• 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.

Seemingly inexplicable poor FPS in games

If we rule out the CPU because it's the same as it was the day before and it worked OK, then should probably rule out everything that hasn't changed since the day before, because it was OK the day before.
So apparently it's the fault of Steam and the 2 new games. Tried removing them and seeing if it fixes the issue?
 
Also try a driver reinstallation in case either of the games did something weird. Check for any Steam updates to World of Tanks in the last day.
 
After a quick read of the WOT forums. This kind of problem seems to be pretty common since the 8.7 patch. It could just be game related. On the train simulators, i would say it was down to the cpu as a lot of these games only run on a single core where amd are weak. I think it was cities 2012/13 my mate played with his [email protected] paired with a 7970 and performance was rubbish due to the engine using only 1 core on the cpu.

What settings are you using on train simulator. Guys with more powerful systems than you are reporting that using aa @ 3x3 setting is giving to much performance hit. They say use 2x2.
 
Last edited:
TheRealDeal said:
After a quick read of the WOT forums. This kind of problem seems to be pretty common since the 8.7 patch. It could just be game related. On the train simulators, i would say it was down to the cpu as a lot of these games only run on a single core where amd are weak. I think it was cities 2012/13 my mate played with his [email protected] paired with a 7970 and performance was rubbish due to the engine using only 1 core on the cpu.

What settings are you using on train simulator. Guys with more powerful systems than you are reporting that using aa @ 3x3 setting is giving to much performance hit. They say use 2x2.
Click to expand...

I've been looking into the setting on all the games. I've got WoT working again, i think! The sims, Trainz apparently has a problem since a big Service Pack in April. It appears to revolve around the maps rendering every time the camera moves such as going round a corner or actually moving the camera. This would fit what I have noticed that with far reduced draw distance and no anisotropy, i can get 50+ FPS, all be it this jumps around getting as low as 25 FPS. I think this is all down to an update on the game, don't see how the Steam client could be effecting things although both the new games I'd expect to play well are from Steam and the WoT problem started with a Steam install and the new games. From what I can see, Train Sim uses 4 cores and Trainz 5, Train Sim is eating the GPU though, running at 99% all the time. Trainz barely touches anything. However, this does look to a be a game issue. At least I'm getting there with knowing what's causing the problems.
 
Marine-RX179 said:
OP don't seem to realise games are subjected to change when it comes to optimisation. It seem the recent updates/patches have brought quite a huge performance issue for lots of people (despite people used to run the game fine). I'm not saying people using Intel CPU ain't suffering the problem, but from what I read around, the issue seem to hit people that ain't using overclocked core i5/i7 much harder (mostly likely due to to weaker single-threaded performance).

If he wants to hear "his GTX680 is too weak for the game", and sure I will say that...
Click to expand...

With regards to Trainz, it appears that an update on that is causing the issue. As for why yesterday WoT worked great and today not so much, no idea.

I am well aware that games and software are updated and optimised, or that's the intention of the update, but sometimes they don't go well. However, this is a very different argument to the your CPU is **** argument you started out with.
 
teppic said:
(I didn't mean updates to the Steam client :) Updates to the game via Steam.)
Click to expand...

The game checks for updates whenever you load it, it's not a steam game. At least, mine isn't.

It appears that the updates for games that come through Steam aren't always the most recent, oddly. I think I'm just going to have to come to terms with the fact that it's not my hardware and it's the games. World of Tanks seemed better today, maybe it's just I never noticed it, or it was considerably less noticeable.
 
Th3M8dH8tt3r said:
I am well aware that games and software are updated and optimised, or that's the intention of the update, but sometimes they don't go well. However, this is a very different argument to the your CPU is **** argument you started out with.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if you realise this, but game problem or not, using 1 cores or 4 cores, a Bulldozer FX CPU (even overclocked) would bottleneck a GTX680 for online gamings in general.

Even if a game uses up to 4 cores, your FX8150 at 4.50GHz is only around as fast a Phenom II X4 at around 3.90-4.00GHz. I would imagine the FX8150 and 4.50GHz would handle most single player FPS/action games fine and possibly won't bottleneck the GTX680 so long as they use a minimum of 4 cores, but any less than that, or playing games online, the GTX680 will get bottlenecked right away.

Bottomline is, you simply won't come close to getting the most out of your GTX680 with the current CPU you got, particularly if you play older games (which don't use more than 2 cores) as well.
 
Last edited:
For what its worth. World of Tanks can be bottlenecked quite heavily by the cpu. With running 1x 6970 with an OC on, 1920 x 1200 and most settings set pretty high / max I get around 80% CPU usage on one core of a 4.7GHz 2600K. The othe cores are generally on 0 - very little use.
 
Marine-RX179 said:
I'm not sure if you realise this, but game problem or not, using 1 cores or 4 cores, a Bulldozer FX CPU (even overclocked) would bottleneck a GTX680 for online gamings in general.

Even if a game uses up to 4 cores, your FX8150 at 4.50GHz is only around as fast a Phenom II X4 at around 3.90-4.00GHz. I would imagine the FX8150 and 4.50GHz would handle most single player FPS/action games fine and possibly won't bottleneck the GTX680 so long as they use a minimum of 4 cores, but any less than that, or playing games online, the GTX680 will get bottlenecked right away.

Bottomline is, you simply won't come close to getting the most out of your GTX680 with the current CPU you got, particularly if you play older games (which don't use more than 2 cores) as well.
Click to expand...

Can you qualify this as I'm not seeing any effects of said bottlenecking. The occasional stutter is back where it was, not there or very rare and this is down to a mod that I've installed for WoT. My original query was more with relation to the sim games. Trainz it transpires has a problem and is badly written so it's not running right on ANY system.

If I look at my core monitor, why am I seeing 4 or 5 cores at work and none of them are hitting 100%? If I move PhysX to my CPU, I am seeing one core at 100% as expected.
 
Th3M8dH8tt3r said:
Can you qualify this as I'm not seeing any effects of said bottlenecking. The occasional stutter is back where it was, not there or very rare and this is down to a mod that I've installed for WoT. My original query was more with relation to the sim games. Trainz it transpires has a problem and is badly written so it's not running right on ANY system.

If I look at my core monitor, why am I seeing 4 or 5 cores at work and none of them are hitting 100%? If I move PhysX to my CPU, I am seeing one core at 100% as expected.
Click to expand...
Forget about looking at CPU usage...you should monitor your GPU usage instead. The simplest way is to monitor your GPU usage while in game (you can use on-screen display feature of MSI Afterburner. If your GPU usage is dropped far from 99/100% and getting low frame rate, and and dropping your graphic setting doesn't improve the frame rate at all, then you got a CPU bottleneck. Unlike crossfire/sli with multi-GPU set up, if your GPU usage is not hitting close to 100% at all time (with the exception of capped frame rate or vsync to 60fps), it always points to CPU bottleneck rather than driver issue (with the exception of if you changed GPU and might have so leftover drivers from previous cards which may causing problem).
 
Th3M8dH8tt3r said:
Can you qualify this as I'm not seeing any effects of said bottlenecking. The occasional stutter is back where it was, not there or very rare and this is down to a mod that I've installed for WoT. My original query was more with relation to the sim games. Trainz it transpires has a problem and is badly written so it's not running right on ANY system.

If I look at my core monitor, why am I seeing 4 or 5 cores at work and none of them are hitting 100%? If I move PhysX to my CPU, I am seeing one core at 100% as expected.
Click to expand...

If your card can output 100FPS on average but your CPU on that selected game and settings can output 80FPS on average there is a bottleneck, you wont see it however unless the minimums are quite aggressive/low, you also might not notice as you're probably running a 60hz screen inwhat case the real bottleneck in my example is your screen :D

Easiest way to see what your CPU is capable of on any game is to turn the resolution down to near enough nothing, run a bench test and that's that, up the details and res to become more GPU limited.

Give this a read: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18508204
 
OP is the same guy who tried to tell people the VRAM on SLI'd cards stack, in a thread he started about using 3x 780s for photoshop.

It's easier for people to help you when you show a little humility and don't act like you know better. The CPU is crap.
 
Orangey said:
OP is the same guy who tried to tell people the VRAM on SLI'd cards stack, in a thread he started about using 3x 780s for photoshop.

It's easier for people to help you when you show a little humility and don't act like you know better. The CPU is crap.
Click to expand...

So you're telling me my CPU has gone from been absolutely fine yesterday to crap today!!!! And, I was happy to admit that I was wrong about the SLI. I was trying to tell anyone anything either. Simply how I thought things would work with multi-monitor and stuff wasn't the case.

This thread is not about whether or not my CPU is an Intel i CPU. What I was asking for is if people have experienced similar things where some games have bad FPS and others don't and if there's a setting somewhere that could be effecting it. Or, could it be the games are badly written.

For some reason everyone has decided that magically my CPU has turned into a pile of turd because I installed a new game. This is why I hate forums ...read the original post!!!!!

I don't give two ***** about what people think about my CPU. I like it, it never causes me any problems. It runs cool and plays and does everything I ask of it.

All I wanted was some feedback from people who may have had a similar experience and if changing the settings in games and the nVidia control panel sorted the problem or if the game's were badly coded.
 
Last edited:
Marine-RX179 said:
Forget about looking at CPU usage...you should monitor your GPU usage instead. The simplest way is to monitor your GPU usage while in game (you can use on-screen display feature of MSI Afterburner. If your GPU usage is dropped far from 99/100% and getting low frame rate, and and dropping your graphic setting doesn't improve the frame rate at all, then you got a CPU bottleneck. Unlike crossfire/sli with multi-GPU set up, if your GPU usage is not hitting close to 100% at all time (with the exception of capped frame rate or vsync to 60fps), it always points to CPU bottleneck rather than driver issue (with the exception of if you changed GPU and might have so leftover drivers from previous cards which may causing problem).
Click to expand...

Not the case as I've been trying to say. There's nothing wrong with my hardware. All I wanted to know is if people have had similar experiences and if settings changed things.
 
Are you sure your clocks on your card were boosting when gaming? You can get them stuck on 2D clocks and that would cause poor performance.

The CPU in terms of gaming of single/dual threaded games is crap though, the IPC just isn't there.
 
Couple of good answers which have led me to look things up and try things and everything is fine.

If I had an i7 4770k and had the same OP, would I be getting these responses or is it because it's an AMD people go to a generic, the CPU is **** and bottlenecking everything answer rather then reading the actual OP?

This forum seems completely and 100% biased towards Intel i CPUs. My FX8150 has done everything I've asked of it and never caused me any problems. Benchmarks are just a dick waving competition. Who can get the highest number without actually looking into how hardware is being tested and whether or not that test suits some hardware more then others. There's benchmarking software out there that favours AMD CPU but I never see anything about that. It's all just about Intel.

When I find games don't play at max settings, I change my hardware. Like I just did with my GPU. My benchmarks sucked for the last two cards but they still played everything up till a few months ago. There's more to computers then sitting there for a whole weekend running test after test just so you can say my computer comes with x amount of points. Just use the hardware and enjoy it!
 
Tonester0011 said:
Are you sure your clocks on your card were boosting when gaming? You can get them stuck on 2D clocks and that would cause poor performance.

The CPU in terms of gaming of single/dual threaded games is crap though, the IPC just isn't there.
Click to expand...

Mostly, card boosts to 1250mhz from 1050 or whatever it is normally. Idles at 320mhz.

Trainz it doesn't but that's because only 30% of the GPU is being utilised, same as the CPU BUT, there's a known fault with that game causing performance issues for everyone so it's an irrelevant point at the moment. Till the game is fixed anyway, then I'm sure it'll be fine.

It seems like everything is working ok now anyway. Changed a few things and all is as well as it's going to be. Train Simulator is running well with everything absolutely maxed out except anti-aliasing which I've set to FXAA and I honestly can't see much change between that and the max setting. Might up it a bit.
 
You're talking to the wrong person about getting the highest X/P score as that's what i enjoy and that's what i buy hardware for - rarley play games.

As for the forum being bias towards Intel....yes and no, it's more to do with Intel being far far superior in the one thing that matters for gaming - IPC. When games only utilise 1-4 cores (a lot of games....) Intel will come out top, only in games where they can take advantage of all the others AMD provide do they break even and even then the 4c4t Intel will trump the best AMD has, no to mention the 6c6t beasts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom