GPU usage at around 60-65 with gtx680 :s

  • 68 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -

I bought a gtx680 a couple of months ago, I play mostly bf3, and in some of the DLC maps, my fps drops to 40-45, no matter at what I set my video settings. I normaly get 80-90fps, sometimes a little less, 65-70, and you know since I have a freaking gtx680, I should be running over bf3 ultra settings like a charm no ? So how do I know if i am taking full advantage of my GTX680 ? When i check the % GPU usage with MSI afterburner, im around 60-65. And it's wierd because not long ago I was closer to the 80s... I've been told many times that my CPU is bottlenecking my GPU, which i'm starting to believe. Rig in sig, what do you guys think ? Suggestion ? What I should do ? How do I check my CPU usage ?

Thanks

#2 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -

Your gpu would not be averaging 80% usage and another day 60-65% usage. Plus BF3 will use all six cores so even with 2.8 ghz you shouldn't be getting 40-45 fps. You have something going on with your system. But it also wouldnt hurt to get that Phenom to 3.2 ghz or better.

#3 Posted by superclocked (5863 posts) -
Your CPU isn't holding you back in BF3...
#4 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -

Your CPU isn't holding you back in BF3...superclocked
a 955 at 3.2 ghz getting 55-60 fps average in 64 mp with a GTX 560

Another cpu scaling benchmark with 7970

Untitled-9.png

All test runs have enabled:

  • DX11
  • Ultra mode
  • 4xMSAAAA enabled
  • 16x AF enabled
  • HBAO enabled
  • Level: Operation Swordbreaker
#5 Posted by superclocked (5863 posts) -
I think that you misunderstood me.. I said that his CPU wasn't holding his GPU back in BF3 ;)
#6 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -
I think that you misunderstood me.. I said that his CPU wasn't holding his GPU back in BF3 ;)superclocked
O lol my bad :P
#7 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -

[QUOTE="superclocked"]Your CPU isn't holding you back in BF3...04dcarraher

a 955 at 3.2 ghz getting 55-60 fps average in 64 mp with a GTX 560

Another cpu scaling benchmark with 7970

Untitled-9.png

All test runs have enabled:

  • DX11
  • Ultra mode
  • 4xMSAAAA enabled
  • 16x AF enabled
  • HBAO enabled
  • Level: Operation Swordbreaker

Isn't that sp?

BF3 is hugely cpu bound.

On my laptop with a 2720es, I get 100% gpu usage at 1280x960 and get 60-110fps.

That's too low, so I lowered it to 1024x768 and I get 65-130 but my gpu usage hovers around 80%
and my cpu usage is very high.

2720 ES i7 that goes to 3.3ghz (turbos)

This is 32+ TDM.


I get around 150-200fps on my 670 and 2600k.

I play at 1280x960 but I get the same fps at 1920x1080.

You are definitely cpu bound if you are talking about MP.

#8 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -
I am talking about multiplayer, never touched singleplayer. And those benchmarcks are for singleplayer so those numbers are useless.
#9 Posted by ShimmerMan (4460 posts) -

Are you overclocking? because the 680GTX failsafe mode does not crash or artifact, instead it downclocks the GPU and gives around 30% less performance than stock.

#10 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -

I am talking about multiplayer, never touched singleplayer. And those benchmarcks are for singleplayer so those numbers are useless.jack00
Not really, my performance on 64 MP is 50+ . Even when I cap BF3 to two cores I get 30 fps.

6 or 8 core cpu's tend to get better fps averages then quad cores with MP. People with the same cpu as you with gpu's half as powerful are averaging 50+fps at 1080 max settings. You should check and see whats running in the background, also get latest drivers, how old is your windows 7 install? someone on the BF3 forums thanked EA for the patch in september, and his phenom x6 1055t and GTX 680 got a major boost.

#11 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -

[QUOTE="jack00"]I am talking about multiplayer, never touched singleplayer. And those benchmarcks are for singleplayer so those numbers are useless.04dcarraher

Not really, my performance on 64 MP is 50+ . Even when I cap BF3 to two cores I get 30 fps.

6 or 8 core cpu's tend to get better fps averages then quad cores with MP. People with the same cpu as you with gpu's half as powerful are averaging 50+fps at 1080 max settings. You should check and see whats running in the background, also get latest drivers, how old is your windows 7 install? someone on the BF3 forums thanked EA for the patch in september, and his phenom x6 1055t and GTX 680 got a major boost.

50+fps is low...
#12 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -

Are you overclocking? because the 680GTX failsafe mode does not crash or artifact, instead it downclocks the GPU and gives around 30% less performance than stock.

ShimmerMan
The GPU is overclocked.
#13 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -

[QUOTE="jack00"]I am talking about multiplayer, never touched singleplayer. And those benchmarcks are for singleplayer so those numbers are useless.04dcarraher

Not really, my performance on 64 MP is 50+ . Even when I cap BF3 to two cores I get 30 fps.

6 or 8 core cpu's tend to get better fps averages then quad cores with MP. People with the same cpu as you with gpu's half as powerful are averaging 50+fps at 1080 max settings. You should check and see whats running in the background, also get latest drivers, how old is your windows 7 install? someone on the BF3 forums thanked EA for the patch in september, and his phenom x6 1055t and GTX 680 got a major boost.

50 FPS isn't what I consider "good" when you have a freaking gtx680. Anything below 60 is not acceptable.
#14 Posted by ShimmerMan (4460 posts) -

Check BF3 with stock clocks. If the FPS is higher than when OC'd then you definitely know the OC failed.

#15 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="jack00"]I am talking about multiplayer, never touched singleplayer. And those benchmarcks are for singleplayer so those numbers are useless.jack00

Not really, my performance on 64 MP is 50+ . Even when I cap BF3 to two cores I get 30 fps.

6 or 8 core cpu's tend to get better fps averages then quad cores with MP. People with the same cpu as you with gpu's half as powerful are averaging 50+fps at 1080 max settings. You should check and see whats running in the background, also get latest drivers, how old is your windows 7 install? someone on the BF3 forums thanked EA for the patch in september, and his phenom x6 1055t and GTX 680 got a major boost.

50 FPS isn't what I consider "good" when you have a freaking gtx680. Anything below 60 is not acceptable.

It's your cpu. You can check your gpu clocks with precision and click the voltage button and tick "enable k boost" which will force your gpu in turbo clocks. It might help a bit, I always have that ticked. It does raise your idletemps/power though. Run furmark at 720p fullscreen and check your fps. It should be around ~85 That will hide any cpu bottlenecks
#16 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="jack00"]I am talking about multiplayer, never touched singleplayer. And those benchmarcks are for singleplayer so those numbers are useless.jack00

Not really, my performance on 64 MP is 50+ . Even when I cap BF3 to two cores I get 30 fps.

6 or 8 core cpu's tend to get better fps averages then quad cores with MP. People with the same cpu as you with gpu's half as powerful are averaging 50+fps at 1080 max settings. You should check and see whats running in the background, also get latest drivers, how old is your windows 7 install? someone on the BF3 forums thanked EA for the patch in september, and his phenom x6 1055t and GTX 680 got a major boost.

50 FPS isn't what I consider "good" when you have a freaking gtx680. Anything below 60 is not acceptable.

Its not your your hardware, its software/driver related.
#17 Posted by Truth_Hurts_U (9434 posts) -

I would use EVGA Precision X. It works for all Nvidia cards and is backed by Nvidia.

Make sure that you don't have adaptive half resolution on, frame rate limiting set or if it is that it matches your res of your monitor.

#18 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -

Heh, some dude say its my CPU bottlenecking, the other says it isn't... this is driving me insane. I'll do some more tests with precision X. Should I uninstall MSI after burner first ?

#19 Posted by GTR12 (10036 posts) -

It wouldn't hurt to OC the CPU some.

#20 Posted by Guovssohas (330 posts) -
What's your cpu? I can't see your sig for some reason.
#21 Posted by Truth_Hurts_U (9434 posts) -

Heh, some dude say its my CPU bottlenecking, the other says it isn't... this is driving me insane. I'll do some more tests with precision X. Should I uninstall MSI after burner first ?

jack00

Just reset the card back to default then disable MSI afterburner from auto starting when windows boots.

Best thing you can do is try a benchmark program and match it up to other similar specs to see if your in the range of performance you should be getting. Or check other peoples FPS when they play BF3 with +/- 1 CPU tier and same GPU OC'ed or not.

#22 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -
What's your cpu? I can't see your sig for some reason.Guovssohas
Phenom II 1055T
#23 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -
Run furmark at 720p to see if your cpu is bottlenecking you... (fullscreen)
#24 Posted by Klunt_Bumskrint (4394 posts) -
What are your gpu temps?
#25 Posted by kraken2109 (13203 posts) -

Why has nobody said check CPU usage?

Run task manager in the background, play for a few minutes and alt+tab out, see how much CPU you were using.

#26 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -

Why has nobody said check CPU usage?

Run task manager in the background, play for a few minutes and alt+tab out, see how much CPU you were using.

kraken2109
because my furmark reccomendation would tell all that you need to know but he is ignoring it like the plague
#27 Posted by Guovssohas (330 posts) -

Have you oc'd it? It's clocked quite low on stock, try to oc it a little higher.

#28 Posted by kraken2109 (13203 posts) -
[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

Why has nobody said check CPU usage?

Run task manager in the background, play for a few minutes and alt+tab out, see how much CPU you were using.

JigglyWiggly_
because my furmark reccomendation would tell all that you need to know but he is ignoring it like the plague

Furmark only uses 1 core for me
#29 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -
[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"][QUOTE="kraken2109"]

Why has nobody said check CPU usage?

Run task manager in the background, play for a few minutes and alt+tab out, see how much CPU you were using.

kraken2109
because my furmark reccomendation would tell all that you need to know but he is ignoring it like the plague

Furmark only uses 1 core for me

it's a pure gpu benchmark, it will show if something is wrong with his card or if there is a cpu bottleneck.
#30 Posted by kraken2109 (13203 posts) -
[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"][QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"] because my furmark reccomendation would tell all that you need to know but he is ignoring it like the plague

Furmark only uses 1 core for me

it's a pure gpu benchmark, it will show if something is wrong with his card or if there is a cpu bottleneck.

How can it show a CPU bottleneck if it's a pure GPU benchmark...
#31 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"][QUOTE="kraken2109"] Furmark only uses 1 core for mekraken2109
it's a pure gpu benchmark, it will show if something is wrong with his card or if there is a cpu bottleneck.

How can it show a CPU bottleneck if it's a pure GPU benchmark...

Multiple benchmarks shows even an Athlon II X4 does not bottleneck a 7970 at 1080 enough to even worry about. Using a benchmark tool like Furmark does not gauge real world cpu/gpu usages. Especially games that actually use 4 or more cpu cores. Again even with a massive cpu bottleneck with that gpu he would be getting performance roughly equal to people with his cpu and gpu's that are half as powerful ie GTX 560/560ti etc. But he's getting random and unstable results which point to OS/driver/ background usage causing his issues. Because other people with his cpu with GTX 670's 680's 7950 etc dont have the same unstable results.

One sure way to rule out all software is to start fresh with windows using latest drivers running basically nothing in the background.

#32 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"][QUOTE="kraken2109"] Furmark only uses 1 core for mekraken2109
it's a pure gpu benchmark, it will show if something is wrong with his card or if there is a cpu bottleneck.

How can it show a CPU bottleneck if it's a pure GPU benchmark...

I don't think you understand what I'm saying.
I am saying runfurmark at 720p and post the fps to see if something is wrong with his gpu, if nothing is wrong, then his cpu is the bottleneck.


#33 Posted by danygo1996 (373 posts) -

[QUOTE="superclocked"]Your CPU isn't holding you back in BF3...04dcarraher

a 955 at 3.2 ghz getting 55-60 fps average in 64 mp with a GTX 560

Another cpu scaling benchmark with 7970

Untitled-9.png

All test runs have enabled:

  • DX11
  • Ultra mode
  • 4xMSAAAA enabled
  • 16x AF enabled
  • HBAO enabled
  • Level: Operation Swordbreaker

what the hell... 47 fps with an i7 and a 7970???

thats what i get with an 570 with nvidia's cp maxxed out and bf3's settings maxxed out... have an i7 950 stock speeds

#34 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="superclocked"]Your CPU isn't holding you back in BF3...danygo1996

a 955 at 3.2 ghz getting 55-60 fps average in 64 mp with a GTX 560

Another cpu scaling benchmark with 7970

Untitled-9.png

All test runs have enabled:

  • DX11
  • Ultra mode
  • 4xMSAAAA enabled
  • 16x AF enabled
  • HBAO enabled
  • Level: Operation Swordbreaker

what the hell... 47 fps with an i7 and a 7970???

thats what i get with an 570 with nvidia's cp maxxed out and bf3's settings maxxed out... have an i7 950 stock speeds

early 7970 drivers...
#35 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"] it's a pure gpu benchmark, it will show if something is wrong with his card or if there is a cpu bottleneck.04dcarraher

How can it show a CPU bottleneck if it's a pure GPU benchmark...

Multiple benchmarks shows even an Athlon II X4 does not bottleneck a 7970 at 1080 enough to even worry about. Using a benchmark tool like Furmark does not gauge real world cpu/gpu usages. Especially games that actually use 4 or more cpu cores. Again even with a massive cpu bottleneck with that gpu he would be getting performance roughly equal to people with his cpu and gpu's that are half as powerful ie GTX 560/560ti etc. But he's getting random and unstable results which point to OS/driver/ background usage causing his issues. Because other people with his cpu with GTX 670's 680's 7950 etc dont have the same unstable results.

One sure way to rule out all software is to start fresh with windows using latest drivers running basically nothing in the background.

That cpu he has is a huge bottleneck for BF3 in MP. I don't know what you guys are talking about lol.
#36 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="kraken2109"] How can it show a CPU bottleneck if it's a pure GPU benchmark...JigglyWiggly_

Multiple benchmarks shows even an Athlon II X4 does not bottleneck a 7970 at 1080 enough to even worry about. Using a benchmark tool like Furmark does not gauge real world cpu/gpu usages. Especially games that actually use 4 or more cpu cores. Again even with a massive cpu bottleneck with that gpu he would be getting performance roughly equal to people with his cpu and gpu's that are half as powerful ie GTX 560/560ti etc. But he's getting random and unstable results which point to OS/driver/ background usage causing his issues. Because other people with his cpu with GTX 670's 680's 7950 etc dont have the same unstable results.

One sure way to rule out all software is to start fresh with windows using latest drivers running basically nothing in the background.

That cpu he has is a huge bottleneck for BF3 in MP. I don't know what you guys are talking about lol.

:lol: your so full of it.... Any quad core at or above 3 ghz is enough for BF3 MP, he has a six core which has the ability to spread the workload along more cores even though its clock slightly below 3 ghz.
#37 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -
[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Multiple benchmarks shows even an Athlon II X4 does not bottleneck a 7970 at 1080 enough to even worry about. Using a benchmark tool like Furmark does not gauge real world cpu/gpu usages. Especially games that actually use 4 or more cpu cores. Again even with a massive cpu bottleneck with that gpu he would be getting performance roughly equal to people with his cpu and gpu's that are half as powerful ie GTX 560/560ti etc. But he's getting random and unstable results which point to OS/driver/ background usage causing his issues. Because other people with his cpu with GTX 670's 680's 7950 etc dont have the same unstable results.

One sure way to rule out all software is to start fresh with windows using latest drivers running basically nothing in the background.

04dcarraher
That cpu he has is a huge bottleneck for BF3 in MP. I don't know what you guys are talking about lol.

:lol: your so full of it.... Any quad core at or above 3 ghz is enough for BF3 MP, he has a six core which has the ability to spread the workload along more cores even though its clock slightly below 3 ghz.

no it's not read my post earlier about my 2720es in my laptop.
#38 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]That cpu he has is a huge bottleneck for BF3 in MP. I don't know what you guys are talking about lol.JigglyWiggly_
:lol: your so full of it.... Any quad core at or above 3 ghz is enough for BF3 MP, he has a six core which has the ability to spread the workload along more cores even though its clock slightly below 3 ghz.

no it's not read my post earlier about my 2720es in my laptop.

Lol, that post is full of fail. laptop cpu with laptop gpu, of course your going to get 100% usage. Next you play at 1280x960 with a fps range and claim you get same fps at 1080 that's a lie right there.
#39 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"] :lol: your so full of it.... Any quad core at or above 3 ghz is enough for BF3 MP, he has a six core which has the ability to spread the workload along more cores even though its clock slightly below 3 ghz. 04dcarraher
no it's not read my post earlier about my 2720es in my laptop.

Lol, that post is full of fail. laptop cpu with laptop gpu, of course your going to get 100% usage. Next you play at 1280x960 with a fps range and claim you get same fps at 1080 that's a lie right there.


I get the same fps on my gtx 670 at 1920x1080 or 1280x960 (I play on lowest)


The 2720es is a fast i7 cpu.
It turbos to 3.3ghz. Has 8 megs of l3 cache since it's an engineering sample (they cud it down to 6 later)


I eliminated the gpu bottleneck at 1024x768, it became a CPU one.

The 2720es is faster than his budget cpu

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X6+1055T

Ctrl + f for 2720 and then 1055t

significant difference

//i am always rite btw if you wana save yourself some trouble




#40 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"] no it's not read my post earlier about my 2720es in my laptop.JigglyWiggly_

Lol, that post is full of fail. laptop cpu with laptop gpu, of course your going to get 100% usage. Next you play at 1280x960 with a fps range and claim you get same fps at 1080 that's a lie right there.


I get the same fps on my gtx 670 at 1920x1080 or 1280x960
The 2720es is a fast i7 cpu.
It turbos to 3.3ghz. Has 8 megs of l3 cache since it's an engineering sample (they cud it down to 6 later)


I eliminated the gpu bottleneck at 1024x768, it became a CPU one.

The 2720es is faster than his budget cpu

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X6+1055T

Ctrl + f for 2720 and then 1055t

significant difference

//i am always rite btw if you wana save yourself some trouble




ya with your logic you play at low setting with 1280x960=1080 fps yet every benchmark known about gtx 670 at 1080 maxed with best cpu's only get 65-70 fps average. ie Intel Core i7-3770K @ 4.6 GHz with gtx 670 averages 67 fps. :roll: tell me another joke will you
#41 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -

I think you missed the part where I said on lowest everything with every possible configuration on lowest.

I gotta maintain that 66.62 % m98b accuracy and 51.2% 44 cal accuracy

I play at 150-200fps.

#42 Posted by Bikouchu35 (7611 posts) -

http://www.overclock.net/t/1228869/intel-i5-2500k-or-amd-phenom-ii-x6/30

Scroll allll the way down of this page and look for the screen grab. You can't really see the pict at least for me, but the comments suggest that the gpu usage is smoother hence less spike drops or better minimum frames. Its a 570 for comparison, but I believe the gap will be even bigger for your card.

Nobody gives a rat*** about singleplayer for games like bf3 yet benchmark sites keep using them. I don't know why, I guess is easier to give a fair comparison, but that doesnt shed the light for le resource hog bf3 in 64 mp.

#43 Posted by kraken2109 (13203 posts) -

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"] it's a pure gpu benchmark, it will show if something is wrong with his card or if there is a cpu bottleneck.JigglyWiggly_

How can it show a CPU bottleneck if it's a pure GPU benchmark...

I don't think you understand what I'm saying.
I am saying runfurmark at 720p and post the fps to see if something is wrong with his gpu, if nothing is wrong, then his cpu is the bottleneck.


Ah, I read it wrong
#44 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -
Ok well just to make things clear, I reinstalled windows and bf3 not that long ago so everything is still fresh and I run nothing on the background while playing bf3. I have also spoke to someone who also has the same problem as me and he also says his CPU bottlenecks him and gets alot of FPS fluctuation.
#45 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -

Well one real way to see if its your cpu is just to overclock it to 3.2ghz or better, its not hard to do.Because I own myself and others with Phenom's Athlon II's and FX six cores have not seen these same dips like you and their gpu's range from GTX 460 to GTX 670 but its been awhile since they played. Your cpu is clocked at 2.8 ghz which might be the the reason why your seeing these dips. But performance per system is not equal because of the config differences.

You also do not want to rule out the gpu downclocking at random, Adaptive Power Management , and or Power target features.

Also some people are experiencing the same issues like you since october patch.

"Idk what is going on but since that October patch that we got i can not play this game even on the lowest settings i thought it might have been my video cards cause i run xfire the only way for me to even get 50-70 fps " but dips lower then 40fps" is by turning off xfire i did not have any problems until that patch i have 2 6850's before i was getting around 75-80 fps with an oc on the cards and dropping around 63fps i have tried some of the suggestions that have been posted on the net but does any else have or know anything new to this problem? "

"Having similar problems here. I haven't played since Halo 4 was launched, and I had just bought a 570 right before. I was getting a whole range from 60 to upwards of spikes on 110 FPS with my 570 then and I haven't changed anything since I last played. I was able to record using Dxtory, and still be 60 FPS while recording 30 FPS 1080 video.

After I came back to play recently, had me update in battlelog first, and now I often drop down to 30 fps while never going above around 70, which isn't often. I get a couple stutters in there too. This is ridiculous. I just bought the 570 to increase my frames and it worked at first, but evidently not anymore for some reason...

Core i7 920
8 GB of DDR3
GTX 570 "

"I have 2700K 4.6ghz with GTX 680 and indeed after the patch the performance dropped, from constant 60-85+ FPS i have 60+ fps with drops, as some1 mentioned lowering mesh does seems to solve it, no idea what dice did but lower setting on a high end card or any pc after patch is ridiculous ."

#46 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -
Hmm now that I think of it, I did notice poor performances since the last update which was in october, but I thought it was an update for origin only :s But even so, before that, I did have some other problems. I'm still tweaking around with settings.
#47 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -

Well one real way to see if its your cpu is just to overclock it to 3.2ghz or better, its not hard to do.Because I own myself and others with Phenom's Athlon II's and FX six cores have not seen these same dips like you and their gpu's range from GTX 460 to GTX 670 but its been awhile since they played. Your cpu is clocked at 2.8 ghz which might be the the reason why your seeing these dips. But performance per system is not equal because of the config differences.

You also do not want to rule out the gpu downclocking at random, Adaptive Power Management , and or Power target features.

Also some people are experiencing the same issues like you since october patch.

"Idk what is going on but since that October patch that we got i can not play this game even on the lowest settings i thought it might have been my video cards cause i run xfire the only way for me to even get 50-70 fps " but dips lower then 40fps" is by turning off xfire i did not have any problems until that patch i have 2 6850's before i was getting around 75-80 fps with an oc on the cards and dropping around 63fps i have tried some of the suggestions that have been posted on the net but does any else have or know anything new to this problem? "

"Having similar problems here. I haven't played since Halo 4 was launched, and I had just bought a 570 right before. I was getting a whole range from 60 to upwards of spikes on 110 FPS with my 570 then and I haven't changed anything since I last played. I was able to record using Dxtory, and still be 60 FPS while recording 30 FPS 1080 video.

After I came back to play recently, had me update in battlelog first, and now I often drop down to 30 fps while never going above around 70, which isn't often. I get a couple stutters in there too. This is ridiculous. I just bought the 570 to increase my frames and it worked at first, but evidently not anymore for some reason...

Core i7 920
8 GB of DDR3
GTX 570 "

"I have 2700K 4.6ghz with GTX 680 and indeed after the patch the performance dropped, from constant 60-85+ FPS i have 60+ fps with drops, as some1 mentioned lowering mesh does seems to solve it, no idea what dice did but lower setting on a high end card or any pc after patch is ridiculous ."

04dcarraher
It's his cpu. I already showed you the video of where I got 200fps at 1920x1080 and 1024x768
#48 Posted by 04dcarraher (20396 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

JigglyWiggly_

It's his cpu. I already showed you the video of where I got 200fps at 1920x1080 and 1024x768

Which is not quite true, also what video? in a earlier post you stated 1280x960 not 1024x768.

But anyways you can not gauge how well a cpu is able to deliver the data to a gpu when your using lowest settings no matter the resolution. Because even with my measly Phenom 2 X4 955 @ 3.6 ghz with a GTX 560 and lowest settings seen virtually the same fps at 800x600 vs 1680x1050.With high/ultra settings at same resolutions changed the fps averages. And you cant ignore the fact that other people are seeing the same issues as the TC after the oct. patch with both AMD and Intel cpu's with weaker gpu's and equal ones.

Below cpu used i7 3770k @ 4.6 ghz.
bf3_1280_800.gif

bf3_1920_1200.gif

Even with a 400 mhz lower clock the Phenom 2 X6 1100T still outpaces the Phenom 2 X4 980 because of the extra two cores. The fact that the 6990 is more demanding on the cpu's then a single gpu is also something to consider.

attachment.php?attachmentid=121724&d=131

So there are multiple factors at work, but his cpu isnt all to blame....

#49 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23826 posts) -
Are those sp benchmarks?
#50 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -
Yes they are.