Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Black Ops fps junk, get new gpu or cpu?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 15, 2010 2:51:11 PM

so i bought call of duty black ops and when playing the campaign or the multiplayer my frame rate is usually just decent down to pure crap, with graphics on auto before but not set to low. im running a 8800gts with 640mb and i have a core 2 duo E6850 at 3ghz. so im wondering would a new video card help with the frame rate or would i need to upgrade my processor. not very smart when it comes to computer intelligence but my card could make the graphics on high and i didnt notice too much performance boost turning down the graphics, meaning i still lag when sh*t goes down and i need to have smooth video. also on a side note according to windows cpu gadget thing, black ops usually runs my cpu between 90-100% when playing. thanks for the replys.
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2010 2:57:29 PM

I see, well obviously an upgrade will help in performance, but bear in mind many people are having problems in black ops,including me am getting 60 fps v sync high settings, then goes to 30 then up again, spikes.. The recent patch might help you, but its doesn't do great, more patches to come-
m
0
l
a c 189 U Graphics card
November 15, 2010 2:59:49 PM

What resolution do you play at? RAM?
What about the other games?
m
0
l
Related resources
November 15, 2010 3:02:55 PM

i play at 1680x1050, i have 4gbs of ddr2 800 ram, i usually play fps games, MW2 worked fine on higher settings even left 4 dead 2 played pretty good, i also play DotA (warcraft 3), and another note, would turning off one of my 2 monitors do anything at all? (just power off not disabling down to one monitor)
m
0
l
a c 189 U Graphics card
November 15, 2010 3:11:53 PM

Oh, you are running 2 monitor?
Then try running with only 1 monitor, disable the other monitor (just unplug the VGA/DVI cable)
m
0
l
a c 620 U Graphics card
November 15, 2010 3:50:14 PM

A new GPU is the way to go for better gaming.

One test you can do is run 3D Mark Vantage, then compare your GPU score versus your CPU score. If they are equal, you have a decently matched system if one is higher than the other, then the lower one is your bottleneck.
m
0
l
November 15, 2010 4:44:16 PM

Before you upgrade, you should know that CoD:BO has a widely known bug that causes your CPU usage to shoot up to 80-100% throughout the game. This happens with people even with the most bleeding edge processors. It is simply a case of poor resource optimization by Treyarch. They are patching it and should release an update soon. Wait for it before you make your decision to upgrade. Almost every BO player is experiencing the same problem on the PC.
m
0
l
November 15, 2010 4:56:09 PM

17seconds said:
A new GPU is the way to go for better gaming.

One test you can do is run 3D Mark Vantage, then compare your GPU score versus your CPU score. If they are equal, you have a decently matched system if one is higher than the other, then the lower one is your bottleneck.


so i downloaded and ran 3d mark vantage, boy did it look choppy lol, but my results for the cpu and video card was...

CPU score - 21884 (fastest is 74975 according to website)
GPU score - 5070 (68706 fastest)

so does this mean my video card is crap and i need a better one?
m
0
l
a c 620 U Graphics card
November 15, 2010 5:00:15 PM

kratom420 said:
so i downloaded and ran 3d mark vantage, boy did it look choppy lol, but my results for the cpu and video card was...

CPU score - 21884 (fastest is 74975 according to website)
GPU score - 5070 (68706 fastest)

so does this mean my video card is crap and i need a better one?

Yeah, I would say a GPU upgrade would be a wise choice. (My GPU score is over 20,000.) Luckily, there are plenty of deals going on right now.

Hopefully, they will patch your game as well.
m
0
l
November 15, 2010 5:19:43 PM

so now that it seems like i could get a performance boost from upgrading my video card the question is, would i be able to use say a GTX 460 on my motherboard with no problems? mother board is a ASUS P5N-E SLI
m
0
l
a c 620 U Graphics card
November 15, 2010 5:23:39 PM

I would say the GTX460 would be a perfect match and would greatly increase your performance.
m
0
l
November 15, 2010 5:34:07 PM

17seconds said:
I would say the GTX460 would be a perfect match and would greatly increase your performance.


thanks for all the answers but i was also wondering about these 2 video cards, HD 5770, GTS 450
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

i wouldnt mind saving at least 50 dollars but would the 460 out perform (noticeably) and last longer for future gaming than these 2 other video cards thus making the extra $50 really worth it?
m
0
l
a c 620 U Graphics card
November 15, 2010 6:00:57 PM

kratom420 said:
thanks for all the answers but i was also wondering about these 2 video cards, HD 5770, GTS 450
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

i wouldnt mind saving at least 50 dollars but would the 460 out perform (noticeably) and last longer for future gaming than these 2 other video cards thus making the extra $50 really worth it?

Performance-wise, the order from best to worst is: 460>5770>450. The 5770 costs about the same as the 460, so let's rule that out for now. The question is whether the 450 will be enough for your resolution and the games you listed, and will the extra $50 be worth it. (By the way, that EVGA GTS450 you listed is only $94 after rebate. That is really cheap! The EVGA GTX460 is $140 after rebate.)

Using to the reviews, and chart below, I would say the GTS450 will play your COD:Modern Warfare titles at around 60-80 fps with details turned up high, which is plenty. The GTX460 will pull about 90 fps. Overall, according to the chart, the 460 is about 30% faster at your resolution. I would check out the gaming benchmarks in both articles and see if the 450 is getting over 30 fps in the games you like. If so, then get the 450, if not go for the 460.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GeForce_GTS_450_...
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gts-450-review-ro...

m
0
l
a c 172 U Graphics card
November 16, 2010 12:24:55 AM

I would do what others have suggested and wait for the patch. sounds like even if you upgraded the GPU you will still get slowdowns. But yeah, your GPU is getting old, you nearly have the same setup as myself. a 5770 or gtx460 or 6850 would be good.
m
0
l
November 16, 2010 3:25:35 AM

6850>GTX460(maybe the super OCed...)>5770.... choose in that order....

But the problem is the game.... lol....
m
0
l
November 18, 2010 3:24:49 PM

Copy all your mw2 settings to black ops, worked for me ;o

Aspect ratio: auto
Anti-Aliasing: off
Sync every frame: no

Might help ;o
m
0
l
November 19, 2010 7:33:45 PM

As someone mentioned above, CoD: BO is complete crap on the pc. It really isn't optimized for it, so a lot of users with high-end comps are having trouble with it as well. Just pray for a patch, but a new GPU would definately help out, too.
m
0
l
November 19, 2010 7:46:08 PM

.... everyone said the same thing
m
0
l
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2010 8:23:50 PM

Beware...I run a similar system. Athlon 64x2 dual core 4800+ and 8800TGS 640 MB 3gb ram Vista 32.
I just picked up a GTX 460 768mb from Newegg and now BLack ops runs worse if you can believe that. After the last patch it was playable for me with next to lowest resolution...some low FPS 20-25 in some of the open areas of bigger maps, but 30-60 almost otherwise. Now its totally unplayble..worse than day 1. I think I am reverting back to the 8800GTS for now.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2010 8:43:15 PM

kratom420 said:
i play at 1680x1050, i have 4gbs of ddr2 800 ram, i usually play fps games, MW2 worked fine on higher settings even left 4 dead 2 played pretty good, i also play DotA (warcraft 3), and another note, would turning off one of my 2 monitors do anything at all? (just power off not disabling down to one monitor)


None of those games are very demanding. So your 8800 GTS 640MB should easily run any of them. Black Ops should be a little more graphically demanding (as will other newer games) so your video card is going to start showing it's age.

If you want to buy a new video card, and keep your existing 1680x1050 monitor resolution, I'd get a GTX 460. Preferably the 1GB version, although the 768MB version is cheaper and would work. Honestly though, I'd suggest the 1GB for longer term usage. Not only does the 1GB card have more processing units, but the higher amount of RAM will come in handy as future games start loading higher res textures.

As for Black Ops: I never bothered to buy that game. Mainly on principle. :)  I can see I chose well, considering folks are having issues with it.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
November 20, 2010 8:53:55 PM

55Range said:
I see, well obviously an upgrade will help in performance, but bear in mind many people are having problems in black ops,including me am getting 60 fps v sync high settings, then goes to 30 then up again, spikes.. The recent patch might help you, but its doesn't do great, more patches to come-


That's the standard behavior of having v-sync enabled when a system is hovering around 60 fps without v-sync on.

You can fix this buy enabling tripple-buffing. If it's not enabled in game, your video cards control panel will have the option availible.

m
0
l
November 21, 2010 4:36:42 PM

Quote:
None of those games are very demanding. So your 8800 GTS 640MB should easily run any of them. Black Ops should be a little more graphically demanding (as will other newer games) so your video card is going to start showing it's age
nahhhhhhh BO uses the same engine that WAW used.... lol
m
0
l
a c 146 U Graphics card
November 21, 2010 4:57:43 PM

Atotalnoob said:
Quote:
None of those games are very demanding. So your 8800 GTS 640MB should easily run any of them. Black Ops should be a little more graphically demanding (as will other newer games) so your video card is going to start showing it's age
nahhhhhhh BO uses the same engine that WAW used.... lol


they might use the same engine but normally new things were added to the engine when they develop new game which sometimes makes the game much more demanding then the previous one
m
0
l
November 21, 2010 5:18:19 PM

not much more... they didn't put DX10/11.... makes it a worthless game.... BF3 isn't even supposed to have DX9... (slated for late 2011)
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 21, 2010 5:23:31 PM

Atotalnoob said:
not much more... they didn't put DX10/11.... makes it a worthless game.... BF3 isn't even supposed to have DX9... (slated for late 2011)

It does not use the same engine as prior MW's. Have you read one PC review ?

Your second point is just lol, so every game that has dx11 is not worthless ?
m
0
l
November 21, 2010 7:33:42 PM

Quote:
It does not use the same engine as prior MW's. Have you read one PC review ?
I said WAW....

Quote:
Your second point is just lol, so every game that has dx11 is not worthless ?
they didn't even BOTHER with higher graphics, so they obviously don't care towards moving forward.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 21, 2010 8:00:59 PM

Atotalnoob said:
Quote:
It does not use the same engine as prior MW's. Have you read one PC review ?
I said WAW....

Quote:
Your second point is just lol, so every game that has dx11 is not worthless ?
they didn't even BOTHER with higher graphics, so they obviously don't care towards moving forward.

I don't agree. There is a lot of effort put in to this game. If it wasn't clear in the other post, I think your dead wrong basing your view on the fact they coded they game in dx9 as to why 'they didn't move forward.'
I'm not going to argue the merits of dx9 vs dx11 , but the bottom line is we have not seen any graphic improvements that compare to what we see in the Heaven benchmark , for 9 vs 11 .
Most of which is tesselation. A feature that AMD does not want to to much of to soon.
Every game has to be graded on its own merits, and dx11 snobbery is obvious and petty.
m
0
l
November 21, 2010 8:35:52 PM

Quote:
Every game has to be graded on its own merits, and dx11 snobbery is obvious and petty.
sooo when people try to take steps forward, use the latest tech. Give us GOOD graphics it is snobbish?
Quote:
I'm not going to argue the merits of dx9 vs dx11 , but the bottom line is we have not seen any graphic improvements that compare to what we see in the Heaven benchmark , for 9 vs 11
the point is, they don't care about moving forward. Activision of all people should be able to push into at LEAST DX10.
Quote:
I don't agree. There is a lot of effort put in to this game. If it wasn't clear in the other post, I think your dead wrong basing your view on the fact they coded they game in dx9 as to why 'they didn't move forward.'
No doubt they put effort in it. They just left out several key things, that are becoming the norm. Other things that were very stupid to leave out, such as Optimization.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
November 21, 2010 8:51:39 PM

There are multiple aspects of a game that needs to succeed in order for a good game. Just being DX11 also does not make it look nicer. It just gives you more tools to work with.

And just because a game looks attractive, does not make the game fun. A lot of companies have lost sight of that. A great story, and fun combat often times means more than good visuals, but of course, terrible visuals are also a turn off.

A game with a good excuted DX9 engine, with great game play and story will always sell better than a great looking DX11 graphics engine, with poor gameplay and or story.
m
0
l
November 21, 2010 10:48:19 PM

Well it isnt a good engine...
m
0
l
a c 146 U Graphics card
November 22, 2010 12:09:59 AM

bystander said:
There are multiple aspects of a game that needs to succeed in order for a good game. Just being DX11 also does not make it look nicer. It just gives you more tools to work with.

And just because a game looks attractive, does not make the game fun. A lot of companies have lost sight of that. A great story, and fun combat often times means more than good visuals, but of course, terrible visuals are also a turn off.

A game with a good excuted DX9 engine, with great game play and story will always sell better than a great looking DX11 graphics engine, with poor gameplay and or story.


totally agreed with that :) 
m
0
l
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2010 12:01:16 PM

kratom420 said:
so now that it seems like i could get a performance boost from upgrading my video card the question is, would i be able to use say a GTX 460 on my motherboard with no problems? mother board is a ASUS P5N-E SLI


I have this set up at the moment (ASUS P5N-E SLI & ASUS GTX 460 1GB) with 4gb DDR2 RAM, Q6600 2.4Ghz and Black ops, WELL, Black ops is a pain in my arse. If you put everything on low settings, it's terrible - you get fps lag and spikes all over the shop plus it generally looks like CS 1.6.

However, put the settings on Extra High with full anti x16 1680x1050 resolution the game runs consistently smooth with around 45-90 fps. It simply feels smoother too.
m
0
l
!