安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
it forces it to try to run it on 4 threads. it can actually only use about 3 threads ( not cores, threads and cores are different thing.)
you cant force a game that simply just to run on more cores than it was designed to without problems or it actually not working.
that all comes down to witcher 3 using 4 cores. Witcher 3 takes all the performance it can get out from your CPU (Thats why it runs notably "better" with higher settings than your CSGO) since csgo can only use your two cores.
However, Source being able to only use 3 threads explains why I only manage to use 80% usage across all 4 cores on my A8-7650k. Cheers for clearing that up.
Yeah, and the 1 extra youre getting as a thread, doesnt work that well either (It uses that about 30% more of utilization, but it actually cant be seen in performance.) it just generates useless heat and reservers the 30% utilization just for "Trying" to run the game on 3 threads.
That is kinda the limitation of source engine, and why they havent "updated" the game to use 3 or 4 cores.
perfectly explainable.
your CPU cant run the game that higher FPS(Due to the two cores only being used, which both are quite low in core-performance), and your GPU is so powerful its not bottlenecking (If it would bottleneck, you would get higher FPS with less settings.)
Youre already getting the max performance on GPU side, but your CPU cant run the game any higher, thats why changing the settings wont matter in any kind of way, since those settings are all related (Other than resolution) on GPU.
and resolution change? its the only thing which would affect FPS but only about 5-10fps. also it takes heat off GPU.
I know all the things about AMD CPUs after 2000s, been using them since athlons first came up in line, and know what versions of the CPUs are weak and what not.
FX and athlon series have always had BAD single core performance. they do DECENTLY in apps that use 4 cores (Still no games which use all my cores... sad) and thats why it cant get that better performance. in future it will change though when games are able to USE all the resources they have in their hands. you got to take in consideration Source engine which CSGO runs on is old. thats why theyre making Source 2 engine atm.
Having a higher FPS can decrease input lag and it feels a lot smoother when playing with a higher fps(without vsync)
Remember that your pc in general, it self only uses 2 cores because 2 of them ar parked so "-threads 4" does not work :)
May i ask what settings you use? My FX8150 just so makes it to stable 120fps and an FX8320 shouldn't be much more than 10-20% faster.
Of course the lowest settings with AFx16 and native resolution 1920x1080. Lowest are the best taking in consideration performance, and in CSGO graphics doesnt matter. Lowest = better viewsided.
also im paired with a GTX680 2GB version so that old flagship card has a lot of power behind it pushing all the frames up.
Also i have no other crap running than steam and CSGO, since i like to keep everything optimized and cooled properly.
if your FX8150 is on stock clocks, take in consideration mine is at the moment clocked on 4.8GHZ (almost as fast as 5ghz 9590, Its actually the same processor (Exaclty same but just higher clock and different name) So mine is actually 50-60% faster than yours is.
Also the 81X series along with 61X series FX processors were known to have even more horrible single core performance than 83X and 63X series did. even the FX83/63 have ♥♥♥♥♥♥ single core performance, its still even more horrible on 81 series ones.
Thats why they had to create the "much improved" 83/63X line processors.
Yep, that explains it. My FX8150 runs slightly undervolted @ 4ghz without turbo. It's so power hungry already, i don't feel like OCing it. I thought about getting a 8320 or 8350 but from benchmarks in PC magazines i only saw like a max 20% increase and mostly below 10%, so investing 150€ for that little increase didn't seem worth it to me.
High or low settings don't make any difference for me fps-wise, so i keep them on high. GPU is not a limiting factor for me either, as i recently upgraded from a HD 6970 to a R9 290X, which didn't give me any FPS increase in CSGO.
That is quite odd then. im able to pull that 299FPS no problemo with 2x antialiasing.