Steam'i Yükleyin
giriş
|
dil
简体中文 (Basitleştirilmiş Çince)
繁體中文 (Geleneksel Çince)
日本語 (Japonca)
한국어 (Korece)
ไทย (Tayca)
Български (Bulgarca)
Čeština (Çekçe)
Dansk (Danca)
Deutsch (Almanca)
English (İngilizce)
Español - España (İspanyolca - İspanya)
Español - Latinoamérica (İspanyolca - Latin Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Yunanca)
Français (Fransızca)
Italiano (İtalyanca)
Bahasa Indonesia (Endonezce)
Magyar (Macarca)
Nederlands (Hollandaca)
Norsk (Norveççe)
Polski (Lehçe)
Português (Portekizce - Portekiz)
Português - Brasil (Portekizce - Brezilya)
Română (Rumence)
Русский (Rusça)
Suomi (Fince)
Svenska (İsveççe)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamca)
Українська (Ukraynaca)
Bir çeviri sorunu bildirin
Tartışma Kuralları ve Yönergeleri
Bu iletiyi bildir
'It does seem MugHugs system is at the point where the CPU has just enough to keep the GPU fed'
But as soon as I increase the resolution for example, that nice balance goes out the window. Seems to be a sweet spot for each system by changing resolution, settings, etc.
Good read.
'Let’s consider a PC with an Intel Core i7-7700K, the fastest CPU for gaming currently available. Now let’s say the graphics card is an entry-level RX 550 or GT 1030. Even though the CPU is powerful enough to allow games to run at more than 100 FPS, the graphics cards simply aren’t powerful enough to push any reasonable framerate. This is a GPU bottleneck.'
http://blog.logicalincrements.com/2017/09/what-cpu-gpu-computer-bottlenecks-how-to-detect-them/
A bottleneck can contribute to the stutters but there are many other reasons.
What Hz is your monitor running at?
What is your typical FPS in AC:O at current settings. What are you curremt settings?
Do you have any form of VSync or similar running through your drivers, utilities or game?
If so, exactly what?
Without the proper information it is unlikely anyone here can really help you.
GPU bottleneck does not exist. Any GPU usage at 99% on games is optimal, regardless of what GPU it is. It means you are using all of what your GPU can offer because your processor does not bottleneck it. Even if you are using v-sync to 60 Hz for example and the GPU is not always at 99% but 80-90% but you get 60 fps all of the time then that also means there is not a CPU bottleneck.
However, if your processor is pushing your GPU way too much, then at that moment it might be wise to consider a GPU change, but that does not mean you had a GPU bottleneck, is just that it was giving its all, as simple as that.
1) The game could stutter because you are not using v-sync and your monitor Hz are less than the fps the game is displaying.
2) Slow HDD causes stutter in some games.
3) The game is not an optimization marvel, so it could stutter.
4) You could use RivaTuner STS to stabilize frame time on this game to see if it helps with some micro stutters.
5) You don't have a CPU bottleneck, is just that this game has very high CPU utilization.
That is NOT a GPU bottleneck. You have NO idea of what you are talking about, people like yourself confuse others even more. The lower the CPU usage is and the higher GPU usage is, the better, that is OPTIMAL PC performance and should always be like that. If that CPU was 20% and was able to keep the GPU at 99% then the CPU has enough power to send draw calls to the GPU while doing almost nothing. GPU usage should be always HIGH and CPU usage should always be LOW!!!
I bet you think an i7 8700k at 25% and a GTX 1080 Ti at 99% is a "GPU bottleneck", lmfao, the ignorance.
Semantics sure, but the GPU is still the limiting factor in your performance here even if it's not "bottlenecking" anything further down the line.
Arrogant little ......, aren't you.
'Bottleneck' - a point of congestion or blockage, in particular.
As far as the example of ELEX it was not meant to be a true GPU bottleneck example but potentially an example of in-efficiency in their game engine, holding back the possible FPS and better performance, etc.
Nearly 75% of a CPU's muscle potentially sitting there doing nothing in a 2017 title like that is not encouraging when it comes to your brand new expensive 6+ core CPU you just laid out for!! Use you brain for once.
And you can bet whatever you want, just bet it up your own ...... Sound like the best place for you.
Now, do we take this unknown (as to be qualified to talk on the subject) but clearly arrogant person's word or look at the 1000's of results from doing a Internet search
'Can a gpu bottleneck a cpu'
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1AVFC_enUS782US782&q=can+a+gpu+bottleneck+a+cpu&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjL98zoxqTZAhVCvlMKHZyHD8EQ1QIIywEoBQ&biw=1920&bih=987
So, even if just a third of the results indicate a gpu can be a bottleneck that still ends up:
191,000 sources v the singular Mr. KSr_2210. Cut it down to just 25% of the results and that is a lot more people then little old Mr. KSr_2210. And on and on.
Mmm, Mr. know-it-all or all of those other sources out there on the Internet.
To use your words: 'I bet you think' you know it all but the sad fact is you do not.
Remember the bottleneck can result from an over-loaded or inefficient GPU affected through hardware specs, drivers or software utilization of the GPU. They can affects the potential end results including either playability, graphical fidelity or performance. Flight sims like PrePar3D or X-Plane come to mind.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-3445516/ryzen-1600-gtx-1080.html There is no botleneck problem with your combo.
I have problems with stutter when I launch the game due to the 8GB ram, windows will start using page file and it takes a minute for it to automatically send the other programs and services to page file and give priority to the game to run on ram. Try having as little as possible programs running while gaming.
Overclock your CPU, it was made with that in mind.
GPU 98%
CPU 100%
i5-6600K O/C 4.4Ghz, GTX970 EVGA SSC 2, 16GB DDR-4 and SSD.
1080p maxed out @ 60Hz.
but then i lowered a bit the graphics settings (custom) and i always have more than 57 now and 60.
I tested the bench test at 1080p all maxed i got 72fps and more than 8900 score.
About my monitor I have a benq monitor 1080p 60hz, but when i don't used vsync I have even more stuter. Nothing else than v sync,
ps: bench done without v sync and it was awful full of stuter.
And btw i never saw my cpu over 90 and gpu over 92.
even without v sync.
Yes, there is a bottleneck with the OP's combo IN THIS PARTICULAR GAME. I know because I have a 1700 @ 3.8 Ghz and a GTX 1080, and my GPU gets bottlenecked in Alexandria, even at 1440p. This is with DDR4-3000 memory. As you can see in the video I posted earlier, even an 8700K paired with DDR4-4200 can bottleneck a GTX 1080 in Alexandria in this game.
Your GPU is designed to draw frames as quickly as it can. It will run at 100% utilization unless it constrained by a frame rate limit or another component in your PC. Saying that your GPU "doesn't run at 100% because it doesn't need to" is nonsensical and inaccurate. The GPU isn't smart. It can't just say "well this is enough frames, don't need to produce more." Unless otherwise restricted, it will always produce as many frames as it can and the only impact of switching to a lower resolution is that it will be able to produce more fps. If you don't have a frame rate limit in place and your GPU isn't running at 98%+ utilization, then it is being bottlenecked by SOMETHING. The reason you see lower GPU usage on high-end GPUs at low resolutions is because the GPU is able to produce higher FPS, so you run into a bottleneck somewhere else in the system.
You might not be seeing 100% utilization on the CPU (or even 100% on a single core), but that doesn't mean the GPU isn't being bottlenecked by the CPU and/or system RAM. You could also be bottlenecked by CPU cache latency, core-to-core latency, memory speed, or even memory amount. Core utilization is not the only factor here. AC Origins in particular, like a lot of recent open-world games, is very sensitive to memory bandwidth and if you have slow RAM that is absolutely going to limit your GPU's performance.
Now, you might say that technically, being limited by the RAM is not a "CPU bottleneck" specifically, and while that might be semantically true, the reality is that most Ryzen systems only realistically support memory speeds up to 3000 or 3200, so if you buy a Ryzen system you're basically guaranteed to run into a memory bandwidth bottleneck at some point in AC Origins. So saying "well that's not a CPU bottleneck" is kinda silly, since your choice of CPU is leading to a RAM limitation that is leading to a bottleneck.
You also need to keep in mind that bottlenecks are situational, not absolute. Saying "a Ryzen 1600 bottlenecks a GTX 1080" is too vague because that's not how it works. Given the task in question, you might see different components in a system become the limiting factor at any given moment. At one point, the CPU might be the bottleneck, then it might need to load and the drive becomes the bottleneck, then it gets to a less CPU-intensive scene and doesn't need to load so the GPU becomes the limiting factor again. So (presuming resolution stays the same) you might have one game where the R5 1600 doesn't bottleneck the 1080 at all and it runs at 100% all the time, another game where the 1600 becomes the bottleneck some of the time, and another game where the 1600 is the bottleneck all of the time, depending on how the game is designed and what it expects of the CPU.
I'm not trying to slag Ryzen here. I love my 1700. This post isn't supposed to be "hurr durr Ryzen sucks lol." Rather, the point I'm trying to make is that many recent games like AC Origins and Watch Dogs 2 are EXTREMELY CPU and memory-bandwidth intensive, and nearly all high-end GPUs will be bottlenecked at some point in these games even when paired with higher-end CPUs/mobos/RAM.
Even if what you say is true, he doesn't need to worry about it, it's just how it is, and if he's playing at 1080p the bottleneck won't matter any way.