CPU limited or eco mode?

Zeebedy

Zeebedy

Zeebedy

Soldato
Joined
28 Jan 2011
Posts
7,910
Hey guys,

installed my new GPU yesterday and all is well. My only thing is I’m not getting much more performance than my old 4070?

could it be bottlenecked or even as my CPU is on “ECO 95W” mode?

it’s a 5900X with a 4070 ti super.
 
been looking at the 5800X3D chip, can get it for a little more than what i can get for my 5900X, just dunno if I wanna go down to 8 cores from 12??
 
pepp77 said:
Define not getting much more performance, you've shown the settings, but what FPS you got and are getting on each card. Most reviews suggest maybe 9% increase between the two cards.
Click to expand...

i will need to do some more "digging" and see where im at. I disabled ECO mode for now, see how that goes.

only 9%, surely a 4070 to a ti super is better than that??
 
just fired up some CS2 to see how that compares to my previous card..weird, i was averaging around 320-350 fps, at 2K (yes, I know its a easy game to run).. and both CPU and GPU were about 50% utilisation and low temps when I finished..

i just dont understand it sometimes? :(
 
Trox said:
I doubt there’s much of a real difference between those gpus with a 5900x. I wouldn’t entertain an eco mode on the cpu...
Click to expand...

yeah, i have put it back into its "vanilla" setting on the CPU.

Played some Valorant last night, getting 350-400+ fps, and after 2-3 hours I checked my temps and usage, and both the GPU and CPU were hardly breaking a sweat.
 
Trox said:
I doubt there’s much of a real difference between those gpus with a 5900x. I wouldn’t entertain an eco mode on the cpu...
Click to expand...
ECO mode of 95W on a 105W part will not have any performance hit in single core loads and only a small hit in multi-core workloads depending on cooling. In some cases, it could improve performance as the chip will run cooler. I run a 7950X with ECO 65W and the single core performance is the same as at 170W, but the chip runs much cooler.
 
FredFlint said:
ECO mode of 95W on a 105W part will not have any performance hit in single core loads and only a small hit in multi-core workloads depending on cooling. In some cases, it could improve performance as the chip will run cooler. I run a 7950X with ECO 65W and the single core performance is the same as at 170W, but the chip runs much cooler.
Click to expand...
I’d rather just under volt than run an eco mode
 
Last edited:
Well, just played some Horizon : Zero Dawn just to get an indication on performance, temps etc..

I was 150-160+ fps at 2K high detail, DLSS off and ran like butter.

Checked afterburner and yes, my GPU was at full utilisation with an peak temp of 68c and the CPU didnt break a sweat averaging mid 50c or so..

As I was going to look into under volt etc.. but with those numbers, im happy, big jump in power consumption though compared to my last card, sitting around peak at 285W :eek:

Which I realise its much these days, but damn, thats still some juice!
 
If you see a situation where neither your CPU nor your GPU are at 100% and you also are not game engine limited or limited by a software setting then it will generally be your memory that is the limiting factor, I would assume on a 5900X that you are running either 3200Mhz or 3600Mhz and just to confirm, you ARE you in dual channel right ? ...as that will castrate your performance if not. As for power, yea, more peroformance means more power required as a general rule, that's how it works until another generational leap is made :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom