Low fps - Good specs + high resolution

beezdul

So when I enabled eyefinity, my fps got even worse from 80 fps at 1440p@80hz to 7-25 fps at 3x1440p@80hz with even the lowest settings

Specs:
3x monitors (2560x1440 @ 80hz)
Radeon 7970 (3 GB) *crossfire disabled due to that horrible flicker problem
Radeon 7970 (6 GB)
16 GB 2600MHz ram
AMD FX 4350 @ 4.20 GHZ (quad core)


tech_support.zip
http://www.filedropper.com/techsupport


Is there anything I can do to increase the fps to a minimum of 50 while retaining my resolution? I know there's something wrong because apparently people can get 120 fps+ with 6850s, while with a 7970 I can barely get 80 (with one monitor)

Soul_Rider

The problem is your CPU. Unfortunately, NS2 very much requires single threaded performance. Your processor performs roughly at the same level as a Core i5 760 @ 2.8Ghz. Due to the high CPU requirement of the LUA code your graphics card is not being utilised enough.

Getting 80FPS at 1440p is about what I would expect, I would expect around 90-120FPS @1080p.

If you overclock your CPU, you will see a small performance boost, and if you upgrade to one of the latest i5 cpus, you will also see a massive improvement.

Other than that your performance level is pretty much spot on for your current hardware.

Zinkey

Agree with @Soul_Rider, I wouldnt go as far as to say your CPU is a problem, but its most certainly the bottleneck in your system. Id also go as far as to say thats not just an NS2 issue, you will probably find your FPS isnt what a 7970 can really do, its probably just more pronounced in NS2 due to the games high CPU req.

One way to verify this is by typing r_stats 1 in the console while running NS2. This will show the rendering stats as the game is playing and will give you a time in ms waiting for either GPU or Render Thread (essentially CPU). You will probably notice your waiting on GPU is solidly 0 whereas the waiting for render thread is not.

Overclocking may be worth a shot but I doubt it will really give you the boost you are after. As for a CPU upgrade id probably recommend just a more powerful AMD chip as an intel chip would require a new motherboard as well. As for which AMD chip would be worth considering I couldnt say I'm far more familiar with intel ones myself.

beezdul

Zinkey wrote: »

Overclocking may be worth a shot but I doubt it will really give you the boost you are after. As for a CPU upgrade id probably recommend just a more powerful AMD chip as an intel chip would require a new motherboard as well. As for which AMD chip would be worth considering I couldnt say I'm far more familiar with intel ones myself.

The best AMD processor I could find would be this:
AMD FX-9590 Vishera 4.7GHz Socket AM3+ 220W Eight-Core Desktop Processor - Black Edition FD9590FHHKWOF

I could easily OC it to 5 GHz like everybody else, but would it really increase performance with 8 cores?
Now if I went the intel route, what processor do you use (if you like it), what would be the absolute best for gaming before the law of diminishing returns (EG: paying 500$ more for 2% performance), and what would be the best gaming processor for the money?

Soul_Rider

I've just upgraded to a i5 4670k, I can highly recommend the processor, there is no need to go to a 4770k, unfortunately I can't offer any details on price, as it is around £200 in UK, but i have no idea how much it costs in the US.

NS2 is limited to single threaded performance, so 8 cores would provide you with no benefit in NS2.

beezdul

Soul_Rider wrote: »

I've just upgraded to a i5 4670k, I can highly recommend the processor, there is no need to go to a 4770k, unfortunately I can't offer any details on price, as it is around £200 in UK, but i have no idea how much it costs in the US.

NS2 is limited to single threaded performance, so 8 cores would provide you with no benefit in NS2.

In the US it's only $240. I might upgrade my processor in the future, but overclocking to 4.7GHz got me an extra 5 fps.

Zinkey

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-1852053/amd-9590-intel-4770k.html

This is a pretty interesting read if comparing the 9590 and 4770K. I have a 4770K myself and its absolutely brilliant, running it on stock with a GTX780Ti and that absolutely tears through everything I throw at it.

As for what you should do its entirely up to you. The easiest option for you would seem to be just to swap out your current CPU for the 9590 as you are already running an AM3+ socket motherboard. BUT as mentioned in the above link the 9590 has a much higher power requirement and to run it at 5.0GHz has some rather beastly cooling requirements so you may find yourself having to spend more to accommodate that and after all is said and done the 4770K may have been an easier option.

My personal advice would just be to do some research, look at your current setup and how much each option would cost you to upgrade to. Try to bear in mind however that cost/performance of individual components isnt always the best indication of what hardware to buy. Its all about balance really. Generally I'd say something like the i5 4670K has a pretty solid $/performance ratio but once you have multiple GPUs its very easy to bottleneck them if your CPU isnt up to scratch. In short, the best $/performance CPU for gaming may not be the best $/performance relative to the rest of your hardware.

Soul_Rider

Yeah, although, to be fair, the 4770k only has an additional 2mb Cache (8mb vs 6mb) and a 100mhz base and turbo clock advantage. However, I've overclocked my CPU to a comfortable 4.4Ghz straight off the bat. I could test properly and go further, but I just went straight to 4.4, and it worked, so I left it

Remember too that the current Haswells are not the top of the line products. Soon?? Intel will be releasing their i7's and the Haswell-E range, which will be the real high end stuff, but that will come with a big premium attached as well..