm not sure if it's PUBG or my CPU bottlenecking. I was about to get a 8700K but would be really sad if it didn't help this problem.

 

[nashathedog]

There won't be any bottle-necking you need to worry about. An extra 10 to 20 frames doesn't degrade the experience when you're hitting in 80 to 100+ ballpark.

If i was you with what we know today I'd get the gpu first & then wait until we get new cpu's that have no Spectre weaknesses. You won't have any issues gaming. Half the members think Sandybridge is still good enough to hold out before upgrading so with that in mind Haswell certainly is. Yes an upgrade is on the cards just don't rush into it.

 

[Vir]

Thought I'd report back on this thread as you might be interested. I just upgraded my Xeon X5670 @ 4Ghz + 12GB 3200Mhz DDR3 to Intel 8700K + 16GB 3200Mhz DDR4 and I have just installed Windows and PUBG (didn't have more time to test other stuff) and the difference is night and day. The GPU is now 99% in use all the time and it feels supersmooth, no more strange framedrops and GPU not in use. Also, for example I noticed that Firefox loads like instantly which it didn't on the old system. For me the upgrade is already worth it

 

[MasterOC]

Just my two cents . No quad core CPU is upto the task of 32 let alone 64 man battlefield games . My 6500 got eaten alive paired with a 1070 on bf1. Perfectly fine for low threaded games or games without a large multiplayer overhead but 6 cores here is minimum or at the very least a form of SMT . As for PUBG it a low threaded unoptimzed peice of garbage . Shouldnt be setting an upgrade path based on that. Server / network performance there end is likely the largest bottleneck as im at 99 percent gpu tax here and still get pretty abysmal frames on 1070 . Yeah its ib the hundreds outta town and cities but can get choppy in town on a 2700 . go for a xeon for now and save for a large upgrade on a fresh platform imo