1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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.

    Dismiss Notice

Have I really got a bottleneck?

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by davedudes, 12 May 2010.

  1. davedudes

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 13 Apr 2009

    Posts: 1,590

    Having a few problems with SC Conviction the frames go up and range from 24 to 60, hope Im going to be ok, because ive asked loads and everyone has been saying id be ok.

    Cheers
     
  2. RavenXXX2

    Capodecina

    Joined: 6 Oct 2007

    Posts: 18,598

    Location: North West

    SC Conviction is another ubisoft poor console port like assassins creed 2 was, play it then ditch it.
     
  3. Rapido!

    Associate

    Joined: 18 Jan 2009

    Posts: 94

    ATi weren't ready with the drivers for this one. I've read a lot of glowing reports of how well it runs on Nvidia cards and, uh, very mixed ones about ATi. Game looks amazing though.

    I expect a 10.5 Preview will fix a lot of that. 10.4a is the driver to use for now.
     
  4. davedudes

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 13 Apr 2009

    Posts: 1,590


    Ok cheers, guess ill have to wait :)
     
  5. Marine-RX179

    Capodecina

    Joined: 6 Feb 2010

    Posts: 14,343

    Since a E8400 at 4.25GHz is more or less on balance with a 5850 on a scale, your E8400 at 4.05GHz would bottleneck a 5870 a bit.

    Try overclocking your E8400 higher may be?
     
  6. 'Wes

    Capodecina

    Joined: 28 Jun 2009

    Posts: 11,748

    Location: Łódź, Poland

    This basically sums it up. Console ports have lately been really badly ported to PC and i wouldn't think an E8400 at 4GHz would bottleneck a 5870, although there is always a slight bottleneck in every system but it's barely noticeable.
     
  7. gurusan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Sep 2006

    Posts: 13,489

    Location: Portland, OR

    i doubt an e8400 @ 4ghz will bottleneck this game tbh. you guys didn't even ask at what resolution he games! I see he has a 24" monitor so I assume 1900x1200...with 4xAA and 16xAF he should not be bottlenecking at all.
     
  8. Muel

    Mobster

    Joined: 26 Jun 2009

    Posts: 3,028

    Location: Sheffield

    Wouldn't it be 1920x1200 or 1920x1080?

    It might well bottleneck it I reckon, my Phenom 2 965BE goes upto around 60% on 2 cores on Crysis with a single 5830, and that's supposed to be more GPU intensive or so I've heard.
     
  9. 'Wes

    Capodecina

    Joined: 28 Jun 2009

    Posts: 11,748

    Location: Łódź, Poland

    Depends on what motherboard and ram you're using as well.
     
  10. gurusan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Sep 2006

    Posts: 13,489

    Location: Portland, OR

    AFAIK the game doesn't even support more than 2 cores! The "recommended" spec is only a 1.8GHz C2D.

    Come on guys, a 4GHz wolfy will not bottleneck the card :/
     
  11. RavenXXX2

    Capodecina

    Joined: 6 Oct 2007

    Posts: 18,598

    Location: North West

    Yeah it's an unoptimized console port, I think it only supports DX9, goes to show how ubisoft treat the PC community. On top of all that you have their stupid DRM which means you have to be on-line to play the game even when playing off-line, you lose connection the game shuts down. :eek:

     
    Last edited: 13 May 2010
  12. Marine-RX179

    Capodecina

    Joined: 6 Feb 2010

    Posts: 14,343

    Poor game port aside, hardware wise a 5870 with a 4Ghz E8400 won't be any faster than a 5850 in most games, because a 4GHz E8400 at 100% would only be able to use up to 80~85% of 5870's full capability.
    Crysis
    X3: Terran Conflict
     
    Last edited: 13 May 2010
  13. gurusan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Sep 2006

    Posts: 13,489

    Location: Portland, OR

    Both of those are notoriously CPU limited games, not to mention they are benches at 1680x1050 with no AA and no AF. I mean you realize bit-tech picked both of those benches specifically because they were entirely CPU limited? It pretty much says so.

    Therefore hardly relevant to the OP, IMO. I mean X3 is ancient anyway, it's only single threaded.
     
    Last edited: 13 May 2010
  14. Marine-RX179

    Capodecina

    Joined: 6 Feb 2010

    Posts: 14,343

    Actually the GPU bound for 5870 for Crysis at those settings is actually at average 57fps. i5 750, i7 920/930, i7 980X overclocked to around 3.5-4.72GHz+ all manage to get the 5870 to average 57fps, whereas the E8400 at 4.25GHz only managed to get the 5870 to average 48fps, so it is clearly a case of the CPU not keeping up with the 5870. 48fps vs 57fps is roughly 84% vs 100%.

    The bottleneck might not happen in all the games, but assume even if only 30-50% of the games does, I stand corrected that by overclocking his E8400 to higher the 5870 will give him increased frame rate (unlike slower cards that already hit the GPU bound), practicularly for games that stress the CPU more.
     
    Last edited: 13 May 2010
  15. gurusan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Sep 2006

    Posts: 13,489

    Location: Portland, OR

    again, 1680x1050 with no AA, no AF, on a game that takes advantage of multithreading :/

    He is gaming at a much higher res with, I assume, a substantial amount of AA and AF....and the game in question is just a dual-threaded game.