• 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.

Graphics card or CPU letting me down

bakes0310

bakes0310

bakes0310

Soldato
Joined
22 Oct 2004
Posts
13,719
My setup:
[email protected]
8gb ram
670 2gb SLI
2560x1440 Res
Windows 7 64bit

For me I like to play games at max settings (EVERY setting) and the following games are at unplayable fps for me.
Metro LL
Arma 3
Tomb Raider
BF 4 Beta
Crysis 3

I think arma 3 is cpu intensive. BF4 Beta is well in beta so that's unfair really. But I think its graphics cards that make the difference. BF3 I couldn't play at ultra when I had a 5970, but when I went to 670 sli it was no problem.
 
Last edited:
A 2500K was bottlenecking my 680's at 4.6, so it is your CPU holding you back. 4770K seems to be ok for SLI and a 3930K at 4.6 is perfect for SLI Titans, so should be good for SLI 670's :D

Not telling you what to buy btw and just adding my tuppence.
 
Well, my 2500k at 4.3ghz does bottleneck my sli 670s in Battlefield 3/4 and Crysis 3 ( GPU usage sometimes dropped as low as <50% in the BF4 beta!). I have a 3770k being delivered tomorrow for this very reason :D

I have never had a problem with Tomb Raider though as it isn't cpu intensive. I play it at 1080p, 2xSSAA and everything else maxed with tressfx and with v sync on it is bang on 60fps the whole way through the game.
 
SeraphX said:
I might be wrong but to me 2Gb Vram wouldn't be enough for that screen with those games maxed out.
Click to expand...

What makes you say that? Every bench of even BF4 shows that 2GB is enough even at 1600P. If you play Skyrim and heavily mod it, you would be correct and I could add loads more mods and kill my Titan's VRAM but till recently I had SLI 2GB 680's and never ran out of VRAM and that was at 5760x1080.
 
I was kinda hoping it was my cpu letting me down as I really like my 670sli plus I paid just over £700 on release:p
Kinda conflicting reports guys, lets say its the cpu. Ive been out of the loop so I looked on the store. I see theres a chip called Haswell 4770K and one called Ivybridge-E 4930K. Which one would a gamer who values his Frames over costs should pick.
 
I am the worstest at math ever but I will show 3DMark11 Physics scores from the same clocked CPU's Just remember that memory also plays a part in these scores.

2500K @ 4.6 = 8400
4770K @ 4.6 = 12677
3930K @ 4.6 = 16617

So a 4770K at 4.6 adds a 1/4 lets say over a 2500K @ 4.6Ghz and a 3930K adds a 1/4 over the 4770K again. Now if more games are using more cores (like BF4 is), you will see less stress on the CPU and allow the GPU's to goto 99% usage.

That is my take on it and happy to be proven wrong btw. Like I say, I am crap at math.
 
Cheers greg that's a big difference in benchmarking. I care more about fps though being a gamer:)
Im looking into seeing what I can afford, as ill need to buy cpu/motherboard/ram/.
 
Last edited:
Gregster said:
A 2500K was bottlenecking my 680's at 4.6, so it is your CPU holding you back. 4770K seems to be ok for SLI and a 3930K at 4.6 is perfect for SLI Titans, so should be good for SLI 670's :D

Not telling you what to buy btw and just adding my tuppence.
Click to expand...

Were you getting low gpu usage on your 680's with a 2500k? Did going to an i7 make a big difference for gpu usage?
 
Jono8 said:
Were you getting low gpu usage on your 680's with a 2500k? Did going to an i7 make a big difference for gpu usage?
Click to expand...

Yep. I would only see a max of 80% usage in BF3 and going to a 3930K and pumping it up to 4.6Ghz, I see the 680's hit 99% usage all the time.
 
@Bakes

http--wwwgamegpuru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Battlefield_4_Beta-test-bf_4_proz_2_zps1598e2ee.jpg


As you can see, there is a benefit of changing CPU and for fps. I am rubbish at explaining, so will let this slide do the talking :D
 
I don't know how much help it'll be but,

In regards to arma 3/Bf3-4, even with my crap gpu, i have no problem running them, i had BF4 on ultra minus Msaa and saw averages of 50fps (1080P).

With arma 3, after testing each setting and their effects vs performance hit, the biggest one i found that makes no different in how the game looks (as far as i can see) is SSAO, disable it and gain around 20Fps.

By all means test it yourself first.

My Gpu usage is 99% in every game i've played.

If it was me, i'd go with the 4770K for 670s in SLI.
 
Gregster said:
@Bakes

http--wwwgamegpuru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Battlefield_4_Beta-test-bf_4_proz_2_zps1598e2ee.jpg


As you can see, there is a benefit of changing CPU and for fps. I am rubbish at explaining, so will let this slide do the talking :D
Click to expand...

Bear in mind that graph shows graphics settings at very low levels. Once you push the graphic load up, the CPUs get much, much closer together.
 
@the op, if your board can take a 3770k. This will provide a nice boost, and will be cheaper than buying a new board, cpu and ram. Ive owned both 3770k and 4770k with sli 670. There's very little difference between both cpu's.
 
I'm getting my 3770 today :) coming from an i5 2500k just could not afford the whole motherboard/memory upgrade as well, but reading around I should still see a nice boost.

Edit: looking forward to how you get on with yours Jono8 :-)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom