Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

6870 low fp on all games.

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 19, 2011 10:26:54 PM

Hello,
Ok, When I unboxed my PowerColour hD 6870 Graphics card. I plugged it in and it was worse than my 9600. I was getting 100-200 mediocre fps. My new graphics card didn't performed the way I'd like to to. My graphics card is not over heating and I have a 750 watt power supply. Suggestions for help? Here is my last resort, if I cant get it fixed. Im going to the computer shop

Processor:
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q8400 @ 2.66GHz (4 CPUs), ~2.7GHz
Memory:
4096MB RAM
Hard Drive:
808 GB
Video Card:
Radeon HD 6870
Monitor: Running at 1920x 1080 on a 23 Inch Screen.
Operating System:
Windows 7 Home Premium 32-bit
Motherboard: ASUS P5Q SE/R

More about : 6870 low games

April 19, 2011 10:36:16 PM

What games were you running that you get 100-200 "mediocre" fps, because on any newer games that is a very good framerate.

Also...what PSU do you have? If you have a cheap-o PSU that could be issue.
m
0
l
April 19, 2011 11:03:12 PM

Counter Strike Source. On my 9600 I had easily around 200-300 fps
m
0
l
Related resources
April 19, 2011 11:47:57 PM

bump need more suggestions to solve this problem :p 
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 19, 2011 11:57:10 PM

What are your FPS now?

You may not realize this, but the max FPS your monitor is displaying is 60 in most cases, and in the best of conditions, it can be 120 (with a 120hz 3d display). Due to this, cards aren't really designed to around the idea of getting retardedly high FPS. Not only is it not visibly better, it will cause a lot of cards to over heat.
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 12:04:20 AM

It shouldn't be that. I asked one of my friends on another forum and he also has a 6870 too. This is what he said
"I also recently got a HD6870 and i run css at 400-600 fps and can get as high as 1200, so there is quite a problem. I'm not a tech guy but it could be that something is bottlenecking? "

I also asked him for his specs
"Sure thing

| Intel® Core™ i5-2400 3.10 GHz | ASUS P8P67 B3 EVO | Kingston 4GB DDR3 1333 | HIS Radeon HD 6870 | Corsair TX-750 ATX |
Thermaltake Armour+ Full | Seagate SATA 1TB HDD | Windows 7 Home Premium 32-bit | "

And with that PC he can run upto 1200 fps with my card :p .
Im not really a tech guy, could it be a hardware problem or something else? Can my computer handle the card?
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 20, 2011 12:09:30 AM

There are people that tend to exaggerate, but if there is a problem it's likely with the way it's seated. If a card isn't seated well, it can be operating at x4 instead of x16. He may also be talking about the highest it can hit in a few specific areas of a map.

I'd be a lot more interested in what your benchmarks are in games like Metro 2033 or other modern games. That game is so old it's hard to know what it should do.

And SC2 had a lot of issues with people burning up their cards at release as a result of their menus allowing video cards to hit 900 FPS. That kind of FPS is very hard on a video card.
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 12:11:28 AM

Alright, then. Ill unplug PC and check if its seated well. If not I'll go get some benchmarks on modern games. like NBA 2k11 and starcraft 2
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 12:17:19 AM

Did you clean out all the old drivers before installing new ones?
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 12:31:30 AM

Ok. I just checked my gfx card. And it was fine. All i noticed was the sticker of the card peeling off so I just peeled it off. My gfx is seated properly. I will do some benchmarks and no. I havent cleaned my old drivers. So ill uninstall the drivers and reinstall them again.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 20, 2011 12:42:01 AM

dazzletoad said:
Ok. I just checked my gfx card. And it was fine. All i noticed was the sticker of the card peeling off so I just peeled it off. My gfx is seated properly. I will do some benchmarks and no. I havent cleaned my old drivers. So ill uninstall the drivers and reinstall them again.


Proper seating is something you can tell visually a lot of the time. The best way to know is to use GPU-Z and check the bus interface. If it's reading something other than x16 2.0, something might be wrong.
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 12:43:01 AM

Ok ill try that out and Download GPU-Z then
and report back with results
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 12:48:24 AM

Ok Ive fully re-installed drivers. Going to check fps framerate on counter strike source. And get benchmark results for starcraft 2 + nba 2k11
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 20, 2011 12:54:13 AM

GPU-Z looks normal.
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 1:00:47 AM

Ok Its still the horrid result on counter strike source. I did a video stress test and had an average of 150fps. Will re-formatting help?
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 20, 2011 1:06:09 AM

dazzletoad said:
Ok Its still the horrid result on counter strike source. I did a video stress test and had an average of 150fps. Will re-formatting help?


You might want to check to make sure that AA mode isn't set to SSAA, and you might try turning AA off all together, but 150 FPS isn't horrible. Try testing some modern games, so we can see how it reacts under normal conditions.
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 1:24:55 AM

but my graphics card is underperforming. 150 is horrid for a $270 6870 which is worse than my 9600.
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 1:50:23 AM

Ok On NBA 2k11. Its capped on 60 fps so its a solid 60 fps all the time. On Black ops I get 60 fps as well
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 1:50:47 AM

Should i reformat?
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 4:18:29 AM

keep reformatting as a last option try out your card on your friends rigs and see if the performance is similar
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 20, 2011 3:08:35 PM

dazzletoad said:
Ok On NBA 2k11. Its capped on 60 fps so its a solid 60 fps all the time. On Black ops I get 60 fps as well


It would be a little more helpful if you turned off v-sync on these tests.
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 6:42:17 PM

I know this is a dumb question but are you running the same graphics settings as you were with the other card. I also read somewhere that the human eye cant really "see" beyond 60 fps. I have a HIS 6870 turbo that I use in my rig to play wow. With vsync turned off i get up too 200fps. If I leave it turned on it will only hit 65 due to the monitor restrictions. The only reason I turn it off is to have the extra room in fps when I play. If I have it capped at 60 it will drop below this sometimes depending on the map. If I leave it off it will only drop to 75-60 when in demanding areas because of the extra fps that I get from having vsync off.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 20, 2011 7:19:45 PM

The human eye doesn't see FPS, and in some conditions it only notices very small amounts of FPS in cases like slow moving fog, and in other conditions, it can see over a 1000 FPS.

However, hardware limitations, such as his setup, can only display 60 FPS. If you have more, then you are guaranteed to see tearing.
m
0
l
April 20, 2011 8:29:30 PM

You guys don't understand, if you play CS:S, regardless of what you can "see", higher frames can affect the gameplay.

Specific fps caps change the mechanics of the game...and the 6870 should be getting much higher fps. The default fps_cap in CS:S is 300, and thats what the majority of players keep it at. A card like the 6870 should have no trouble attaining a steady 300 fps even at the highest resolutions and graphic settings. Heck a $75 5670 can get 300 fps max settings with absolute ease.

I would suggest trying to find a config within CS:S that eliminates the problem you are having. One little command could make a difference, at least mess around with the video settings in game.
m
0
l
a c 273 U Graphics card
April 20, 2011 9:00:59 PM

dazzletoad said:
bump need more suggestions to solve this problem :p 

Quote:
Don't...
* Bump posts,


Source.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 20, 2011 11:07:48 PM

amk09 said:
You guys don't understand, if you play CS:S, regardless of what you can "see", higher frames can affect the gameplay.

Specific fps caps change the mechanics of the game...and the 6870 should be getting much higher fps. The default fps_cap in CS:S is 300, and thats what the majority of players keep it at. A card like the 6870 should have no trouble attaining a steady 300 fps even at the highest resolutions and graphic settings. Heck a $75 5670 can get 300 fps max settings with absolute ease.

I would suggest trying to find a config within CS:S that eliminates the problem you are having. One little command could make a difference, at least mess around with the video settings in game.


I've seen posts that have these claims, and they are probably right. I saw one with all the math behind it and all. But the difference between having 100 fps vs 300 fps was so small that I doubt hardly anyone could notice a difference.

That said, I want to see benchmarks, with out vsync on, because I'd like to be able to see if there is a problem with the card and his general system. Once that has been proven to be running correctly, then he can then focus on CS solutions.
m
0
l
April 21, 2011 12:23:03 AM

bystander said:
I've seen posts that have these claims, and they are probably right. I saw one with all the math behind it and all. But the difference between having 100 fps vs 300 fps was so small that I doubt hardly anyone could notice a difference.

That said, I want to see benchmarks, with out vsync on, because I'd like to be able to see if there is a problem with the card and his general system. Once that has been proven to be running correctly, then he can then focus on CS solutions.


It's not "probably" right...it IS right. I play the game every day and there are specific fps maxes that can change the way the game works.

For example, if you familiar with CS:S you may be familiar with bunnyhopping. There are specific fps_maxes that allow you to hit more perfect jumps, thus increasing your ability to bhop. Pro bhoppers however frown upon these fps_maxes, and the "legit" bhopping fps_max is 300. There is a huge difference and that is an absolute fact. Visually, yes, the difference between 100 vs. 300 is incredibly small. But for a lot of people its a necessity to have a consistent 300 fps.

Regardless, his video card shouldn't even break a sweat getting 300 fps.
m
0
l
April 21, 2011 7:01:57 AM

Thanks amk09. I'm still getting the same problem. I tried Just Cause 2 and I was playing it on FULL Settings everything on full AA etc. And i was running it on 50-80 fps which is great. I honestly cannot find the problem for this low fps on the game. I've tried every video setting and I'm just puzzled. Should I reformat?Should I go to the nearby computer shop?
m
0
l
April 21, 2011 7:10:21 AM

I don't believe the card is faulty whatsoever. It can run high quality games like Just Cause 2 on FULL settings 4x AA 16x AAF and MAX Graphics settings and still easily run it at 40-70fps. Most of my friends say that my CPU Is not good enough and is bottlenecking. My gfx card. Since it is Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q8400 @ 2.66GHz (4 CPUs), ~2.7GHz
m
0
l
April 21, 2011 10:03:00 AM

then why are you feel bad the card is good the proplem is not from it maybe because this new cards have limit of 60 FPS to run old games like CS:S if you are runing newest games like JC2 and get a good frame rates then its not the card its the game and the card so you dont have to do anything but you dont want to turn on V.sync it will make you sad but believe me 60 fps is very good why you want 300+ fps while your monitor Refresh rate is limited to 60 and you will see that annoying tearing in the screen your best option is to forget about it
m
0
l
a c 173 U Graphics card
April 21, 2011 11:30:11 AM

wtf is wrong with cs:s players and wanting 300fps? the game is old and you dont need 300fps. and yes i have played it. do you like screen tearing? does that help your gaming experience? just enable tripple buffering and vsync and be happy with a good quality image and rock solid framerate.
m
0
l
April 21, 2011 3:34:34 PM

I explained EXACTLY why a player would want 300 fps in my post... Jeez people it's not that hard to understand -.-

Everyone knows that your monitors refresh rate is limited to 60 fps but that is not that damn point.

@dazzletoad, have you tried uninstalling and reinstalling CS:S?
m
0
l
April 23, 2011 4:29:37 AM

No. I have not. I will do it now but.
m
0
l
a c 173 U Graphics card
April 23, 2011 7:28:19 AM

amk09 said:
I explained EXACTLY why a player would want 300 fps in my post... Jeez people it's not that hard to understand -.-

Everyone knows that your monitors refresh rate is limited to 60 fps but that is not that damn point.

@dazzletoad, have you tried uninstalling and reinstalling CS:S?

the only thing i understand is people seem to be really anal about fps in a crappy old game doing bunnyhopps.........but each to their own...
m
0
l
April 24, 2011 5:26:27 AM

iam2thecrowe said:
the only thing i understand is people seem to be really anal about fps in a crappy old game doing bunnyhopps.........but each to their own...



Crappy old game? Give me a break.

Counter-strike 1.6 (11 years old) and Counter-strike: Source (6 years old) are still the top 2 games played on steam over any of the current "NEW AND GOOD" games, more than all of the Call of Duty's released in the last 4 years - combined. It's still common to see 80,000 or more players on CS:S at the same time. Tell me why 80,000 people would still be playing an "old and crappy game" while you see a fraction of the players on the latest and greatest CoD games?

Please use your head before talking out of your ass like that. It's unnecessary to be so ignorant and stupid.
m
0
l
April 24, 2011 7:25:39 AM

Ive reinstalled and its still crap :p . Please get on topic guys :p . I think im bottlenecking since I think my CPU 2.66Ghz. I don't know guys :( 
m
0
l
April 24, 2011 1:38:23 PM

By the way Ive had the graphics card for around 2-3 months ago. On the first month it was absolutely perfect. It somewent went crappy and I dont know why it just went crappy. Could it be a faulty card? What could it be? When I got the card it was fine but afterawhile it went bad.
m
0
l
April 24, 2011 3:33:13 PM

dazzletoad said:
By the way Ive had the graphics card for around 2-3 months ago. On the first month it was absolutely perfect. It somewent went crappy and I dont know why it just went crappy. Could it be a faulty card? What could it be? When I got the card it was fine but afterawhile it went bad.


If other games are working fine then its not a faulty card. More than likely a driver issue, maybe you could try to roll back to an older driver?

By the way your CPU is not a bottleneck on CS:S, a single core pentium 4 could run the game on high settings back in 2004. A quad core @ 2.66 should have no problems. Oh that reminds me, there is a command you can enter in the launch options that may help you out, it enables multi-core rendering. In steam, right click on CS:S, click properties, then set launch options, and type "-threads 2" without quotes, or in your case since you have a quad-core you could try "-threads 4"

anything is worth a try, i would suggest setting the launch options in steam before rolling back your drivers.
m
0
l
April 25, 2011 10:44:01 AM

Ok man thanks Ill try now.
m
0
l
April 25, 2011 10:48:44 AM

Hmm didn't do much. Where can i get suitable drivers for my Powercolour 6870 gfx card.
m
0
l
April 25, 2011 4:19:39 PM

dazzletoad said:
Hmm didn't do much. Where can i get suitable drivers for my Powercolour 6870 gfx card.


I know you said you messed with the video settings in game...but have you tried enabling multi-core rendering through that? Also, try setting CS:S as a high priority in task manager. be

Another couple questions. What servers are you testing this in? Did you fix your rates and do you have good ping? Or are you just basing this off the in-game video test?

Also, see what kind of CPU/GPU usage you are getting while playing. I think you can monitor both of these with Rivatuner.

As far as rolling back drivers, I'm not sure, maybe google can help :/ 
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 25, 2011 5:08:55 PM

Don't get drivers for the Powercolour, go directly to ATI's website to get the official drivers. You'll find them at amd.com.
m
0
l
April 26, 2011 12:42:58 AM

I did a video stress test. + Multicore rendering is always on. I haven't put css on high prioty yet. I'll try it now. I'll reinstall drivers
m
0
l
April 26, 2011 3:59:37 AM

well have you actually tried going into servers yet? I mean thats the only thing that matters... if you are getting 299 consistently in servers then who gives a rip about the stress test.
m
0
l
April 30, 2011 7:03:50 PM

Hi there , first of all ur Res is little Bit too high for ur card , Ur Card Just cant Handle that high Res !

I got 75Fps with my Old 9600GT & now its 75FPs with my 6870 ! oh but away i am playing at 1440x900 !

m
0
l
April 30, 2011 9:10:44 PM

nanoguy said:
Hi there , first of all ur Res is little Bit too high for ur card , Ur Card Just cant Handle that high Res !

I got 75Fps with my Old 9600GT & now its 75FPs with my 6870 ! oh but away i am playing at 1440x900 !


no its not, his res is fine -.-

if your are getting the same fps with a crappy 9600GT as a 6870 then something is wrong. Whether your cpu is bottlenecking or whatever else the issue is, something is wrong. The 6870 absolutely destroys the 9600gt, even making a joke out of 9600gt sli.
m
0
l
a c 217 U Graphics card
April 30, 2011 9:53:36 PM

amk09 said:
no its not, his res is fine -.-

if your are getting the same fps with a crappy 9600GT as a 6870 then something is wrong. Whether your cpu is bottlenecking or whatever else the issue is, something is wrong. The 6870 absolutely destroys the 9600gt, even making a joke out of 9600gt sli.


While you are more definitely correct when comparing newer titles, when it comes to ancient games, things don't always compare the same. Though the 6870 will still out perform the 9600, most what what makes the 6870 more powerful isn't being used on that ancient of a game, so there may be a much smaller gap than you'd expect.
m
0
l
May 1, 2011 11:02:37 AM

So why Do i get same FPS ? Bottleneck or Something else ? what what ?

What else Can be Cause of This ?
m
0
l
May 1, 2011 11:06:26 AM

nanoguy said:
Hi there , first of all ur Res is little Bit too high for ur card , Ur Card Just cant Handle that high Res !

I got 75Fps with my Old 9600GT & now its 75FPs with my 6870 ! oh but away i am playing at 1440x900 !


Really?!?! Sounds like you got a 75Hz monitor and vsync turned on....
m
0
l
!