Horrible FPS Performance...

Discussion in 'Videocards - AMD Radeon' started by Primus Palus, Jan 28, 2015.

  1. Primus Palus

    Primus Palus Guest

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Msi Twinfrozr R9 270X 4G
    There wasn't a general "help" section of the forums so I decided to put this here as I'm running an AMD card. I have the following build and am getting ridiculously low frames on just about everything:

    CPU: AMD FX-8370 (4.2ghz - 8 Cores)
    Mobo: Asus Crosshair V Formula-Z
    RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws X 1600mhz 16GB (8-8-8-24)
    GPU: Msi Twinfrozr R9 270X 4G (4GB)

    Using Msi Afterburner I got the following stats running Dying Light:

    GPU Temp - 51C (max)
    GPU Usage: 40-50% Average with spikes to 98 (every couple minutes)
    GPU Core Clock: 1080mhz constant
    GPU Memory Clock: 1400mhz constant
    VRAM Usage: 3011 (max)

    CPU #1 Usage: 85% (min) / 100% (max) / 95% (average)
    CPU #2 Usage: 47% (min) / 99% (max, one spike) / 65% (average)
    CPU #3 Usage: 51% (min) / 99% (max, one spike) / 70% (average)
    CPU #4 Usage: 22% (min) / 100% (max, one spike) / 55% (average)
    CPU #5 Usage: 28% (min) / 99% (max, one spike) / 55% (average)
    CPU #6 Usage: 11% (min) / 97% (max, one spike) / 45% (average)
    CPU #7 Usage: 0% (min) / 100% (max, one spike) / 50% (average)
    CPU #8 Usage: 0% (min) / 99% (max, one spike) / 40% (average)

    RAM Usage: 2161 (min) / 8009 (max)


    I only get 10-15 frames in that game when standing still looking out over the city. Most of the in-game settings are off or low. This is pretty much the standard story across all games. Sub-par frames (less than 50), much of the graphics off or turned down, and piss poor returns.

    I just built this PC about two weeks ago. Every driver possible has been updated. GPU, BIOS, everything. Fresh wipes of ALL drives, re-install of Windows (7, 64-bit)... should be the perfect scenario. But I'm getting poor results.

    Any ideas here?
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015
  2. quickkill2021

    quickkill2021 Guest

    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    1080ti sli Poseidon
    You have done a great job at demonstrating what a CPU bottle neck is.

    As you can clearing see, for your first example 1 core is at 100 percent, where as everything else is pretty high as well.

    Your gpu is at around 40 percent. Meaning your cpu is not fast enough to feed the gpu which is why you have low fps.

    How to fix?

    Only way to fix is either

    1. Overclocking as high as you can get. You will know if you are not bottle-necked if your gpu can reach 100 percent usage.

    2. Buy a new cpu with a faster per core performance.

    3. wait till direct x 12 - direct x 12 games should not have this issue with your cpu being slow

    4. only play amd mantle games.

    Now you know why its so important to have low level api. This is why. Most games only use 1 thread. So it doesn't matter how many cores you have. Hope i helped.
     
  3. Primus Palus

    Primus Palus Guest

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Msi Twinfrozr R9 270X 4G
    I'm confused... why would an 8 core, 4.2ghz processor not be "enough"?

    I did some more testing with 3DMark 11. Here are the results:


    http ://i1380.photobucket.com/albums/ah162/Primus_Palus/Results_zpsw4pbfybr.png

    (a space was placed before the : to allow a link)


    Here are the scores:

    3DMark Score: 8216
    Graphics Score: 8506
    Physics Score: 7784
    Combined Score: 7013
    Graphics Test: 38.09 fps
    Graphics Test: 41.0 fps
    Graphics Test: 55.36 fps
    Graphics Test: 25.35 fps
    Physics Test: 24.71 fps
    Combined Test: 32.62 fps

    Keep in mind the test was done in 1280 x 720 (my native being 1920 x 1080... which should yield even lower scores).
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015
  4. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Your CPU is 100% not bottlenecking r9-270x. When it is bottlenecking really strong graphical setup (SLI/CF) it still produces well over 60fps in games.

    I would look at sound card/nic/sata drivers.
    While you installed them, one can't be sure you installed version which is not defective.

    Start task manager, enable display of kernel times in CPU utilization (red line) and if that is anywhere over 5~10% you have driver problem.
     

  5. Primus Palus

    Primus Palus Guest

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Msi Twinfrozr R9 270X 4G
    Red line is really low... hard to tell an exact %:

    http: //i1380.photobucket.com/albums/ah162/Primus_Palus/Bench_zps9dgl8uj7.png

    I would say at most that's 10%... but it does fluctuate.

    EDIT:

    After taking this screenshot and letting it sit longer, the red line is even lower and more stable. FYI.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015
  6. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    It does not look like driver problem, but screen shows quite some AA levels.
    What kind of Anti-Aliasing are you using? Can you turn that off instead of those details you sacrifice?
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015
  7. Primus Palus

    Primus Palus Guest

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Msi Twinfrozr R9 270X 4G
    AA is on (the games default AA, nothing fancy). I can turn it on for like 1 or 2 fps gain. But that's it. My graphics card (under the CCC) has everything set to application controlled. So nothing happening on that end.

    It would be nice to at least hit 30fps in these games... so I can TRY and stream or record them. Unfortunately the frames are just too low most of the time to make it even playable.
     
  8. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Thing is, that screen shot shows well threaded game, and your CPU while having lower per thread performance has about same total performance as mine.
    And should perform really well. Your graphics card on other hand has performance of high end GPU from 2009/2010, which does not allow you to run some fancy stuff today like mentioned AA. I would turn it off for good.

    Can you install HWiNFO64, get into sensors and look at your clocks when you game?
    Maybe something does not keep clocks when you game.

    Edit: since I don't have Dying Light, I have no clue exactly how game performs. But what I found by quick google is that it does not run exactly well on average hardware and biggest impact has view range.
    People who owns it advise to keep it only around 20-30%.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015
  9. Primus Palus

    Primus Palus Guest

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Msi Twinfrozr R9 270X 4G
    I can tell you from running Msi Afterburner and following the clocks carefully that while playing, my gpu clock sticks to 1080mhz and my memory clock sticks to 1400mhz. Without fail and without any change. Very consistent.
     
  10. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    I meant CPU clocks/ram. But still can Dying Light seems to be poorly optimized and developed mainly for 30fps.
    And minimal requirements are around your system, from which one can presume, you would have to set everything to minimum to have 30fps.

    Very unfortunate decision from Techland.
     

  11. Primus Palus

    Primus Palus Guest

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Msi Twinfrozr R9 270X 4G
    I'll take a look at the CPU clocks here soon.

    I just ran a 2009 game, Red Faction Guerrilla. In open terrain with nothing around... amazing 100fps. In populated areas... I dropped as low as 35fps. CPU usage was majority of cores one and two with almost nothing in a few of the others. GPU usage was 90% or so.

    If I run Battlefield 4 (on only one map tested), I was pulling 35fps at the lowest and near 90fps on the high end. Average was about 60fps which is nice and solid (almost everything turned up to High).

    If I run ArmA 3 on the other hand... I'm looking at 30fps or less with most settings bumped down, and using every tweak I can find online with regards to settings, launch parameters, and so forth. Unfortunately I don't think ArmA is a great comparison as a lot of people have pretty garbage results with that game.

    I'll test a few other games out when I can and let you know what I get. If there's a specific game I can run through, that you guys can compare to your own experiences or similar systems just let me know. This is me here:

    http: //steamcommunity.com/id/PrimusPalus/

    Just let me know if a game I have, you'd like to see some numbers from. I really want to get to the bottom of this.
     
  12. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Installing Red Faction Guerrilla. I have BF4 installed, Natural Selection 2, Nosgoth, I am Alive, Dead Island: Epidemic.

    For testing I'll Down clock my CPU to 2.0GHz. That is lower per single thread performance than yours give. and considerably lower total performance than yours provide.

    And since My GPU is bit stronger, I should be capable to see big bottleneck if exists. But I do not think I'll have an issue.
     
  13. sTOrM41

    sTOrM41 Guest

    Messages:
    508
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    GTX 970 @ 1500 MHz
    cpu limit

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    the game only profits of 1-2 cores, so you need a 5ghz intel cpu for this terrible port for decent playability.

    an other way to solve the problem is to uninstall this trash.
     
  14. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    This is sad situation. PS4 with 8core 1.6GHz having 30fps, and PC port with 8Core AMD CPU having 18fps at 4GHz.
    It means it has 4times higher demands on PC than on console.
    And even on those new i7s it performs badly.
     
  15. quickkill2021

    quickkill2021 Guest

    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    1080ti sli Poseidon
    because the game doesn't care if its a 8 core or a 500 million core cpu.

    the game stresses 1 core. so if you have a 1,000 core cpu. If 1 core is at 100 percent and all the others is at 5 percent it doesn't matter, the bottle neck is that 1 core. The frame rate depends on how fast that 1 core is.

    I will give you another example, I believe the game cryostasis only uses 1 cpu core. So since i have a 4930k at 4.5 ghz, someone who has a 4790k clocked at 4.5 ghz will still have a higher frame rate than me even though i have 2 additional cores. Because his one core at 4.5ghz is faster than my 4.5 ghz core. You get it?

    However lets look at battlefield 4. That game does use all cpu cores. So you aren't going to see 1 cpu core at 100 percent while all the others is like at 15 to 20 percent.

    Look at DSOGAMING article regarding dying light. Its clear you don't know what a cpu bottleneck is. Most games only use 3 cpu cores. It never mattered if you had 8 cpu cores. If you have 8 slower cores v s 3 faster ones, always the 3 faster cores would yield higher fps.

    Also every video game engine is different on how many cpu cores they use. You have to research each game and their engine to see if they can use your 8 cores. Most modern games only use 3 maybe 4 cores max. The battlefield 4 and dragon age inquisition are the standouts that actually use all your cpu cores.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015

  16. ibitato

    ibitato Guest

    Higher resolutions, less CPU bottleneck
    Lower resolutions, higher CPU bottleneck

    Higher resolutions, higher GPU bottleneck
    Lower resolutions, lower GPU bottleneck

    CPU bottleneck beign speed per core.
    Depending on the game engine and optimisations, you might use 1,2,3 or more cores.
    Usually game logic goes to 1 core, sound handling to other, etc

    So, It's not about having cores, it's about how fast your core(s) is(are).

    Obvious to say, that are games that
    1) need more than 1 core
    2) Are heavy cpu bound, and no matrer what GPU you have
    3) Are better optimised for threading / multi-tasking

    If you really want yo know how your PC handles, make it on real life
    scenario
    that is
    1) 1080p
    2) little of AA ot FXAA , AF of your liking

    then post game / frames per second on each game.
    then those numbers are comparable with others, and you really know if you could do better or not

    3DMark 11 is a synthetic bench, not a real life scenario
    games are a much more complex scenario
     
  17. ibitato

    ibitato Guest

    BTW Dying Light has a 1 CPU 100% problem
    there is a fix floating around
     
  18. sTOrM41

    sTOrM41 Guest

    Messages:
    508
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    GTX 970 @ 1500 MHz
    finished my download right now

    performance is ok, not great, not unplayable.

    fps around 30 with high settings in 4k
     
  19. quickkill2021

    quickkill2021 Guest

    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    1080ti sli Poseidon
    I saw totalbiscuts port report. He was complaining about horrible sli scaling.


    Well. how can this game scale on sli when it can't tax 100 percent 1 gpu in cpu limited situations, which is mostly this entire game.

    I hope directx12 fixes this issue. It is clear to me as of right now there is no point in upgrading your gpu if the cpu will always be the bottleneck due to 1-3 cores only being used.

    Most people will say its bad optimization. It probably has to do with a bad engine.

    Ps4 and xbox one does not have this problem because its low level api already. Bet you though if you ran this game using a 1.6 ghz 8 core cpu you won't get past 20 fps lol on the pc i mean.

    I will say though that tomb raider is the best game i have ever played regarding taxing the gpu to 100 percent all the time. If it wasn't for the fact that tessellation breaks the game using sli then it would be a perfect pc port.
     
  20. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    AvP 2010 is one which runs perfectly with 1.6GHz Atom + good GPU.

    But, please don't say he'll be limited always, because that is not truth.
    With this game everyone has bad performance, till they fix it.
     

Share This Page