Will my AMD Phenom 9550 hold me back? (Gaming)

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
McDohl

McDohl

Honorable
Jun 18, 2014
123
0
10,690
Will my Phenom 9550 really hold me back? I ask because I tried using my Phenom 9550 with a Gigabyte R9 270 and I'm still not getting the best FPS (AC4, Sleeping Dogs, maxed out).

The 9550's four cores are NEVER being maxed, maybe 50-60 percent. I'm confused why the frame rate is low. My ram is neither maxing out. Since it's DDR2, maybe it's a "quickness" thing regarding CL or timing?

Here's a benchmark using Fire Strike: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4054907

This was using the 9550 and the 270.

Also, here are the setups I'm considering (I'm budgeting hard):

#1
CPU: AMD Phenom 9550 (I already own it)
GPU: Gigabyte R9 280x

V.S.

#2
CPU: FX 6300
GPU: Twin Frozr GTX 750Ti (I already own it)

 
Solution
CraigN
Bad console port. Not that strange.

McDohl - I misspoke earlier, other reviews mention that Sleeping Dogs is GPU heavy, not CPU heavy. So what's happening here is the game is giving most of the work to the GPU and not to the CPU. This is something around how the game is designed, and isn't something you can do a whole lot to get around. Even if you got the FX6300, though, the FX6300 running at 40% capacity is still a *lot* better than the Phenom running at 40% capacity.

Also, you can probably get a set of 8GB DDR3 1600 MHz for like $70-75, so it's not too bad all things considered.

That being said however, your Phenom 1 is still bottlenecking your R9 270. Other reviews for that board put game framerate in the high 70s and 80s+ on...
Sort by date Sort by votes
CraigN

CraigN

Distinguished
Aug 15, 2013
1,437
0
19,960
The first gen Phenoms were really quite awful in terms of performance. You'd be better off with your Option #2, if that's an option for you.

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/AMD+Phenom+X4+Processor+9550/review?_ga=1.237623235.279341893.1410811068

Gives you an idea of relative performance of the 9550 to other CPUs.

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/AMD+FX-6300/review

The 6300 would probably work out quite a bit better for you, but you're going to need a motherboard that supports it, keep in mind, and that *might* force you to get DDR3 RAM.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
McDohl

McDohl

Honorable
Jun 18, 2014
123
0
10,690

Thanks for the swift reply. What confuses me is that the 9550 isn't being maxed out, such as in AC4 and Sleeping Dogs. With that, you would assume those games aren't CPU intensive enough to require resources exceeding what the 9550 is providing. I'm not the most hardware savvy, what am I missing here?

You're right, regarding the 6300 I was going to take Microcenter up on a deal where I get a free Gigabyte GA-78LMT USB3 with the purchase of a FX 6300. Having to buy DDR3 would suck but it's the name of the game I suppose.

So you really think a 6300 + 750ti would provide better gaming performance than a Phenom 9550 + Gigabyte 780x?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
CraigN

CraigN

Distinguished
Aug 15, 2013
1,437
0
19,960
My only suggestion is to see if any of your cores are "parked." There are several Core Unpark apps out there that could help and see if it then runs at 100%, but the problem with the first gen Phenom series is awful single-core performance (most important for games) and even at 100%, probably won't boost your performance by that much.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
McDohl

McDohl

Honorable
Jun 18, 2014
123
0
10,690

I checked and none are parked. From what I've read, CPU matters more at lower resolutions. Does that mean getting say an i7 wouldn't improve gaming performance at 1920x1080?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

bmacsys

Honorable
BANNED
Jul 4, 2013
1,854
9
12,165


The 6300 will absolutely destroy a first generation Phenom. In fact a Athlon II or Phenom II will destroy your Phenom.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
CraigN

CraigN

Distinguished
Aug 15, 2013
1,437
0
19,960
This is partially correct, McDohl. But some games are CPU-intensive, like StarCraft and (I think) Sleeping Dogs. Other games, like AC4, run like ass on PC anyway. For games that are CPU intensive, your Phenom I is holding you backk. The 6300 will be a noticeable performance bump on your system.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
McDohl

McDohl

Honorable
Jun 18, 2014
123
0
10,690

Here's a screenshot I just took of Sleeping Dogs (Max everything with Texture Pack): http://oi59.tinypic.com/23r9cz.jpg

As you can see, 99% of the GPU is being utilized (r9 270), while only a small fraction of the CPU load. In regards to AC4, I was just reading that. Guys with some serious setups were having issues with it, very strange.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
CraigN

CraigN

Distinguished
Aug 15, 2013
1,437
0
19,960
Bad console port. Not that strange.

McDohl - I misspoke earlier, other reviews mention that Sleeping Dogs is GPU heavy, not CPU heavy. So what's happening here is the game is giving most of the work to the GPU and not to the CPU. This is something around how the game is designed, and isn't something you can do a whole lot to get around. Even if you got the FX6300, though, the FX6300 running at 40% capacity is still a *lot* better than the Phenom running at 40% capacity.

Also, you can probably get a set of 8GB DDR3 1600 MHz for like $70-75, so it's not too bad all things considered.

That being said however, your Phenom 1 is still bottlenecking your R9 270. Other reviews for that board put game framerate in the high 70s and 80s+ on that card at 1920x1080. Your motherboard may have a Gen 1 PCIE slot, or the Phenom 1 is just bottlenecking the card that badly.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
McDohl

McDohl

Honorable
Jun 18, 2014
123
0
10,690

I see, that sucks. I'm relatively new/crossing over to PC gaming.

"Even if you got the FX6300, though, the FX6300 running at 40% capacity is still a *lot* better than the Phenom running at 40% capacity. "

In other words, it's like in a physically demanding task, 40% of a body builders physical resources would be superior to 40% of an average Joe's?

I didn't even consider the quality of its ports: " PCI-Express 1.0 runs at a maximum of 2.5 GT/s, while PCI-Express 2.0 doubles this rate at a maximum of 5 GT/s (gigatransfers per second). "

I checked the benchmarks others got for Sleeping Dogs, and you're absolutely right! It actually wiped the floor with mine, and they were playing at a significantly higher resolution (2560x1600) - mine was 1920x1080.

Not to mention, I just swapped my 750ti back in and my CPU maxed out: http://oi60.tinypic.com/316q79h.jpg

All signs are pointing to a new CPU.



EDIT!!: Surprisingly my M3A78-EM has PCIE 2.0
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
CraigN

CraigN

Distinguished
Aug 15, 2013
1,437
0
19,960



That *is* actually surprising. And your analogy is actually pretty good. And yeah, there's even a few videos up, this one probably the most relevant to give you an idea:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDl2UGCOErY

Guy is running Sleeping Dogs on an FX6300 with a GeForce 660 (The 750 Ti performs between a 660 and a 660 Ti I believe) and it plays pretty smooth without any dips. This is closer to what you should be experiencing with that card, so my conclusion is if it's not the PCIE port (since you clearly have 2.0) and I'm assuming you're running on the latest drivers for your graphics card from the NVIDIA or AMD (depending on which GPU you're using) website and not the driver disk, then your Phenom is bottlenecking. I would verify your driver versions at least at first, since that's a no-cost solution.

Is the Phenom maxing out in Sleeping Dogs as well with the 750 Ti in? Each game manages CPU overhead differently.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
McDohl

McDohl

Honorable
Jun 18, 2014
123
0
10,690

Apparently the GF 660 is more on par with the r9 270 according to this chart: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

Fortunately I still have a 270 on hand and tested them both anyways - got distinct evidence your assessment was correct!

r9 270
http://oi59.tinypic.com/b54l8w.jpg

I noticed I forgot to turn off v-sync which helped a lot, but I still experienced drastic variables in FPS. CPU is clearly not able to keep up.

GTX 750 ti
http://oi59.tinypic.com/2q862v5.jpg

The CPU however is pushing the 750 ti to the max (Yes, latest drivers).

What I'm considering now is getting a 6300 and pairing it with the 750 ti long enough for me to sell it and buy an HD 7950. What do you think?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
CraigN

CraigN

Distinguished
Aug 15, 2013
1,437
0
19,960
If your primary focus is gaming, I'd recommend regardless of what route you go to go ahead and get the FX6300. It's one of the better price/performance chips in AMD's lineup without making a hard swap to Intel, and will certainly not bottleneck your GPU if you decide to go up the food chain.

Honestly, not as familiar with AMD as I am with NVidia, so I don't know the current price 7950s are going for. I think it's a sound plan since you already own the card, the 750 Ti is a great budget card so selling it off to a friend or someone in need of a low power but good GPU would most likely buy it off you no problem when you're ready for something faster.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
McDohl

McDohl

Honorable
Jun 18, 2014
123
0
10,690

I emphatically agree. I went ahead and purchased the FX 6300 and installed it - I'm *far* more happy taking this route than keeping the old Phenom. I'm getting significantly more stable framerates with the benefit of my whole system running better.

The 7950's (Used) go for around $125-$140, not a bad price for what's actually a r9 280. Thanks for all the help/advice. I'm very happy with this decision.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom