• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Far Cry 6 GPU performance not bad at all but is severely bottlenecked by CPU

Associate
Joined
25 Apr 2017
Posts
847
Far Cry 6 seems to run okay on a 6700 XT at 1440P maximum settings, just recorded some gameplay and separately the benchmark sequence.

I played for 11 minutes and did not see any texture issues that I could notice. Perhaps issues would pop up If i continued for longer, not sure.

Video memory usage peaked at 10.1GB, but seemed to be below 10GB for most of the video.

Didn't see it climb above 10gb in the benchmark sequence.

Will add the other footage once its uploaded. @Shaz12
On my 3080 Ti, using the same settings, its using slightly more VRAM in this benchmark vs. the other video where it was using quite a bit less. But unlike your video, there is constant stuttering as you can see. The HD pack is unplayable on NVIDIA hardware currently.

 
Associate
Joined
21 Oct 2013
Posts
1,835
Location
Ild
On my 3080 Ti, using the same settings, its using slightly more VRAM in this benchmark vs. the other video where it was using quite a bit less. But unlike your video, there is constant stuttering as you can see. The HD pack is unplayable on NVIDIA hardware currently.

why are you convinced your issue is vram? your GPU is hardly breaking 80% for most of that video.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jul 2005
Posts
15,984
Location
N.Ireland
why are you convinced your issue is vram? your GPU is hardly breaking 80% for most of that video.

zn9qg4nvjdi21.jpg
 
Associate
Joined
25 Apr 2017
Posts
847
Here is something interesting I just noticed. I deleted the textures cache in the far cry 6 folder which increased my VRAM usage across the board. Then, I turned off all the ray tracing effects to keep my allocated VRAM below 11.0GB with the HD pack. Notice, every time I switch guns, the game is stuttering but all the textures on the guns are high resolution. Then I turned on all the ray tracing effects to get my allocated VRAM into the 11.0GB range which it finally exceeded after deleting the texture cache. Now I am seeing low resolution textures on the guns but the stuttering is completely gone. Don't know what to make of it


why are you convinced your issue is vram? your GPU is hardly breaking 80% for most of that video.
Its not. That's the thing. Why is the game stuttering when the VRAM buffer is not exceeded? Regarding the low GPU usage, that's not an issue as the benchmark was done at 1440p where the game is terrible CPU bound and my 9900k can't keep up but at 4k which is where I play the game, its more or less pegged above 90%.
 
Caporegime
Joined
12 Jul 2007
Posts
37,332
Location
United Kingdom
On my 3080 Ti, using the same settings, its using slightly more VRAM in this benchmark vs. the other video where it was using quite a bit less. But unlike your video, there is constant stuttering as you can see. The HD pack is unplayable on NVIDIA hardware currently.

What CPU are you using?

CAn you share more details about your system specs? Memory freq/timings etc?
If he wants to offload some of these cards im all ears.. :p
:D

Here is something interesting I just noticed. I deleted the textures cache in the far cry 6 folder which increased my VRAM usage across the board. Then, I turned off all the ray tracing effects to keep my allocated VRAM below 11.0GB with the HD pack. Notice, every time I switch guns, the game is stuttering but all the textures on the guns are high resolution. Then I turned on all the ray tracing effects to get my allocated VRAM into the 11.0GB range which it finally exceeded after deleting the texture cache. Now I am seeing low resolution textures on the guns but the stuttering is completely gone. Don't know what to make of it



Its not. That's the thing. Why is the game stuttering when the VRAM buffer is not exceeded? Regarding the low GPU usage, that's not an issue as the benchmark was done at 1440p where the game is terrible CPU bound and my 9900k can't keep up but at 4k which is where I play the game, its more or less pegged above 90%.
I'm going back to my initial assumption, might be a driver issue.

I was disappointed you turned off comments on YouTube, I wanted to big up the Shaz massive.
 
Associate
Joined
25 Apr 2017
Posts
847
What CPU are you using?

CAn you share more details about your system specs? Memory freq/timings etc?

:D
CPU is a 9900k @ 4.9ghz. Memory is 16 GB G-Skill DDR4-3200 16-18-18-38. The game is installed on a 1TB Samsung Evo Nvme SSD. PSU is a Corsair HX 1000.
 
Caporegime
Joined
12 Jul 2007
Posts
37,332
Location
United Kingdom
CPU is a 9900k @ 4.9ghz. Memory is 16 GB G-Skill DDR4-3200 16-18-18-38. The game is installed on a 1TB Samsung Evo Nvme SSD. PSU is a Corsair HX 1000.
Your CPU is not the best, but it should be more than good enough.

That said, your GPU utilisation is a concern, it looks to me like you are a bit bottlenecked.

Whether that is the fault of the CPU or your display driver though is debateable.
 
Associate
Joined
25 Apr 2017
Posts
847
Your CPU is not the best, but it should be more than good enough.

That said, your GPU utilisation is a concern, it looks to me like you are a bit bottlenecked.

Whether that is the fault of the CPU or your display driver though is debateable.
At 4k which is what I play, the GPU usage is always pegged at 99%. Turning on FSR lowers usage in some scenes to 85% or so but majority of the time is above 90%. I do not see any improvement in FPS going down from 4k to 1440p, as the single threaded performance of my 9900k isn't good enough.
 
Associate
Joined
8 Sep 2020
Posts
475
I think the 9900K is still right up there as far as gaming CPUs go.

It is very much still a brilliant cpu for gaming task and at 4K will gain pretty much 0% uplift in performance by switching to be later Intel or AMD :cry: At 4k you will be pretty much GPU bound 99.99% of the time , it even puts in impressive numbers at 1440p.... if i had a 9900K i certainly wouldn't be worrying or looking to up grade for some time yet especially at 1440p or 4K

 
Associate
Joined
19 Sep 2009
Posts
2,265
Location
Riedquat system
Not fast enough in this game though looking at his utilisation, not helped by the driver overhead either.

Driver overhead should not really be that much of an issue since there should be plenty of spare CPU. FC6 seems to be held up by a single thread and Shaz is running RAM at fairly low speed/timings. Buffing those up would surely help in such a thread limited situation.
 
Caporegime
Joined
12 Jul 2007
Posts
37,332
Location
United Kingdom
At 4k which is what I play, the GPU usage is always pegged at 99%. Turning on FSR lowers usage in some scenes to 85% or so but majority of the time is above 90%. I do not see any improvement in FPS going down from 4k to 1440p, as the single threaded performance of my 9900k isn't good enough.
Fair enough if your res is 4K native, I agree with Jay then.

Surprised your utilisation drops with FSR enabled though, I see 99% locked regardless of FSR setting used.
 
Associate
Joined
19 Sep 2009
Posts
2,265
Location
Riedquat system
Here's the bench on my 5800X and 3080 trying to use the same 1440p settings. Can see my single thread hits 97%+ at one point but at same time I do not get any stutters.

 
Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2015
Posts
5,887
Weren't you defending the Crysis 1 remaster when it was released, what changed? :p

Nothing. I praised C1R for good reasons, and railed against it for others. It was still a mess at launch and had plenty of issues (and again with an extra helping of problems for people using AMD), but I defended it on the grounds of performance & esp. on the CPU side because a lot of people were using misinformation to talk about it (f.ex. ignored like-for-like visuals vs performance comparison, which favoured the remaster, but when testing max settings in the remaster you'd tank performance excessively - because the settings were as such - and then people would use that to complain about "lack of optimization" about the game overall rather than understand that they're morons ignorant of settings scaling; ah well).

I still think they did a good job overall with it, esp. as they kept patching it, but as I said then - it's not really faithful to the spirit of what Crysis meant for the PC community because the remaster doesn't go far enough, and probably can't anyway absent a total remake even if they weren't resource constrained. So for me it's a mixed bag, but I'd still play the C1R over the OG if I wanted to play the game. Maybe the same for 2R if they fix it, but here I'm more ambivalent because I liked the style it originally had and am not on board with the lighting changes being 100% better - I think it's a matter of taste. Same as I did with Metro Exodus, I'd rather play the OG version (with RT) than the EE because I think it suits the atmosphere better even though the new version is technically an upgrade. The Crysis 3 remaster on the other hand is a complete joke and I wouldn't play it until we get some of those fabled MCM GPUs that are 5x more powerful and the game is on gamepass, because they put **** all effort into it but performance is shot to ****. For me it's very clear that these remasters are first and foremost meant as re-releases for consoles and as a PC gamer they're just including us for the sake of it, we're very much a minor market for them now.

Finally I don't personally care that much about the Crysis games, so in the end it doesn't affect me much besides the annoyance when I look at them at launch and see how they turn out, because they were so iconic for PC gaming. I do wish they'd take another stab at it with a Crysis 4 of sorts and go balls to the wall on graphics, but the market realities are what they are so that's not going to happen, and from what I've seen of the latest Cryengine builds they're now very far behind in tech. The only impressive Crysis they can make now is if they start adopting UE5.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
10,250
It is very much still a brilliant cpu for gaming task and at 4K will gain pretty much 0% uplift in performance by switching to be later Intel or AMD :cry: At 4k you will be pretty much GPU bound 99.99% of the time , it even puts in impressive numbers at 1440p.... if i had a 9900K i certainly wouldn't be worrying or looking to up grade for some time yet especially at 1440p or 4K



Can you not post fake benchmarks thanks!
 
Top