Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
GTA V doesn't use full CPU usage, frankly, despite it's an old game released in 2013.
There are a cooling issue so...
How much coolers you have got in your case?
And the other thing is... Maybe the curve of the fan in the GPU is too low for "x" temperature.
For ex. Working fan at 50% at 70° C
In my case all gpus, I using MSI Afterburner to put in manual to running at 100% the fans, in idle, full load, middle load... It's more cheaper change a fan cooler what a GPU
If I have to recall, the casing has 4 exhaust fans. Inside, there's a heatsink for the CPU and two fans for the big-sized GPU located underneath. It has enough cooling, as a matter of fact.
But... I do recall I had fan failures long before I have this game. Have replaced few months ago or so (or maybe last year when I suspect some fans stopped working despite being cleaned).
Again, I changed nothing in the way I operate the computer. No overclocks, even adjusting fans. Guess the room temperature is what I concerned; I feel some sweat every time I run my computer and playing a game.
Guess my MSI GE72MVR aint laptop then... because Ive played games on it for 3 years now and it still doesnt have any issues.
On semi unrelated note - yes he learned his lesson because he is using brain. Try doing that as well.
Even then, it was the users GPU that has a point of failure, which is far more likely to happen to a GPU than a CPU.
I guess this is like what happened that day all over again. Any electronic components are "really" extremely fragile, even for a top-brass GPU if you didn't take a good care of it. My parents are really concerned with my savings that I'll be using it for a new GPU replacement.
All I know is that there are 4 fans that act as an "exhaust" to dump the heat to the outside. The other fans inside are for both CPU and GPU.
Most of the times I spent my weekend and holiday for gaming and house cleaning and occasionally didn't take an attention to the class during weekdays.
I know computer parts, but not as good as you are. I might gonna learn from you as well.
BTW, when my PC has come out of the repairs, maybe we can spar sometime in a dogfight in AC7.
But I digress; high CPU usage during a game isn't necessarily abnormal, it's merely an indication that your processor requires more dedicated computing to run a given task. However, this dynamic is different during a game. High CPU usage means that your processor needs to utilize all threads. This is bad because those threads are still needed for other backround programs that Windows uses. The bottleneck occurs when you have a GPU that is within spec but has to wait for the CPU to catch up. There are instances where having a higher end GPU paired with a slower CPU will run worse if it had a lower end GPU because of a bottleneck. As I said, even if this is the first or only game where you have high CPU usage, it might be a case where the demands of processing power are higher than what your chipset can provide.
Think of it like running a 3 legged race when you are tied to a partner who wants to constantly run faster than you can. You're both going to be slowed down because you're not working at a pace that is in tandem.
As for cooling solutions. If you are using an AIO cooler, the main point of failure is the pump. Most AIO manufactures provide a RMA for a unit that has malfunctioned within it's life expectancy. Corsair AIO's are suppose to last 5 years, though depending on how heavily used, it's more realistic that 3 - 4 years.
In terms of case fans, the number or even size of case fans do not matter as much as what they are designed for and their performance. There are 2 stats to pay attention to when choosing case fans, Air Flow measured in CFM (cubic feet per minute) and Air Pressure measured in mm H2O (millimeters of water). Air flow is the amount of air that can be moved through the fan and is the type you want to use where it is not going to be restricted by obstructions. A rear exhaust fan is an appropriate example. Air is treated as a liquid which is why air pressure is measured in mm of water. This is a measure of how much a fan can force air through it's blades regardless of the number of obstructions. A radiator fan or ones that would be in front of HDD cages would be good examples of when you would want high air pressure.
It is also worth noting that you ideally want to have positive pressure (more air pumped in then being sucked out). Air is treated as a liquid. If you are only pulling air out of your case, you create negative pressure. This causes your fans to work harder because they have to pull air from somewhere which will only come from air rushing in though gaps in your case. Your fans need air to vent the heat. If the only air they are getting is being forced in by negative pressure then not only is this allowing more heat to build up but increases dust ingress. Positive pressure helps prevents dust from collecting inside the case and makes sure your designated exhaust fans have enough air to vent heat. Having the appropriate type of fans with enough performance and enough intake balanced with exhaust is crucial to dissipate sufficient heat from your PC to maintain performance.
Hope the info helps.
Clock speed is far from the be-all, end-all. By your logic, my FX-6300, with turbo disabled, so at a flat 3.5GHz shouldn't be able to run the game. Yet it maintains sixty frames the majority of time.
Technically, both my GPU and CPU benchmark as weaker than OP, but better than the minimum listed cpu. OP's specs (raw performance wise)aren't the problem.
If clock rates were the be-all and end-all, we wouldn't see such small improvements in standard clocks over the years. There are a lot of other factors involved.
Otherwise, the FX-9590 would would dominate the market with it's stock speed of 4.7GHz/ boost of 5.0 per core, and eight cores, yet the ryzen 1600 at 3.2 stock/3.6 turbo and 6 cores outperforms my FX-6300 by miles, and the 9590 by a signifigant degree as well.
Clock speeds really don't mean quite as much as people think, especially when comparing hardware from different time periods/architectures.
Your statements on case fans are also signifigantly off base.