pc upgrade advice

[urmom]

Hello i bought a built gaming pc some 10 months ago i mostly play counter strike on lowest video settings where i average 190 fps with some drops to 130 and stutters.
I wanted to upgrade to intel I7 12700K or something but i read that you need compatible components for upgrade.
Here are my components:
- MOTHERBORAD: Gigabyte H510M H (review says "anything over i3 and you're losing performance")
- CPU: Intel I5-10400F
- GPU: NVIDIA RTX 3060 8Go GDDR6, OpenGL 4.6, Microsoft® DirectX® 12, Vulkan API, NVIDIA GPU Boost™
- RAM: 16Go
- SSD: 1To NVMe
- 3 frontal regulable ventilators + 1 in the back
- CPU cooler unknown
Can you tell me if i need to upgrade my other components? Like for example my gpu is an 8g is it ok? Or even motherboard or ventilation i dont know its my first computer.
Or if that intel goes too hot could i get 300 fps average with another one avoiding to upgrade more than my cpu?

 

[urmom]

GPU would be the first upgrade.

A 6700xt or equivalent.

The 10th gen CPU should still be quite capable.

If upgrading the CPU your going to need a new motherboard aswell, and depending what CPU you get may need upgrading to ddr5 ram also.

GPU should be the start though.

thx i did some research and i m thinking a ASUS DUAL NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti OC Edition
, do i need to upgrade my Gigabyte H510M H motherboard for that?
For the RAM all i know its a 16 go ddr4 Dual Channel, speed at 2666 MHz. But i dont get what DDR(x) exactly refers to, if its about the motherboard or the ram, etc.. I read that past the 11th generation of intel CPU you need ddr5, but also read that it can also work on ddr4 even with 13 generation CPUs, can you explain?
About the CPU i would go for the Intel Core i7-11700K Rocket Lake Processor (3.6GHz), but if you think its worth it and that ventilation wont be a problem i could go for the i9-11900K 5,3 GHz, LGA1200, 125 W.
What do you think?

 

[urmom]

In Gamers Nexus CS2 CPU benchmarks (on YouTube here), when using a 4090, they needed a 13400F or higher to achieve 300 fps average at 1080p (Medium settings), but the lows were significantly uhm, lower.

In TPU's CS2 graphics benchmarks (here), when using a 13900K, they needed a 3070 to achieve 300 fps average at 1080p (Max settings).

If I try to combine those, then I'd say minimum CPU of:

With your current system - 11600K (or better), assuming the RAM speed is decent.
With a new system - 12600K (or better).


I'd just start with the CPU (for now) and go from there.

thx i did some research and i would go for the Intel Core i7-11700K Rocket Lake Processor (3.6GHz), but if you think its worth it and that ventilation wont be a problem i could go for the i9-11900K 5,3 GHz, LGA1200, 125 W.
For the RAM all i know its a 16 go ddr4 Dual Channel, with speed at 2666 MHz from task manager. The other reply i got said i could have to upgrade components to DDR5 but i dont get what DDR(x) exactly refers to, if its about the motherboard or the ram, etc.. I read that past the 11th generation of intel CPU you need ddr5, but also read that it can also work on ddr4 even with 13 generation CPUs, can you explain?
About the GPU i think the 3060 8g i got is downing my fps stability as my I5 10400F should perform better from the stats i saw. I would upgrade to an ASUS DUAL NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti OC Edition, what do you think?
Thanks again for the help i am noob

 

[urmom]

Tbh looking more into it, probably be better if with a system upgrade.

I would take tetras advice though more than mine he seems to be the guru on here, definitely better than listening to me

thx anyway man

 

[urmom]

There are two problems with this:
1. For 10th and 11th gen CPUs, their performance often doesn't justify their price (relative to newer CPUs), unless you get a great deal.

To give you an example, the i3-12100F (£85) often outperforms the i5-11600K.
The i5-12400F (£130) often outperforms the i9-11900K.

2. Their power consumption, especially in a limited motherboard like yours (that doesn't even have heatsinks) can be very problematic (i.e. over 100 watts).


The reason RAM can be important is because if you're CPU bottlenecked, then the RAM speed matters. When it comes to achieve a high top-end FPS like 300+, it is likely that you will be CPU bottlenecked.


DDR4 or DDR5 is the type of memory.

10th and 11th gen CPUs: DDR4 only.
12th - 14th gen CPUs: DDR4 OR DDR5, but the motherboard supports ONLY one type, so you have to decide when buying the motherboard.


I think the 3060 12GB is capable of very high FPS in CS2, since in TPU's benchmarks it can achieve 189 FPS average at 1080p (max settings). The 3060 8GB is slower than the 12GB card, but it should still perform pretty well.

It is hard to judge from the limited benchmarks that I have, but the CPU results on Gamers Nexus sound like your 10400 is performing as expected (212 average, 137 1% lows) and you are experiencing a CPU bottleneck.

It would help to confirm, if you can tell us what the percentage utilisation of the CPU and GPU is, while you're playing CS2?

You should also tell us if you're playing at 1080p, or not.


I don't like the 4060 Ti. It is overpriced and should have more memory than 8GB.

It is also (according to TPU here) only 42% faster and that's not enough improvement for £400, in my opinion.

So i was able to show stats in game using afterburner and riva turner but i dont know how to calculate the average CPU/GPU percentage. I saw a formula saying "CPU Utilization = (Total Time Spent on Non-Idle Tasks / Total Time) x 100" but i really dont get it since its about in game. In case that will be enough i will now make an improvised test focusing on GPU then CPU trying to get some accurate numbers.
- GPU: on deathmatch between 33 and 45%, in match average between 50 and 71%, low peek 40 up peek 86, around 60°C.
- CPU: pretty much stable at 35 - 38%, low peek 32 up peek 44, around 70°C, 4006 MHz. (didn't include the CPU 1,2,3,4,5,... info)
By being able to see my accurate fps i can make an update: in match it ranges between 130 and 210 often getting back to 150/190 from the two, lows at 100+ and ups at 220, but in deathmatch i fall down to 80 fps multiple times a session and the average falls down to 110/150.
If you need a proper test just tell me how and i will do it, i could even make a video capture and post it on youtube if you need with that riva turner info on.

 

[urmom]

You should also tell us if you're playing at 1080p, or not.


I don't like the 4060 Ti. It is overpriced and should have more memory than 8GB.

It is also (according to TPU here) only 42% faster and that's not enough improvement for £400, in my opinion.

I forgot to say in game resolution is at 1920x1080. Also that 4060 ti has 16gb but if there is better at lower price sure

 

[urmom]

That's a bit confusing, because it suggests your whole system is being throttled, but I suspect it is because CS2 doesn't use all the cores, so I'm still of the belief that you have primarily a CPU bottleneck.


Is there any change in the % usage of the CPU/GPU while you get these frame drops?


I assumed you were buying the 8GB card. The 7700 XT or 7800 XT are usually better performing in price/perf than the 4060 Ti 16GB. If nvidia had increased the bus width, then the story might be different, but the 16GB version has the same bus as the 8GB version.

I made a video capture on a deathmatch session and saw the CPU % go up and also the GPU % but randomly and not everytime so its confusing to me as i have no sense of normality in all this.
I made a youtube channel and uploaded it so you can check it in details, also timestamped when the fps dropped to 100 and lower (67) so you dont waste time waiting for it.
Here is the name of the channel: TESTFORTETRAS (last time i put a link it got cancelled so you can either write it in youtube search bar or in URL put /@TESTFORTETRAS after youtube.com)
I found some of the GPUs / CPUs but maybe lets talk about that when you have a better idea of whats the problem, and if you need anything else before that just ask me better be sure

 

[urmom]

if you're using a 3060, you can overlay the cpu/gpu performance you're getting ingame via the nvidia software, so no calculations, just look at the gpu/cpu % that's being displayed...

NVIDIA Support

nvidia.custhelp.com

an amd 7800xt will wipe the floor with the 4060ti and is £480 (also comes with 16gb vram) compared to £450 for the 4060ti...think nvidia only becomes interesting at 4070super or above this gen

Thx for the help, nvidia display still gives ranging % numbers tho my issue was about if there could be an avrg.
I found an XFX RX 7800 XT [Speedster MERC319 16 Go GDDR6 HDMI 3xDP, AMD RDNA™ 3 (RX-78TMERCB9)] at 559€
and an MSI RTX 4070 Super [12G Ventus 3X OC 12 Go GDDR6X, 2520 MHz, PCI Express Gen 4, 192 Bits, 3X DP v 1.4a, HDMI 2.1a (Supports 4K & 8K HDR)] at 719€
I have no idea if combining intel cpu and amd gpu can be a downgrade in game, i guess if you propose it its ok, the question is: is it worth keeping the rtx/nvidia stuff for 160€?
Performance-wise when comparing these two on UserBenchmark the rtx has +13% speed, +21 avrg score and +30% overcloked score, based on that i think so.
Also in the summary describing the two gpu on the amd one it is written:
"First time buyers tempted to consider the RX 7700/7800 XT by AMD’s army of Advanced Marketing scammers (youtube, reddit, twitter, forums etc.) should be aware that AMD have a history of releasing benchmark busting, heavily marketed, sub standard products. Although Nvidia’s 4070 only offers comparable performance, it has a broader feature set (RT/DLSS 3.0) and offers far better game compatibility (drivers). PC gamers looking to join AMD’s “2%” GPU club (Steam stats: 5000/6000/7000 series combined mkt share) need to work on their critical thinking skills: Influencers (posing as reviewers) are paid handsomely to scam users into buying inferior products. Experienced gamers know all too well that high average fps are worthless when they are accompanied with stutters, random crashes, excessive noise and a limited feature set."
What is your take on this as i learned its kind of a war of opinions going on between the 2 groups of users. Like maybe it wont be a problem for cs2 but if i want to play some more high demanding games is it going to pose problem?

 

[urmom]

Unless you are a pro gamer there's no benefit to such high frame rates. Indeed 130 fps is going to be more than good enough. However, stutters are an issue.



I watched the first few minutes and scrubbed through the rest. No CPU core is hitting 100%; indeed the highest I saw was about 80%. Your GPU is barely breaking 40%. Your system has plenty of performance to spare.

I did note that CPU temperatures were locked in the mid 70s. So I wonder if your PC is thermal throttling. Your first step should be checking the BIOS for that temperature limit - I'll let a BIOS expert advise you on that. And after that you should look into a decent CPU cooler. Something like a Thermalright Assassin - if it will fit in your case.

BTW have you updated the BIOS? Latest is F18 and I see that BIOSes prior to F17 have some issues with RTX 3060 cards.

thx for help, i checked BIOS from gigabyte UEFI troubleshooting: i have the F16 version dated 12/08/2022.
I checked for updates here is the link: https://www.gigabyte.com/fr/Motherboard/H510M-H-rev-10-11-15/support#support-dl-bios .
I downloaded the latest F18 for my 1.1 rev H510M H but i need a usb to load it into the Q-FlASH system, i will have it tomorrow, do i have your approval to proceed?
Also maybe important point: i forgot that to use the faceit anticheat i had to enable secure boot from that UEFI interface, on the faceit page explaing how it says "Do it at your own risk, we are not responsible for any issues with your PC", here is the link to it: https://support.faceit.com/hc/en-us...-Boot-needs-to-be-enabled-to-launch-FACEIT-AC
About fps this deathmatch mode is more stressful for the pc thats why i get these numbers, in normal match i get about 190 avrg with peeks to 230 and drops to 130 and lower and i feel the difference. If i can get 200 dropless without upgrading i would be ok but no 130 is too much of a gap when every frame matters against someone who has twice as much.
Btw i play on wifi if that could be a factor

 

[urmom]

Here's the link:

TEST (drops to 70 -100 fps timestamps in description)

DROPS TIMESTAMPS: 0:30 / 0:50 / 1:50 / 2:15 / 2:36 / 2:52 extended to 3:45 / 3:53 / 4:45 / 5:05 / 5:14 extended to 5:35 / 6:03 / 6:11 / 6:30 / 7:04 / 7:30 / ...

www.youtube.com

I'm terrible at watching these kind of videos, so I'm afraid it doesn't tell me much, but hopefully someone else will watch it and let you know their opinion on what it says about the bottleneck.

ok no problem i just wanted to say that i had to enable secure boot to use the faceit anticheat app, on the faceit page explaing how it says "Do it at your own risk, we are not responsible for any issues with your PC", here is the link to it: https://support.faceit.com/hc/en-us...-Boot-needs-to-be-enabled-to-launch-FACEIT-AC .
I forgot about that and thought i'd mention it to you, also my BIOS update is F16 when 2 other updates arrived, i downloaded the F18 for my 1.1 rev motherboard i shall update it tomorrow with someone's approval, here is the link to it: https://www.gigabyte.com/fr/Motherboard/H510M-H-rev-10-11-15/support#support-dl-bios

 

[urmom]

"First time buyers tempted to consider the RX 7700/7800 XT by AMD’s army of Advanced Marketing scammers (youtube, reddit, twitter, forums etc.) should be aware that AMD have a history of releasing benchmark busting, heavily marketed, sub standard products. Although Nvidia’s 4070 only offers comparable performance, it has a broader feature set (RT/DLSS 3.0) and offers far better game compatibility (drivers). PC gamers looking to join AMD’s “2%” GPU club (Steam stats: 5000/6000/7000 series combined mkt share) need to work on their critical thinking skills: Influencers (posing as reviewers) are paid handsomely to scam users into buying inferior products. Experienced gamers know all too well that high average fps are worthless when they are accompanied with stutters, random crashes, excessive noise and a limited feature set."
My guess that came from 'Userbenchmark'.....the most biased website I've ever had the misfortune to come across and read. So every revieweri n the world and all the yt video's showing performance of the gpu/cpu's in question, are all faked and everyone is being paid by AMD, and intel and nvidia are the poor companies being robbed.....or everyone else is showing their findings and the website is talking ***p.
For gpu in gaming, when going down the stack so to speak, features such as raytracing really don't mean much..the hit in fps means you'll prob turn in on, look at it, go that's nice but my frames are ****, and turn it off and go with raster performance. Here amd are giving better price to performance than nvidia. downside is that you miss out on dlss which is better than fsr(amd version), but at 1080p, they're both meant to be pretty rubbish as not a lot to upscale..as you get more and more expensive cards, then i think extra's such as better ray tracing come into play..however, just saw a vid on yt of the 4080super playing alan wake 2 with path tracing turned on(step up from standard ray tracing), and it managed 42fps...so for a £1k card you get 42fps??? as if people are going to play with that....so i think you have to take everything sade by both nvidia and amd with a pinch of salt...
I generally looks at Harware unboxed at gpu and cpu performance...pretty down the line and graphs easy to understand etc..gamernexus, jaz2cents, paul's hardware etc..they're a few of them
cpu wise, intel were far out in front, rested on laurels, amd rediesigned their cpu's from ground up with ryzen and now they're taking mkt share...12th gen had a little fight back where I had it in front of amd, and overall still is excellent for productivity, but AM5 now has longevity, 7800x3d is the fastest gaming cpu you can get, is a lot cheaper than a 14900k and uses far less power...I couldn't recommend intel unless there productivity involed and then it's video etc, where codec are excellent in intel cpu's...but I'd look at technotice yt for guidamnce there(he does no gaming on his channel)




For transparency, I have 2 pc's running as work abroad so live away from home....B550 e-e gaming,with AMD 5800x cpu, 32gb 3600c18 ddr4 and rtx 3080, and B650e-e strix, 7800X3d, 32gb 6000c30 and 3070ti...even with 3080, i think iturned raytracing on when playing control, then turned it back off when my fps dropped by 50 odd fps

Don't play CS2 so can't really help with setting etc..but looked up the 10400f and that can go up to 100degrees before thermal throttling happens, so 75 degrees isn't anything to worry about. as neither your gpu or cpu are maxed out, I'd start playing around with settings before you drop money on upgrades

massive info thx will look up to that, i have to update my bios and see from there if smth changes, ordered a 3.0 usb tho i need to wait 2 days until the 2.0 delivery i will see what to do from there.
About cpu option, my wish is that after bios update and some advanced in game changes (even tho i game on lowest video settings) my fps will get stable around 200, if not and i have to change components i'd rather not replace my intel motherboard to switch full amd, but i guess now i know its ok to get an amd gpu. Btw someone mentioned "CPU temperature limit", could it be that a bios setting is limiting my cpu at 70°C and therefore causing these frame drops?

 

[urmom]

Someone pointed out if my BIOS was updated and it wasn't so i did the lastest F18 update on my Gigabyte H510M H and still no change.
So i made another capture of a CS2 deathmatch session where i instead used the advanced nvidia overlay: Session Capture (100 and lower drops start at around 1.10 min and go on)
I game on low video settings: CS2 settings
If you need me to run any over test using programs or else no problem i just want to know what is causing this before buying anything