I bought a Dell Ultra-Wide 1440p monitor this weekend and a XFX R9 390X GPU to boost my system performance so it could handle the much higher resolution.
Old system:
Motherboard: Asus Crosshair Forumla IV (Socket AM3)
CPU: AMD Phenom II 965 (Running at 3.4 but can easily run at 3.9-4Ghz)
RAM: 8BG Geil Black Dragon DDR3 PC3 12800
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 6950 2GB (unlocked to 6970)
SSD: 128GB Intel, (cant remember specifics)
HDD: 500GB Seagate 7200rpm.
PSU: OCZ 600w.
New:
Motherboard: Asus Crosshair Forumla IV (Socket AM3)
CPU: AMD Phenom II 965 (Running at 4.0 Ghz)
RAM: 8BG Geil Black Dragon DDR3 PC3 12800
GPU: AMD XFX R9 390X
SSD: 128GB Intel, (cant remember specifics)
HDD: 500GB Seagate 7200rpm.
PSU: Corsair RM 850 PSU.
I was aware that my aging CPU would potentially be a huge bottleneck for the system when paired with a latest gen GPU.
Here's where it gets a little suprising.
On my old system running a benchmark in Asetto Corsa (1440p FULL/Ultra including all the sampling and anti-aliasing on maximum.) HWMonitor had my GPU at 100% and my CPU at around 55-60%. Nothing strange here. I got around 20-25 FPS
On the new system with the same settings, HWMonitor is showing GPU at 100% and CPU at 62% (average across all 4 cores). I get around 66 FPS.
Does this mean my GPU is actually still the "weak link"?
Carrying out the same test on Dirt Rally....
Old system 15-17 FPS
CPU Usage 90% (can't actually remember what this was, but I'm sure it was higher than in AC)
GPU Usage 100%
New system 42 FPS
CPU Usage 66%
GPU USage 100%
Don't really know what to make of the results. How come my CPU does not seem to be being maxed out?
One thing to note is the CPU in the "old system" was running at 3.4Ghz.
In the new system it was running at 4.0Ghz. This goes a little way to explaining the CPU readings but surely this GPU should be above and beyond the CPU performance?
Is this just because I have chosen two games which happen to have very little CPU requirement? If so, I might buy a bigger card!
Old system:
Motherboard: Asus Crosshair Forumla IV (Socket AM3)
CPU: AMD Phenom II 965 (Running at 3.4 but can easily run at 3.9-4Ghz)
RAM: 8BG Geil Black Dragon DDR3 PC3 12800
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 6950 2GB (unlocked to 6970)
SSD: 128GB Intel, (cant remember specifics)
HDD: 500GB Seagate 7200rpm.
PSU: OCZ 600w.
New:
Motherboard: Asus Crosshair Forumla IV (Socket AM3)
CPU: AMD Phenom II 965 (Running at 4.0 Ghz)
RAM: 8BG Geil Black Dragon DDR3 PC3 12800
GPU: AMD XFX R9 390X
SSD: 128GB Intel, (cant remember specifics)
HDD: 500GB Seagate 7200rpm.
PSU: Corsair RM 850 PSU.
I was aware that my aging CPU would potentially be a huge bottleneck for the system when paired with a latest gen GPU.
Here's where it gets a little suprising.
On my old system running a benchmark in Asetto Corsa (1440p FULL/Ultra including all the sampling and anti-aliasing on maximum.) HWMonitor had my GPU at 100% and my CPU at around 55-60%. Nothing strange here. I got around 20-25 FPS
On the new system with the same settings, HWMonitor is showing GPU at 100% and CPU at 62% (average across all 4 cores). I get around 66 FPS.
Does this mean my GPU is actually still the "weak link"?
Carrying out the same test on Dirt Rally....
Old system 15-17 FPS
CPU Usage 90% (can't actually remember what this was, but I'm sure it was higher than in AC)
GPU Usage 100%
New system 42 FPS
CPU Usage 66%
GPU USage 100%
Don't really know what to make of the results. How come my CPU does not seem to be being maxed out?
One thing to note is the CPU in the "old system" was running at 3.4Ghz.
In the new system it was running at 4.0Ghz. This goes a little way to explaining the CPU readings but surely this GPU should be above and beyond the CPU performance?
Is this just because I have chosen two games which happen to have very little CPU requirement? If so, I might buy a bigger card!
Last edited:
