-
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.
I5 2500k bottleneck for 7970?
- Thread starter kunoichia
- Start date
Associate
dont know for sure but i doubt it very much
Caporegime
My minimum fps in certain places on 64 player maps have shot up to 20fps+ in places since moving from an 2500k@ 4.7 to a 2700k @ 4.7 with hyper threading enabled.
Many points on 64 players maps with an i5 you will drop to 45-55 fps, now its 70-85.
If there is a bottleneck on a single overclocked 7970 its slight.
I remember Dave Beast confirming that as well when i compared my results to him (i5 vs i7). On parts i was seeing 99% gpu usage his fps were considerably higher than mine.
I will add, as i made clear to the op this only applies to bf3 64 man which loves cores/threads.
Many points on 64 players maps with an i5 you will drop to 45-55 fps, now its 70-85.
If there is a bottleneck on a single overclocked 7970 its slight.
I remember Dave Beast confirming that as well when i compared my results to him (i5 vs i7). On parts i was seeing 99% gpu usage his fps were considerably higher than mine.
I will add, as i made clear to the op this only applies to bf3 64 man which loves cores/threads.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 483
Yeah, you're going to have serious bottlenecking issues with that. You need to use an AMD piledriver processor and run it at OVER NINE THOUSAND ghz if you want to get the full performance out of that GPU.
Good luck.
Good luck.
Might get a tad more with the 3570K and a z77 system also.
Normally if you dont notice difference I dont think much about it.
You don't have to hit the reply button you know?
Come back when u can make a valuable contribution which I doubt.
Caporegime
So far ive noticed a large increase in minimum fps on the following 64 player maps.
Sharqi, Caspian, Firestorm and Gulf Of Oman.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,594
In CPU demanding games (i.e. mmo) that doesn't use all 4 cores it can bottleneck. My i5 2500K at 4.5GHz bottleneck even my 5850 in Guild Wars 2 World vs World battle, but that's because the game would only use up to 3 cores, and it is not uncommon to have 60-80 players duking it out at the same time in the same area
Think Starcraft II you can get bottleneck quite a bit as well, when you got ridiculous numbers of units on screen
But for most other games, there shouldn't be much bottleneck (if at all).
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe since gregster has just confirmed CPU bottlenecking doesnt affect minimum FPS.
The only FPS is maximum so if you can play above say 40 its really pointless and i doubt an I7 offers 20+ fps over and i5 seriously are you mad?
The only FPS is maximum so if you can play above say 40 its really pointless and i doubt an I7 offers 20+ fps over and i5 seriously are you mad?
Last edited:
Soldato
Yep, an i5 will bottleneck top end latest gen cards, good move Matt
Gregster doesn't know everything you know!
I have an I5 2500K @ 4.5ghz with a pair of 7950's. In BF3 120hz 1080p both GPU's remain at %99 with cpu usage at around %70 so no bottlekneck there for me.
I also have a 2700K that I'm going to install so will be good to see if this makes much difference although from what I read Hyperthreading causes issues with juddering and slowdown ?
I also have a 2700K that I'm going to install so will be good to see if this makes much difference although from what I read Hyperthreading causes issues with juddering and slowdown ?
Last edited:
Soldato
Test it on full 64 player BF3 servers with everything on ultra, there are higher minimum FPS from an i7.
Will have a go with the I5 I have not seen any slowdown at all even on 64 player maps ultra settings and AA.
I will chuck the 2700k in tomorrow and see how it compares but I'm doubting I will see a noticeable with the eye difference.
Edit - Will install it now who needs sleep I'm intrigued.
OK just had a quick go with my I5 at 4.5ghz 64 players with tanks, planes lots going on and fraps never dropped below 70-75fps.
Will install the I7 now this chip also runs 4.5ghz so will see if it makes a difference clock for clock.
Also BF3 only seems to max 2 of the 4 cores with the other 2 sitting around %20 ish... ?
Will install the I7 now this chip also runs 4.5ghz so will see if it makes a difference clock for clock.
Also BF3 only seems to max 2 of the 4 cores with the other 2 sitting around %20 ish... ?
Last edited:
Soldato
It doesn't surprise me. I didn't record enough data moving from an i5 to i7 to comment for definite. Especially with the new drivers pushing GPU performance up. It's completely plausible that the GPU is running at a point where it's hitting the CPU bottleneck.
To be clear it won't be a 24/7 bottleneck, more of a "loads of action" bottleneck.
I felt that the i7 improved frame rates considerably for me but didn't have data to back it up. I did have the data to back up the fact it helped minimum FPS quite considerably for multi GPU.
To be clear it won't be a 24/7 bottleneck, more of a "loads of action" bottleneck.
I felt that the i7 improved frame rates considerably for me but didn't have data to back it up. I did have the data to back up the fact it helped minimum FPS quite considerably for multi GPU.
Keep on testing i really want to see if it makes a difference, i agree on multicard but not single and 20 fps increase i just dont believe at all.
Also recored minimum FPS this is the most important, having 70 max and 10 min is pointless.
Also recored minimum FPS this is the most important, having 70 max and 10 min is pointless.