dead space 3 framerate problem

#1 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

#2 Edited by PfizersaurusRex (664 posts) -

#3 Posted by 04dcarraher (19270 posts) -

lol,

its highly improbable that your i7 have you 2x the fps over that i5.

#4 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

lol,

its highly improbable that your i7 have you 2x the fps over that i5.

Well I don't get it myself, i was getting nauseaus while playing so i checked the framerate. The nauseau was because i was using a crap trust joystick, when attaching my x360 the nauseau went away but the number 150 stayed (more or less) even in big areas. I played for a couple of hours

#5 Edited by 04dcarraher (19270 posts) -

DS3 only uses two cores , and a Q9650 @4.2 gave a GTX 690 95% gpu usage in a test done with the game. which means that you may have had Vsync on before.

#6 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:

DS3 only uses two cores , and a Q9650 @4.2 gave a GTX 690 95% gpu usage in a test done with the game. which means that you may have had Vsync on before.

What do you mean with vsync on before? I don't use vsync, in the past it was going 70-90 something like that, vsync doesn't do that. Benchmarks show that a 7950 boost which is even faster at stock has 90 fps, so that kinda shows th.e same results as it was with my i5 and overclocked 7870xt

anyway i took a screenshot 177 fps here, goes to 130 as well. average of 150

#7 Posted by BattleSpectre (5966 posts) -

How's that a problem bro haha? That's awesome.

#8 Posted by Blutfahne (269 posts) -

Does your monitor even support these refresh rates? From my experience getting 120fps on a 60hz max monitor is tons easier than getting 120fps on an actual 120hz monitor. Because it actually has to render these frames for real.

#9 Posted by PredatorRules (7456 posts) -

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

#10 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

shut up dude,you're an idiot

#11 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

How's that a problem bro haha? That's awesome.

Well because I don't know why, I suppose it has to be the extra cache and maybe the pci-e lanes has to something with it, because they're embedded (or very close, don't know for sure) in the cpu. The funny thing is that most benchmarks (well all of them as far that I know) have been done with quad channel memory, quad channel give more bandwith but has more latency and apparently latency is important to todays games

I run the system in dual channel mode, which has the same latency as a normal system and the same memory bandwith.

I know i told you something about the memory but the quad channel memory apparently has high latency , I wasn't planning on using quad channel immediately and I only had dual sticks at this time (2 x 4gb).

I will test some other games and keep you up to date

#12 Posted by PredatorRules (7456 posts) -

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

shut up dude,you're an idiot

I'm not an idiot, you make yourself look like one (I think the 1st two people that replied already justified this state)

#13 Edited by 04dcarraher (19270 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

shut up dude,you're an idiot

um actually its the other way around......

ether your trolling(aka lying) or you have had something causing issues because going from an i5 to your i7 at best will give you 5 fps average more especially games that only use 4 threads or less.

#14 Posted by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

shut up dude,you're an idiot

I'm not an idiot, you make yourself look like one (I think the 1st two people that replied already justified this state)

You're acting childish, you can get more framerates because you have a faster cpu even if there isn't a bottleneck.

and there's more to this, this cpu has more cache too and it has better communication with pci-e devices. The memory controller and 40 pci-e lanes are integrated on the cpu, so it has faster communication.

Now get the hell out of my thread

#15 Edited by 04dcarraher (19270 posts) -
@evildead6789 said:
@BattleSpectre said:

How's that a problem bro haha? That's awesome.

Well because I don't know why, I suppose it has to be the extra cache and maybe the pci-e lanes has to something with it, because they're embedded (or very close, don't know for sure) in the cpu. The funny thing is that most benchmarks (well all of them as far that I know) have been done with quad channel memory, quad channel give more bandwith but has more latency and apparently latency is important to todays games

I run the system in dual channel mode, which has the same latency as a normal system and the same memory bandwith.

I know i told you something about the memory but the quad channel memory apparently has high latency , I wasn't planning on using quad channel immediately and I only had dual sticks at this time (2 x 4gb).

I will test some other games and keep you up to date

Nope none of that will double fps sorry your lying or you had something seriously wrong with the other mobo/cpu. the i7 3820 of yours is really no faster then slightly overclocked i5 2500 or even faster then i7 2700k. The memory, cache nor the pci-3 slot would not change performance. Unless your were running an Athlon X2 and running say a 7870 to a modern cpu yes you could see double the fps but not from an i5 to an i7.

#16 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:
@evildead6789 said:
@BattleSpectre said:

How's that a problem bro haha? That's awesome.

Well because I don't know why, I suppose it has to be the extra cache and maybe the pci-e lanes has to something with it, because they're embedded (or very close, don't know for sure) in the cpu. The funny thing is that most benchmarks (well all of them as far that I know) have been done with quad channel memory, quad channel give more bandwith but has more latency and apparently latency is important to todays games

I run the system in dual channel mode, which has the same latency as a normal system and the same memory bandwith.

I know i told you something about the memory but the quad channel memory apparently has high latency , I wasn't planning on using quad channel immediately and I only had dual sticks at this time (2 x 4gb).

I will test some other games and keep you up to date

Nope none of that will double fps sorry your lying or you had something seriously wrong.

Why would I be lying, either fraps is messed up or it's something else but this is a freshly installed pc, I haven't tried any other games though.

I'll try another game

#17 Edited by PredatorRules (7456 posts) -

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

shut up dude,you're an idiot

I'm not an idiot, you make yourself look like one (I think the 1st two people that replied already justified this state)

You're acting childish, you can get more framerates because you have a faster cpu even if there isn't a bottleneck.

The difference, will be 15% top.

#18 Edited by 04dcarraher (19270 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

shut up dude,you're an idiot

I'm not an idiot, you make yourself look like one (I think the 1st two people that replied already justified this state)

You're acting childish, you can get more framerates because you have a faster cpu even if there isn't a bottleneck.

The difference, will be 15% top.

Thats with a game that makes use of 8 threads , a game that makes use of 4 or less threads the difference is virtually nil

#19 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

shut up dude,you're an idiot

I'm not an idiot, you make yourself look like one (I think the 1st two people that replied already justified this state)

You're acting childish, you can get more framerates because you have a faster cpu even if there isn't a bottleneck.

The difference, will be 15% top.

Thats with a game that makes use of 8 threads , a game that makes use of 4 or less threads the difference is virtually nil

far cry 3 is giving me around 50 percent more performance.

I was getting 30 fps on max settings before, now it's giving 45.

I think it's the combination of several things, the increased cache, more threads, increased cpu speed and the fact that the pci-e lanes and the memory controller are embedded on the cpu. Some games will benefit more from one thing(s), other games from other thing(s).


Liberty cities gives me about 30 percent more

dayz runs like crap (it ran better on the i5) but I read I have to disable hyperthreading

#20 Edited by 04dcarraher (19270 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@04dcarraher said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

shut up dude,you're an idiot

I'm not an idiot, you make yourself look like one (I think the 1st two people that replied already justified this state)

You're acting childish, you can get more framerates because you have a faster cpu even if there isn't a bottleneck.

The difference, will be 15% top.

Thats with a game that makes use of 8 threads , a game that makes use of 4 or less threads the difference is virtually nil

far cry 3 is giving me around 50 percent more performance.

I was getting 30 fps on max settings before, now it's giving 45.

I think it's the combination of several things, the increased cache, more threads, increased cpu speed and the fact that the pci-e lanes and the memory controller are embedded on the cpu. Some games will benefit more from one thing(s), other games from other thing(s).

lol just no just no.... cache helps a little but after 8mb not so much, more threads dont mean squat if the app does not make use of them,

pci-e 3.0 lanes dont mean squat with a gpu like 7870, also there is also a memory controller on the i5 as well.... all your "gains" are a lie or you had something seriously wrong on previous setup.

Farcry 3 does not make use of more then 4 threads correctly and clockrate means much more a 3.7 ghz Phenom2 X4 had nearly same results as an FX8350 or i5 3550 all using a GTX 680.

day z is still using the ARMA engine which is still heavily single threaded based.

did you happen to redo windows from scratch? that in itself can do wonders if windows and drivers etc were all gunked and screwed up.

#21 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:

@evildead6789 said:

@04dcarraher said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

@PredatorRules said:

@evildead6789 said:

Well it's not really a problem, but what baffles me is that my framerate went up from 70 ish (with my i5-2500) to like 150 ish since I bought my i7, what's even more astonishing is that my card was overclocked in the past and now it isn't.

I don't get it , my cpu is an i7-3820, my gpu an 7870XT. I used the same detail settings (everything max) and smaa

I didn't update my drivers for a year though, has amd magically made super drivers or something?

Seriously, if you keep trolling with this nonsense posts I'd report you, upgrading CPU won't double your fps just because you think it bottlenecked, the 7870 isn't even a high end GPU.

Bottleneck is if you use a high end GPU or lets say a combo of 4x 780ti with i3 CPU or something.

shut up dude,you're an idiot

I'm not an idiot, you make yourself look like one (I think the 1st two people that replied already justified this state)

You're acting childish, you can get more framerates because you have a faster cpu even if there isn't a bottleneck.

The difference, will be 15% top.

Thats with a game that makes use of 8 threads , a game that makes use of 4 or less threads the difference is virtually nil

far cry 3 is giving me around 50 percent more performance.

I was getting 30 fps on max settings before, now it's giving 45.

I think it's the combination of several things, the increased cache, more threads, increased cpu speed and the fact that the pci-e lanes and the memory controller are embedded on the cpu. Some games will benefit more from one thing(s), other games from other thing(s).

lol just no just no.... cache helps a little but after 8mb not so much, more threads dont mean squat if the app does not make use of them,

pci-e 3.0 lanes dont mean squat with a gpu like 7870, also there is also a memory controller on the i5 as well.... all your "gains" are a lie or you had something seriously wrong on previous setup.

Farcry 3 does not make use of more then 4 threads correctly and clockrate means much more a 3.7 ghz Phenom2 X4 had nearly same results as an FX8350 or i5 3550 all using a GTX 680.

day z is still using the ARMA engine which is still heavily single threaded based.

did you happen to redo windows from scratch? that in itself can do wonders if windows and drivers etc were all gunked and screwed up.

the i5-2500 has 6 mb cache, the i7-3820 has 10.

The i5 may have an embedded memory controller , it doesn't have embedded pci-e lanes, the other non-e i7's don't have this either. I think the sandy bridge e is faster clock for clock as well (but don't quote me on that)

Dayz runs like crap, it was running better on my i5, which is bad. The rest I tested there's has a significant performance increase, simple as that.

Yes I redid windows from scratch, but I doubt a reinstall will give me these performance gains, maybe the new drivers, and maybe that's also the reason dayz runs bad.

#22 Edited by 04dcarraher (19270 posts) -

Please listen and learn,

All icore cpu's have pci-e lane controllers each lane consists of two differential signaling pairs, one for receiving data, one for transmitting data, and is the basic unit of the PCIe bus. # of PCI Express Lanes is the total number supported by the processor. For example i5 2500 supports pci-e 2.0, and 16 lanes which means a single gpu running on at x16 or sli at 8x for both gpu's the cpu can handle that just fine, Now your 3820 only natively supports pci-e 2.0 which means that you having a pci- e 3.0 board means no performance gains from cpu. Now your 3820 supports 40 pci-e lanes but the only time you will see this cpu shine in handling multiple gpu's is if you have multiple gpu's using x16 bus. so your i5 to i7 with your 7870xt will yield no gains from the memory or pci-e controllers.

Now the 3820 clock per clock is only 7% faster then a 3770k. also 6mb vs 10mb does not mean 40% increase in processing speed , you might gain a few % at best

and yes redoing windows and using latest drivers can yield massive results just look at Nvidia's 337 drivers giving mantle like gains with many direct x 11 games not having to create an new API.

#23 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:

Please listen and learn,

All icore cpu's have pci-e lane controllers each lane consists of two differential signaling pairs, one for receiving data, one for transmitting data, and is the basic unit of the PCIe bus. # of PCI Express Lanes is the total number supported by the processor. For example i5 2500 supports pci-e 2.0, and 16 lanes which means a single gpu running on at x16 or sli at 8x for both gpu's the cpu can handle that just fine, Now your 3820 only natively supports pci-e 2.0 which means that you having a pci- e 3.0 board means no performance gains from cpu. Now your 3820 supports 40 pci-e lanes but the only time you will see this cpu shine in handling multiple gpu's is if you have multiple gpu's using x16 bus. so your i5 to i7 with your 7870xt will yield no gains from the memory or pci-e controllers.

Now the 3820 clock per clock is only 7% faster then a 3770k. also 6mb vs 10mb does not mean 40% increase in processing speed , you might gain a few % at best

and yes redoing windows and using latest drivers can yield massive results just look at Nvidia's 337 drivers giving mantle like gains with many direct x 11 games not having to create an new API.

pci -e 2.0 vs 3.0 is the same hardware it's just another form of encoding. the controller for this is indeed on the cpu with ivy bridge and on the motherboard with sandy bridge e

but a trait of the lga 2011 platform is that it has is pci-e lanes embedded on the cpu, the other cpu's don't have that. I think it's fairly sure this will give an increase in communication between the cpu and gpu. How much I don't know.

Never once I had a windows reinstall give me such performance gains, amd never settle drivers did give significant performance gains, but this didn't happen the last 6 months.

mantle is not installed.

#24 Posted by 04dcarraher (19270 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:

Please listen and learn,

All icore cpu's have pci-e lane controllers each lane consists of two differential signaling pairs, one for receiving data, one for transmitting data, and is the basic unit of the PCIe bus. # of PCI Express Lanes is the total number supported by the processor. For example i5 2500 supports pci-e 2.0, and 16 lanes which means a single gpu running on at x16 or sli at 8x for both gpu's the cpu can handle that just fine, Now your 3820 only natively supports pci-e 2.0 which means that you having a pci- e 3.0 board means no performance gains from cpu. Now your 3820 supports 40 pci-e lanes but the only time you will see this cpu shine in handling multiple gpu's is if you have multiple gpu's using x16 bus. so your i5 to i7 with your 7870xt will yield no gains from the memory or pci-e controllers.

Now the 3820 clock per clock is only 7% faster then a 3770k. also 6mb vs 10mb does not mean 40% increase in processing speed , you might gain a few % at best

and yes redoing windows and using latest drivers can yield massive results just look at Nvidia's 337 drivers giving mantle like gains with many direct x 11 games not having to create an new API.

pci -e 2.0 vs 3.0 is the same hardware it's just another form of encoding. the controller for this is indeed on the cpu with ivy bridge and on the motherboard with sandy bridge e

but a trait of the lga 2011 platform is that it has is pci-e lanes embedded on the cpu, the other cpu's don't have that. I think it's fairly sure this will give an increase in communication between the cpu and gpu. How much I don't know.

false

#25 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:

@evildead6789 said:

@04dcarraher said:

Please listen and learn,

All icore cpu's have pci-e lane controllers each lane consists of two differential signaling pairs, one for receiving data, one for transmitting data, and is the basic unit of the PCIe bus. # of PCI Express Lanes is the total number supported by the processor. For example i5 2500 supports pci-e 2.0, and 16 lanes which means a single gpu running on at x16 or sli at 8x for both gpu's the cpu can handle that just fine, Now your 3820 only natively supports pci-e 2.0 which means that you having a pci- e 3.0 board means no performance gains from cpu. Now your 3820 supports 40 pci-e lanes but the only time you will see this cpu shine in handling multiple gpu's is if you have multiple gpu's using x16 bus. so your i5 to i7 with your 7870xt will yield no gains from the memory or pci-e controllers.

Now the 3820 clock per clock is only 7% faster then a 3770k. also 6mb vs 10mb does not mean 40% increase in processing speed , you might gain a few % at best

and yes redoing windows and using latest drivers can yield massive results just look at Nvidia's 337 drivers giving mantle like gains with many direct x 11 games not having to create an new API.

pci -e 2.0 vs 3.0 is the same hardware it's just another form of encoding. the controller for this is indeed on the cpu with ivy bridge and on the motherboard with sandy bridge e

but a trait of the lga 2011 platform is that it has is pci-e lanes embedded on the cpu, the other cpu's don't have that. I think it's fairly sure this will give an increase in communication between the cpu and gpu. How much I don't know.

false

Wiki

PCIe 3.0 upgrades the encoding scheme to 128b/130b from the previous 8b/10b encoding, reducing the overhead to approximately 1.54% ((130–128)/130), as opposed to the 20% overhead of PCIe 2.0. This is achieved by a technique called "scrambling" that applies a known binary polynomial to a data stream in a feedback topology. Because the scrambling polynomial is known, the data can be recovered by running it through a feedback topology using the inverse polynomial.[29] PCIe 3.0's 8 GT/s bit rate effectively delivers 985 MB/s per lane, practically doubling the lane bandwidth relative to PCIe 2.0.

link

Wiki

'socket R uses QPI to connect the CPU to additional CPUs. DMI 2.0 is used to connect the processor to the PCH. The memory controller and 40 PCIe lanes are integrated on the CPU. On a secondary processor an extra ×4 PCIe interface replaces the DMI interface. As with its predecessor LGA 1366 there is no provision for integrated graphics.'

link

#26 Edited by 04dcarraher (19270 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@04dcarraher said:

@evildead6789 said:

@04dcarraher said:

Please listen and learn,

All icore cpu's have pci-e lane controllers each lane consists of two differential signaling pairs, one for receiving data, one for transmitting data, and is the basic unit of the PCIe bus. # of PCI Express Lanes is the total number supported by the processor. For example i5 2500 supports pci-e 2.0, and 16 lanes which means a single gpu running on at x16 or sli at 8x for both gpu's the cpu can handle that just fine, Now your 3820 only natively supports pci-e 2.0 which means that you having a pci- e 3.0 board means no performance gains from cpu. Now your 3820 supports 40 pci-e lanes but the only time you will see this cpu shine in handling multiple gpu's is if you have multiple gpu's using x16 bus. so your i5 to i7 with your 7870xt will yield no gains from the memory or pci-e controllers.

Now the 3820 clock per clock is only 7% faster then a 3770k. also 6mb vs 10mb does not mean 40% increase in processing speed , you might gain a few % at best

and yes redoing windows and using latest drivers can yield massive results just look at Nvidia's 337 drivers giving mantle like gains with many direct x 11 games not having to create an new API.

pci -e 2.0 vs 3.0 is the same hardware it's just another form of encoding. the controller for this is indeed on the cpu with ivy bridge and on the motherboard with sandy bridge e

but a trait of the lga 2011 platform is that it has is pci-e lanes embedded on the cpu, the other cpu's don't have that. I think it's fairly sure this will give an increase in communication between the cpu and gpu. How much I don't know.

false

Wiki

PCIe 3.0 upgrades the encoding scheme to 128b/130b from the previous 8b/10b encoding, reducing the overhead to approximately 1.54% ((130–128)/130), as opposed to the 20% overhead of PCIe 2.0. This is achieved by a technique called "scrambling" that applies a known binary polynomial to a data stream in a feedback topology. Because the scrambling polynomial is known, the data can be recovered by running it through a feedback topology using the inverse polynomial.[29] PCIe 3.0's 8 GT/s bit rate effectively delivers 985 MB/s per lane, practically doubling the lane bandwidth relative to PCIe 2.0.

link

Wiki

'socket R uses QPI to connect the CPU to additional CPUs. DMI 2.0 is used to connect the processor to the PCH. The memory controller and 40 PCIe lanes are integrated on the CPU. On a secondary processor an extra ×4 PCIe interface replaces the DMI interface. As with its predecessor LGA 1366 there is no provision for integrated graphics.'

link

again false

this is why

the cpu has to support pci-e 3.0 before you see real gains from it the pci-e 3.0 your cpu has to support it yours only supports version 2.0

Its like sticking a pci-e 3,0 gpu into a 2.0 slot the card reverts to the lower data rates and specifications to be compatible. The cpu does not talk pci-e 3.0 basically.

As I stated before LGA 1155+ cpu's also supports integrated pci-e lanes and memory controllers, as I said before i5 2500 has 16 lanes so does i7 2600k i7 4770k etc.

For you to see that LGA 2011 cpu shine you have to have multiple gpu's having one gpu with your cpu is not going to change the outcome vs any other intel cpu.

#27 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:

@evildead6789 said:

@04dcarraher said:

@evildead6789 said:

@04dcarraher said:

Please listen and learn,

All icore cpu's have pci-e lane controllers each lane consists of two differential signaling pairs, one for receiving data, one for transmitting data, and is the basic unit of the PCIe bus. # of PCI Express Lanes is the total number supported by the processor. For example i5 2500 supports pci-e 2.0, and 16 lanes which means a single gpu running on at x16 or sli at 8x for both gpu's the cpu can handle that just fine, Now your 3820 only natively supports pci-e 2.0 which means that you having a pci- e 3.0 board means no performance gains from cpu. Now your 3820 supports 40 pci-e lanes but the only time you will see this cpu shine in handling multiple gpu's is if you have multiple gpu's using x16 bus. so your i5 to i7 with your 7870xt will yield no gains from the memory or pci-e controllers.

Now the 3820 clock per clock is only 7% faster then a 3770k. also 6mb vs 10mb does not mean 40% increase in processing speed , you might gain a few % at best

and yes redoing windows and using latest drivers can yield massive results just look at Nvidia's 337 drivers giving mantle like gains with many direct x 11 games not having to create an new API.

pci -e 2.0 vs 3.0 is the same hardware it's just another form of encoding. the controller for this is indeed on the cpu with ivy bridge and on the motherboard with sandy bridge e

but a trait of the lga 2011 platform is that it has is pci-e lanes embedded on the cpu, the other cpu's don't have that. I think it's fairly sure this will give an increase in communication between the cpu and gpu. How much I don't know.

false

Wiki

PCIe 3.0 upgrades the encoding scheme to 128b/130b from the previous 8b/10b encoding, reducing the overhead to approximately 1.54% ((130–128)/130), as opposed to the 20% overhead of PCIe 2.0. This is achieved by a technique called "scrambling" that applies a known binary polynomial to a data stream in a feedback topology. Because the scrambling polynomial is known, the data can be recovered by running it through a feedback topology using the inverse polynomial.[29] PCIe 3.0's 8 GT/s bit rate effectively delivers 985 MB/s per lane, practically doubling the lane bandwidth relative to PCIe 2.0.

link

Wiki

'socket R uses QPI to connect the CPU to additional CPUs. DMI 2.0 is used to connect the processor to the PCH. The memory controller and 40 PCIe lanes are integrated on the CPU. On a secondary processor an extra ×4 PCIe interface replaces the DMI interface. As with its predecessor LGA 1366 there is no provision for integrated graphics.'

link

again false this is why

the cpu has to support pci-e 3.0 before you see real gains from it the pci-e 3.0 your cpu only support version 2.0

Its like sticking a pci-e 3,0 gpu into a 2.0 slot the one reverts to the lower data rates and specifications to be compatible. The cpu does not talk pci-e 3.0 basically.

Well apparently you have gotten me on a limb here. Since you said my cpu only supported pci 2.0 i assumed the controller is on the motherboard because the system does support pci 3.0. But it isn't on the motherboard, It's on the chip itself but intel only specified 2.0 on the datasheet because at the time of release there weren't any pci 3.0 cards to test it with.

I've also read that the pci e lanes are embedded on the cpu with normal ivy and sandy as well. It seems that I was wrong, but you were wrong as well.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-3960x-3930k_4.html

I suppose the performance gains come from the the increased cpu speed, the cache and the new drivers then.

#28 Edited by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3697 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

far cry 3 is giving me around 50 percent more performance.

I was getting 30 fps on max settings before, now it's giving 45.

I think it's the combination of several things, the increased cache, more threads, increased cpu speed and the fact that the pci-e lanes and the memory controller are embedded on the cpu. Some games will benefit more from one thing(s), other games from other thing(s).

Liberty cities gives me about 30 percent more

dayz runs like crap (it ran better on the i5) but I read I have to disable hyperthreading

I think you are trying to convince your self more than you are people here on this forum.

  1. Majority of games don't support more than 2 cores
  2. The games that do support more than 2 cores vary from 0-15% performance... In every case if you overclock that 15% becomes 0 because one thing CPU intensive games like more than extra cores is core speed, a 4.5Ghz i5 will give you 5-10% more performance over a stock i7 in a CPU intensive game.
  3. The i7's got a extra 5FPS over a i5 in FarCry 3 in the shot below:

... Guess what? overclock that i5 in that benchmark to 4.2-4.5Ghz and the i5 will outperfrom the i7.

Anyone with a i7 that uses their PC for nothing but gaming is gullible and or incapable of browsing the internet better than a pensioner with arthritis.

#29 Posted by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

far cry 3 is giving me around 50 percent more performance.

I was getting 30 fps on max settings before, now it's giving 45.

I think it's the combination of several things, the increased cache, more threads, increased cpu speed and the fact that the pci-e lanes and the memory controller are embedded on the cpu. Some games will benefit more from one thing(s), other games from other thing(s).

Liberty cities gives me about 30 percent more

dayz runs like crap (it ran better on the i5) but I read I have to disable hyperthreading

I think you are trying to convince your self more than you are people here on this forum.

  1. Majority of games don't support more than 2 cores
  2. The games that do support more than 2 cores vary from 0-15% performance... In every case if you overclock that 15% becomes 0 because one thing CPU intensive games like more than extra cores is core speed, a 4.5Ghz i5 will give you 5-10% more performance over a stock i7 in a CPU intensive game.
  3. The i7's got a extra 5FPS over a i5 in FarCry 3 in the shot below:

... Guess what overclocked that i5 in that benchmark to 4.2-4.5Ghz and the i5 will outperfrom the i7 and boom not only did you save a extra $100.

Anyone with a i7 that uses their PC for nothing but gaming is gullible and or incapable of browsing the internet better than a pensioner with arthritis.

You can overclock the i7 as well

and you can't compare the i7 lga 1155 with the lga 2011 ones, they do have more cache. They also used quad channel to benchmark the i7-3960x which has a lot more latency.

I don't like overclocking

sorry, but your post adds nothing to this thread

#30 Edited by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3697 posts) -

I would just like to add...

The image you posted is from Techspot and below are the specification's of the system used to benchmark those cards with that Dead Space 3:

  • Intel Core i7-3770K (3.50GHz)
  • x2 8GB Crucial DDR3-1866 (CL 9-9-9)
  • Asrock Z77 Extreme11 (Intel Z77)
  • OCZ ZX Series 1250w
  • Crucial m4 512GB (SATA 6Gb/s)
  • Microsoft Windows 7 SP1 64-bit
  • Nvidia Forceware 310.70
  • AMD Catalyst 12.11 (Beta 11 CAP 2)

I'll wait till you figure it out.

Your i7 3820 with a 7870XT gives you 130-177FPS?... But the benchmark shows a 7870 with a 3770K with only 64FPS?

LINK!

#31 Posted by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

I would just like to add...

The image you posted is from Techspot and below are the specification's of the system used to benchmark those cards with that Dead Space 3:

  • Intel Core i7-3770K (3.50GHz)
  • x2 8GB Crucial DDR3-1866 (CL 9-9-9)
  • Asrock Z77 Extreme11 (Intel Z77)
  • OCZ ZX Series 1250w
  • Crucial m4 512GB (SATA 6Gb/s)
  • Microsoft Windows 7 SP1 64-bit
  • Nvidia Forceware 310.70
  • AMD Catalyst 12.11 (Beta 11 CAP 2)

I'll wait till you figure it out.

Your tell me YOUR i5 gave you the same performance as the i7 used for that game?... or are you telling that your new i7 gave you twice the performance with the same card than the i7 used in that benchmark with that game?...

LINK!

I said my i5-2500 with my overclocked 7870 xt gave around 70-90. The 7950 boost gives 89 fps average in that benchmark. My overclocked 7870xt will come very close to the 7950 boost (i overclocked it as high that I could back then) , allthough the average that i had will be around 80 maybe even 75. That would explain the i7-3770k.

The fact is I have double the performance now, It sits mostly around 140-150 , In firefights or big maps it goes more to 120 but this is with my stock clocked card.

I'm trying to find out why and that's why I started this thread.

#32 Edited by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3697 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

I would just like to add...

The image you posted is from Techspot and below are the specification's of the system used to benchmark those cards with that Dead Space 3:

  • Intel Core i7-3770K (3.50GHz)
  • x2 8GB Crucial DDR3-1866 (CL 9-9-9)
  • Asrock Z77 Extreme11 (Intel Z77)
  • OCZ ZX Series 1250w
  • Crucial m4 512GB (SATA 6Gb/s)
  • Microsoft Windows 7 SP1 64-bit
  • Nvidia Forceware 310.70
  • AMD Catalyst 12.11 (Beta 11 CAP 2)

I'll wait till you figure it out.

Your tell me YOUR i5 gave you the same performance as the i7 used for that game?... or are you telling that your new i7 gave you twice the performance with the same card than the i7 used in that benchmark with that game?...

LINK!

I said my i5-2500 with my overclocked 7870 xt gave around 70-90. The 7950 boost gives 89 fps average in that benchmark. My overclocked 7870xt will come very close to the 7950 boost (i overclocked it as high that I could back then) , allthough the average that i had will be around 80 maybe even 75. That would explain the i7-3770k.

The fact is I have double the performance now, It sits mostly around 140-150 , In firefights or big maps it goes more to 120 but this is with my stock clocked card.

I'm trying to find out why and that's why I started this thread.

Do you not see the issue?... i.e. No one believes you.

The reason why is simple... You claim that your CPU upgrade doubled your frame rate to the point where it gives you 76FPS more than a card that's 20-40% faster?

  • i7 3820 + HD 7870 XT = 120-177FPS
  • i7 3770 + GTX 670 = 101FPS

Do you really not understand why no ones taking your post seriously?...

#33 Edited by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

@evildead6789 said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

I would just like to add...

The image you posted is from Techspot and below are the specification's of the system used to benchmark those cards with that Dead Space 3:

  • Intel Core i7-3770K (3.50GHz)
  • x2 8GB Crucial DDR3-1866 (CL 9-9-9)
  • Asrock Z77 Extreme11 (Intel Z77)
  • OCZ ZX Series 1250w
  • Crucial m4 512GB (SATA 6Gb/s)
  • Microsoft Windows 7 SP1 64-bit
  • Nvidia Forceware 310.70
  • AMD Catalyst 12.11 (Beta 11 CAP 2)

I'll wait till you figure it out.

Your tell me YOUR i5 gave you the same performance as the i7 used for that game?... or are you telling that your new i7 gave you twice the performance with the same card than the i7 used in that benchmark with that game?...

LINK!

I said my i5-2500 with my overclocked 7870 xt gave around 70-90. The 7950 boost gives 89 fps average in that benchmark. My overclocked 7870xt will come very close to the 7950 boost (i overclocked it as high that I could back then) , allthough the average that i had will be around 80 maybe even 75. That would explain the i7-3770k.

The fact is I have double the performance now, It sits mostly around 140-150 , In firefights or big maps it goes more to 120 but this is with my stock clocked card.

I'm trying to find out why and that's why I started this thread.

Do you not see the issue?... i.e. No one believes you.

The reason why is simple... You claim that your CPU upgrade doubled your frame rate to the point where it gives you 76FPS more than a card that's 20-40% faster?

  • i7 3820 + HD 7870 XT = 120-177FPS
  • i7 3770 + GTX 670 = 101FPS

Do you really not understand why no ones taking your post seriously?...

Well I'm not lying, Amd drivers can give significant performance increases. I think 2012 was the year of the 'never settle' updates which gave the biggest performance upgrades. My old drivers were from january 2013 though.

The gtx 670 is not that much better than the 7870 xt as well

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/graphics-cards/sapphire-radeon-hd-7870-xt-1130535/review

Tomshardware ranks it the same actually

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

#34 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3697 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

@evildead6789 said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

I would just like to add...

The image you posted is from Techspot and below are the specification's of the system used to benchmark those cards with that Dead Space 3:

  • Intel Core i7-3770K (3.50GHz)
  • x2 8GB Crucial DDR3-1866 (CL 9-9-9)
  • Asrock Z77 Extreme11 (Intel Z77)
  • OCZ ZX Series 1250w
  • Crucial m4 512GB (SATA 6Gb/s)
  • Microsoft Windows 7 SP1 64-bit
  • Nvidia Forceware 310.70
  • AMD Catalyst 12.11 (Beta 11 CAP 2)

I'll wait till you figure it out.

Your tell me YOUR i5 gave you the same performance as the i7 used for that game?... or are you telling that your new i7 gave you twice the performance with the same card than the i7 used in that benchmark with that game?...

LINK!

I said my i5-2500 with my overclocked 7870 xt gave around 70-90. The 7950 boost gives 89 fps average in that benchmark. My overclocked 7870xt will come very close to the 7950 boost (i overclocked it as high that I could back then) , allthough the average that i had will be around 80 maybe even 75. That would explain the i7-3770k.

The fact is I have double the performance now, It sits mostly around 140-150 , In firefights or big maps it goes more to 120 but this is with my stock clocked card.

I'm trying to find out why and that's why I started this thread.

Do you not see the issue?... i.e. No one believes you.

The reason why is simple... You claim that your CPU upgrade doubled your frame rate to the point where it gives you 76FPS more than a card that's 20-40% faster?

  • i7 3820 + HD 7870 XT = 120-177FPS
  • i7 3770 + GTX 670 = 101FPS

Do you really not understand why no ones taking your post seriously?...

Well I'm not lying, Amd drivers can give significant performance increases. I think 2012 was the year of the 'never settle' updates which gave the biggest performance upgrades. My old drivers were from january 2013 though.

The gtx 670 is not that much better than the 7870 xt as well

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/graphics-cards/sapphire-radeon-hd-7870-xt-1130535/review

Tomshardware ranks it the same actually

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

Yeah... My fault I forget how much better the 7807XT was over the 7870.

That being said the performance gain makes no sense what so ever.

The main reason why is that the i7 3820 and i7 3770 perform the same and in some cases the i7 3770K outperforms it in gaming... And if the 7870XT performs the same as the GTX 670 your combination of a i7 3820 and 7870XT should be around 100FPS mark. No driver update will give you a extra 70FPS.

#35 Posted by evildead6789 (7513 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

@evildead6789 said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

I would just like to add...

The image you posted is from Techspot and below are the specification's of the system used to benchmark those cards with that Dead Space 3:

  • Intel Core i7-3770K (3.50GHz)
  • x2 8GB Crucial DDR3-1866 (CL 9-9-9)
  • Asrock Z77 Extreme11 (Intel Z77)
  • OCZ ZX Series 1250w
  • Crucial m4 512GB (SATA 6Gb/s)
  • Microsoft Windows 7 SP1 64-bit
  • Nvidia Forceware 310.70
  • AMD Catalyst 12.11 (Beta 11 CAP 2)

I'll wait till you figure it out.

Your tell me YOUR i5 gave you the same performance as the i7 used for that game?... or are you telling that your new i7 gave you twice the performance with the same card than the i7 used in that benchmark with that game?...

LINK!

I said my i5-2500 with my overclocked 7870 xt gave around 70-90. The 7950 boost gives 89 fps average in that benchmark. My overclocked 7870xt will come very close to the 7950 boost (i overclocked it as high that I could back then) , allthough the average that i had will be around 80 maybe even 75. That would explain the i7-3770k.

The fact is I have double the performance now, It sits mostly around 140-150 , In firefights or big maps it goes more to 120 but this is with my stock clocked card.

I'm trying to find out why and that's why I started this thread.

Do you not see the issue?... i.e. No one believes you.

The reason why is simple... You claim that your CPU upgrade doubled your frame rate to the point where it gives you 76FPS more than a card that's 20-40% faster?

  • i7 3820 + HD 7870 XT = 120-177FPS
  • i7 3770 + GTX 670 = 101FPS

Do you really not understand why no ones taking your post seriously?...

Well I'm not lying, Amd drivers can give significant performance increases. I think 2012 was the year of the 'never settle' updates which gave the biggest performance upgrades. My old drivers were from january 2013 though.

The gtx 670 is not that much better than the 7870 xt as well

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/graphics-cards/sapphire-radeon-hd-7870-xt-1130535/review

Tomshardware ranks it the same actually

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

Yeah... My fault I forget how much better the 7807XT was over the 7870.

That being said the performance gain makes no sense what so ever.

The main reason why is that the i7 3820 and i7 3770 perform the same and in some cases the i7 3770K outperforms it in gaming... And if the 7870XT performs the same as the GTX 670 your combination of a i7 3820 and 7870XT should be around 100FPS mark. No driver update will give you a extra 70FPS.

It's not like the gtx 670 is so much better as well, you made the comparison

You're forgetting , well actually i'm sure you have never known it, that the i7 3820 has high latency in quad channel memory and that's how the benchmarks were made with this chip.

I have dual channel memory on this board , so the latency is the same with other systems, and with this setup i get this kind of framerates.

I think it makes sense after all, the never settle drivers were probably messed up with my system and the overclocked 7870 xt probably got framerates near the gtx 670 with this driver. The drivers from this year probably gave an edge more. The extra cache and increased clock speed with the i7 3820 pushed the system even further.

The raw power in the i7-3820 shows, it's as simple as that, wether you like it or not