Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

GPU/CPU Bottleneck

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 11, 2012 3:44:47 PM

Im running a saphhire raedon hd 7770 graphics card, and my CPU is a AMD 8 core 8120. 8gig ram

I can't get good grahpics quality on the game im currently playing, Guild Wars 2. I can only get about 40 fps on about middle settings.

Which is my bottleneck here, CPU or GPU? Also looking for a better cooling situation for my GPU, it runs around 65C, seems high to me. Not sure if thats bad or not.

More about : gpu cpu bottleneck

a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 3:49:17 PM

no there is no bottleneck your gpu isn't powerful enough to be getting 60+fps on medium maybe low and also what card do you have
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 3:50:30 PM

your video card is the bottleneck and yes 65c is way to hot for that cpu is it overclocked ?
Score
0
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 3:52:08 PM

Ima have to say it's your gpu. The 7770 is a fine card but it's only meant for low-mid settings for most games. It was meant for being power efficient while still being powerful enough. Your 8120 should be enough to pair with a 7870 or 7950. But I highly suggest you get a gtx 660 ti or 670 (if u can afford it)
Score
0
October 11, 2012 3:54:05 PM

Intel processor's are better than AMD in this game, even your 8 core processor is slower than their dual core sandy bridge.



GPU wise, your 7770 should be fine if your playing at 1280x1024 but if your playing at a higher resolution, I suggest bumping it up if you want the best visuals.

Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 3:58:29 PM

2813032,5,847300 said:
Intel processor's are better than AMD in this game, even your 8 core processor is slower than their dual core sandy bridge.

GPU wise, your 7770 should be fine if your playing at 1280x1024 but if your playing at a higher resolution, I suggest bumping it up if you want the best visuals.

Disable a few cores in the 8120 and overclock it. Those dual-cores won't know what just stomped all over them (not that it's a great achievement to beat low end dual core CPUs). There's also CPU/NB frequency overclocking and the fact that your benchmark links had an FX-81xx CPU that was underclocked, not a stock clocked 8120.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:01:17 PM

gamerkila57 said:
your video card is the bottleneck and yes 65c is way to hot for that cpu is it overclocked ?


That's 65C for the GPU according to OP. OP, 65C is not bad at all for a Radeon 7770's GPU.
Score
0
October 11, 2012 4:02:36 PM

The AMD FX 8120 is much better than Intel dual core SB in general; but in games intel dual core SB is a bit better.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:03:53 PM

Rockdpm said:
Ima have to say it's your gpu. The 7770 is a fine card but it's only meant for low-mid settings for most games. It was meant for being power efficient while still being powerful enough. Your 8120 should be enough to pair with a 7870 or 7950. But I highly suggest you get a gtx 660 ti or 670 (if u can afford it)


The 660 Ti is a waste of money because the 660 is to the 660 Ti as the 670 is to the 680 and besides, the similarly priced 7950 is superior and the 7870 is even closer than the 660 (it's actually better in light games that need MSAA thrown up to get proper performance). So, from both the perspective of AMD and of Nvidia, the 660 Ti is a waste of money. The 670 is still fine when you find good deals.
Score
0
October 11, 2012 4:04:48 PM

would a crossfire 7770 help alot, or would geting a new intel motherboard/cpu help more?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:05:29 PM

victorst1 said:
The AMD FX 8120 is much better than Intel dual core SB in general; but in games intel dual core SB is a bit better.


Only at stock and even then, it depends on the game. Many DX11 titles prefer the 8120.
Score
0
October 11, 2012 4:06:19 PM

no im playing it at 1920x1080.
Score
0
October 11, 2012 4:07:04 PM

luciferano said:
2813032,5,847300 said:
Intel processor's are better than AMD in this game, even your 8 core processor is slower than their dual core sandy bridge.

GPU wise, your 7770 should be fine if your playing at 1280x1024 but if your playing at a higher resolution, I suggest bumping it up if you want the best visuals.

Disable a few cores in the 8120 and overclock it. Those dual-cores won't know what just stomped all over them (not that it's a great achievement to beat low end dual core CPUs). There's also CPU/NB frequency overclocking and the fact that your benchmark links had an FX-81xx CPU that was underclocked, not a stock clocked 8120.
said:


All cpu's were clocked the same level showing differences in architecture I believe. yes you can tweak settings but overall, you need to tweak AMD a lot more just to reach sandy bridge performance (talking about their quad cores). He mentioned his 8 core processor and was just showing him core counts don't always determine performance in games.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 4:07:17 PM

trevatheruiner1 said:
would a crossfire 7770 help alot, or would geting a new intel motherboard/cpu help more?

NEW CPU/MOTHERBOARD because if you are just adding gpu's the you cpu will be way outdated
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:07:59 PM

luciferano said:
The 660 Ti is a waste of money because the 660 is to the 660 Ti as the 670 is to the 680 and besides, the similarly priced 7950 is superior and the 7870 is even closer than the 660 (it's actually better in light games that need MSAA thrown up to get proper performance). So, from both the perspective of AMD and of Nvidia, the 660 Ti is a waste of money. The 670 is still fine when you find good deals.

why do you think I suggested a 7870 or 7950 or gtx 670? So and fanboys couldn't say I didn't give and any credit.....
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:08:19 PM

trevatheruiner1 said:
would a crossfire 7770 help alot, or would geting a new intel motherboard/cpu help more?


It would help to CF, but selling that 7770 and getting a 7870 would be better. Crossfire and SLI still have a few kinks to iron out (CF has slightly more) and the 7870 performs roughly the same as two 7770s despite begin the cheaper option with more frame buffer capacity and more upgrade-friendly, so 7770 CF isn't the best way to go.

Getting an Intel CPU won't do anything that overclocking your current CPU after disabling a few cores and/or overcrowding the CPU/NB frequency couldn't do. You can do it and it will help, but it's a very cash-ineffective way to go about it.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:09:27 PM

Rockdpm said:
why do you think I suggested a 7870 or 7950 or gtx 670? So and fanboys couldn't say I didn't give and any credit.....


Showing AMD or not wasn't what I replied to your post for. I replied to it for recommending the 660 Ti when the much cheaper and more power efficient 660 performs about the same as the 660 Ti.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:10:52 PM

devilofdeaths said:
NEW CPU/MOTHERBOARD because if you are just adding gpu's the you cpu will be way outdated

while I support your theory. This isn't always the case but in his case yes it is.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:11:35 PM

Rockdpm said:
while I support your theory. This isn't always the case but in his case yes it is.


Only if OP doesn't mind overclocking. That's something that should be confirmed before passing such judgement.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:14:53 PM

luciferano said:
Showing AMD or not wasn't what I replied to your post for. I replied to it for recommending the 660 Ti when the much cheaper and more power efficient 660 performs about the same as the 660 Ti.

ok and? Why are you attacking my comment? If the 660 ti is better to you than the 660 ti... Then it's better to you. I dont need "correcting" in a graphics and displays thread because I have a long experience with troubleshooting graphics and displays along with choosing the right card. If u think he needs the gtx 660, simply say " i recommend the gtx 660 and this is why" not reply to my comment to "attempt" to make me look bad cause its not gonna work.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:17:01 PM

luciferano said:
Only if OP doesn't mind overclocking. That's something that should be confirmed before passing such judgement.

is there something i did to you? Because I'm getting alot of negative vibes from your towards my supporting comments..
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 4:17:25 PM

Rockdpm said:
ok and? Why are you attacking my comment? If the 660 ti is better to you than the 660 ti... Then it's better to you. I dont need "correcting" in a graphics and displays thread because I have a long experience with troubleshooting graphics and displays along with choosing the right card. If u think he needs the gtx 660, simply say " i recommend the gtx 660 and this is why" not reply to my comment to "attempt" to make me look bad cause its not gonna work.

+1 :lol: 
Score
0
October 11, 2012 4:20:37 PM

luciferano said:
It would help to CF, but selling that 7770 and getting a 7870 would be better. Crossfire and SLI still have a few kinks to iron out (CF has slightly more) and the 7870 performs roughly the same as two 7770s despite begin the cheaper option with more frame buffer capacity and more upgrade-friendly, so 7770 CF isn't the best way to go.

Getting an Intel CPU won't do anything that overclocking your current CPU after disabling a few cores and/or overcrowding the CPU/NB frequency couldn't do. You can do it and it will help, but it's a very cash-ineffective way to go about it.





How do i disable cores, from the BIOS?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:21:11 PM

devilofdeaths said:
+1 :lol: 

your seeing this right?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 4:22:35 PM

Rockdpm said:
your seeing this right?

ya i don't know what his problem is but he needs to get over it
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:24:04 PM

trevatheruiner1 said:
How do i disable cores, from the BIOS?

I dont think you can disable/enable cores on the bulldozer chips. Besides that only worked for phenom II and over locked the cores higher.
Score
0
October 11, 2012 4:28:18 PM

Rockdpm said:
I dont think you can disable/enable cores on the bulldozer chips. Besides that only worked for phenom II and over locked the cores higher.




Oh bummer. Ill look at new grahics cards then
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:30:42 PM

You can disable cores. You can do it through the BIOS for supporting motherboards, through Windows, through PSCheck, and through K10 Stat. The latter three work on all AMD systems since Athlon 64.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:32:05 PM

Rockdpm said:
ok and? Why are you attacking my comment? If the 660 ti is better to you than the 660 ti... Then it's better to you. I dont need "correcting" in a graphics and displays thread because I have a long experience with troubleshooting graphics and displays along with choosing the right card. If u think he needs the gtx 660, simply say " i recommend the gtx 660 and this is why" not reply to my comment to "attempt" to make me look bad cause its not gonna work.


I wasn't trying to make you look bad, I was pointing out that the 660 Ti is a waste of money and I did so because it is. It's as overpriced as the 680, if not even more so if we go be percentages.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:32:31 PM

Rockdpm said:
is there something i did to you? Because I'm getting alot of negative vibes from your towards my supporting comments..


I'm not giving any and didn't mean any offense by what I said. I apologize if I've offended you.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:41:21 PM

luciferano said:
I'm not giving any and didn't mean any offense by what I said. I apologize if I've offended you.

its cool. Just be careful what you say when you quote me. And yes I know because the 7970 is 300$ everyone should buy it but some people might find ands drivers a night mare. Its all depends on personal preference. So you can fix this by stating why you like the 660 in a separate reply and I'll forget all about your comment you made to my opinion and we'll be even
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 4:42:24 PM

Rockdpm said:
ok and? Why are you attacking my comment? If the 660 ti is better to you than the 660 ti... Then it's better to you. I dont need "correcting" in a graphics and displays thread because I have a long experience with troubleshooting graphics and displays along with choosing the right card. If u think he needs the gtx 660, simply say " i recommend the gtx 660 and this is why" not reply to my comment to "attempt" to make me look bad cause its not gonna work.


Pretty much with the 660 Ti he will attack and talk about the bottle neck of the card which they had to cut something from the 670 to make it go in the 300$ range..My opinion on this is its not a bad card even with the memory bus being at 192 and the bandwidth being at 144 i mean hell it could of been down to 100 now thats bad but at the end of the day we recommned cards and in range the 660 Ti,7970 both trade blows and i dont care if someone goes amd or nvidia you cant go wrong with both. But just sitting back dissing the card as if you was there while they made the 660 Ti is meh. I know people will agree with me and disagree but the people thats dissing hasnt done "their own benchmarks" and going off canned benchmarks=subjective answers and debates thats been going on lately..And with that everyones sysem is different and cards act different in alot of setups
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 4:49:20 PM

determinologyz said:
Pretty much with the 660 Ti he will attack and talk about the bottle neck of the card which they had to cut something from the 670 to make it go in the 300$ range..My opinion on this is its not a bad card even with the memory bus being at 192 and the bandwidth being at 144 i mean hell it could of been down to 100 now thats bad but at the end of the day we recommned cards and in range the 660 Ti,7970 both trade blows and i dont care if someone goes amd or nvidia you cant go wrong with both. But just sitting back dissing the card as if you was there while they made the 660 Ti is meh. I know people will agree with me and disagree but the people thats dissing hasnt done "their own benchmarks" and going off canned benchmarks=subjective answers and debates thats been going on lately..And with that everyones sysem is different and cards act different in alot of setups


My point was that the 660 is the better buy compared to the 660 Ti for a Nvidia card. The 660 Ti isn't a horrible card, but it is bad for its price.

The GTX 660 and the GTX 660 Ti have very close performance. The biggest differences between them are price and power consumption, both of which favor the GTX 660, not the GTX 660 Ti. The 660 Ti doesn't really have much of anything at all going for it compared to the 660.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 5:08:27 PM

determinologyz said:
Pretty much with the 660 Ti he will attack and talk about the bottle neck of the card which they had to cut something from the 670 to make it go in the 300$ range..My opinion on this is its not a bad card even with the memory bus being at 192 and the bandwidth being at 144 i mean hell it could of been down to 100 now thats bad but at the end of the day we recommned cards and in range the 660 Ti,7970 both trade blows and i dont care if someone goes amd or nvidia you cant go wrong with both. But just sitting back dissing the card as if you was there while they made the 660 Ti is meh. I know people will agree with me and disagree but the people thats dissing hasnt done "their own benchmarks" and going off canned benchmarks=subjective answers and debates thats been going on lately..And with that everyones sysem is different and cards act different in alot of setups

I agree with you 100%. I got your back on this
Score
0
October 11, 2012 5:48:44 PM

luciferano said:
It would help to CF, but selling that 7770 and getting a 7870 would be better. Crossfire and SLI still have a few kinks to iron out (CF has slightly more) and the 7870 performs roughly the same as two 7770s despite begin the cheaper option with more frame buffer capacity and more upgrade-friendly, so 7770 CF isn't the best way to go.

Getting an Intel CPU won't do anything that overclocking your current CPU after disabling a few cores and/or overcrowding the CPU/NB frequency couldn't do. You can do it and it will help, but it's a very cash-ineffective way to go about it.


Is there somewhere i can see safe frequencies that i can take the 8120 up to for the cpu and nb?? I dont think i hav it overclocked at all yet. Should i disable 2 or 4 cores?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 5:56:03 PM

trevatheruiner1 said:
Is there somewhere i can see safe frequencies that i can take the 8120 up to for the cpu and nb?? I dont think i hav it overclocked at all yet. Should i disable 2 or 4 cores?

4 because only video editing uses more than 4 cores
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 6:09:34 PM

trevatheruiner1 said:
Is there somewhere i can see safe frequencies that i can take the 8120 up to for the cpu and nb?? I dont think i hav it overclocked at all yet. Should i disable 2 or 4 cores?


Four cores being disabled are preferable. The second core of each module is the best to disable, but Windows doesn't always give you this option.

The CPU frequency should be safe around 4.5-5GHz with four cores disabled (more for those with good cooling instead of stock cooling or only marginally better than stock), but 4.5GHz or so is an easier target. About 2.8GHz is a good CPU/NB frequency.

devilofdeaths said:
4 because only video editing uses more than 4 cores


I agree that it should be four, but video editing is not nearly the only thing that uses that many. A few games can use more than four cores fairly well (BF3 is an excellent example of that) and a lot of other software can such as some compression/decompression software and much more.
Score
0
October 11, 2012 6:15:18 PM

Ok thanks Lucifeano! I'll try that first and see if it makes a difference for me. One more quetion....

So i have this win7 gadget, GPU Monitor thing. It shows my usage of the GPU Core clock, the memory, and the fan speed.
It show 0% usage of my Graphics card memory at all times, it only shows the top measurement being used, i think its the actual GPU speed.

Is that normal for it to show 0% usage for the graphics card memory?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 6:20:32 PM

you don't have to disable cores to get a high oc. i was able to clock my FX 8120 to 4.7GHz without disabling cores ?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 6:22:03 PM

gamerkila57 said:
you don't have to disable cores to get a high oc. i was able to clock my FX 8120 to 4.7GHz without disabling cores ?


Why leave cores on when they are doing nothing any more useful other than suck more power? I see little reason to leave them enabled. Without them, a higher overclock is possible. Besides, disabling the second core of each module lets the first one have the entire front end all to itself. This is a considerable performance increase even at the same CPU frequency, let alone overclocked.
Score
0

Best solution

a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 6:26:23 PM

Nobody should be getting upset here - we all mean well, we're all trying to help the OP, and no one's attempting to offend anyone. Luciferano's trying to go about this from the best price : performance perspective, so let me try to articulate what he's saying in a significantly more verbose (and hopefully clearer) way:

The FX-8120 is the bottleneck for Guild Wars 2 (not the 7770), as GW2 simply does not work well with the Bulldozer architecture. The most affordable way to overcome this is through 1) overclocking it and 2) freeing up resources that are shared between cores.

On the point of overclocking, don't attempt this unless you have a 3rd-party CPU cooler. A CoolerMaster Hyper212 EVO is a great entry-level cooler: it's affordable, and quieter and cooler than the stock AMD heatsink. You won't achieve insane overclocks, but it'll do the job very well.

On shared resources, each Bulldozer module (which is composed of two cores; the 8120 has 4 modules) shares critical resources between its cores, which causes the performance-per-clock to drop significantly when both cores in a module are trying to do work. Since the Windows thread scheduler (what assigns workloads to processors) doesn't realize this, the easiest way to force it to spread the workload amongst the modules is to disable every other core (that is, cores 1, 3, 5, and 7).

TL;DR - Don't overclock without an aftermarket cooler, disable every other core if your motherboard's BIOS allows it.
Share
a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 6:48:12 PM

There are work-arounds to pimp BD CPUs (like disabling certain cores and pushing some OC, someone mentioned this before) and they are not that hard to do. CPU-wise you can try that. And GPU-wise i am going to suggest a gtx 670 if you can afford it. Or if you are on a tight budget, try to get a gtx 660 (non ti, i agree luciferano in this, the performance increase over non ti does not justify the price difference) or get a hd 7870 or try to get a hd 7850 at least.
Score
0
October 11, 2012 6:50:06 PM

My BIOS allows me to disable 2 cores at a time, but not every other like yuo described. I can disable 3/4, 5/6, or 7/8. Is there another way to disable cores?
Im using a 600w PSU, would i need to upgrade for a better cooling system? I just have stock CPU fan, and one small fan on the front and one on the back of my tower
Score
0
October 11, 2012 6:53:08 PM

Wow that cooler is only 30 bucks, looks like a great buy from the reviews. Thanks Mousseng!
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 6:54:19 PM

You want to disable 7/8 cores
Score
0
October 11, 2012 6:59:09 PM

And 5/6? Or is there a way to disable 1 3 5 7
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 7:07:58 PM

I've seen some mobos that hide the option to disable individual cores behind some other option (usually something like "manual core disabling"); others require a BIOS update to have the feature at all. If you're not running on the latest BIOS revision, you may want to update and then see if it'll let you. Out of curiosity, what motherboard do you have?

Edit: While you'd likely see some nice thermal and overclocking improvements from disabling the last two modules, you won't see any performance gains from it (ignoring the new overclocking headroom).

@technoholic: Regardless, it'd be wise to see what gains we can get for free/very little on the CPU side of things before considering spending $200+ on a new video card.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2012 7:13:08 PM

Right, see what you can gain from the system you have before upgrading. But if the performance increase isn't there then upgrade
Score
0
October 11, 2012 7:14:33 PM

trevatheruiner1 said:
Im running a saphhire raedon hd 7770 graphics card, and my CPU is a AMD 8 core 8120. 8gig ram

I can't get good grahpics quality on the game im currently playing, Guild Wars 2. I can only get about 40 fps on about middle settings.

Which is my bottleneck here, CPU or GPU? Also looking for a better cooling situation for my GPU, it runs around 65C, seems high to me. Not sure if thats bad or not.



I have an AMD Phenom 965 oc to 4.0ghz and a AMD 7770 msi and I can run guildwars 2 at 40-50 fps with all the settings almost maxed. Also I think my card runs in the mid 50s for temps.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 11, 2012 7:15:21 PM

On a side note, that game looks to be taxing any hardware dearly :) 
Score
0
!