F5F Stay Refreshed Software PC Gaming GTX 760 versus R9 280 in CS:GO – performance comparison.

GTX 760 versus R9 280 in CS:GO – performance comparison.

GTX 760 versus R9 280 in CS:GO – performance comparison.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
U
uHP
Member
53
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#1
He is evaluating my rig against his friends' setup in CS:GO. They share identical video configurations, and all drivers are current. Both players cap their FPS at 300. Key variations include my use of several launch options to boost FPS and unparking my Specs. My specs are FX-8320+ASUS R9 280 while his is i5 4670k + Gigabyte GTX 760. Although both cards are older, the R9 280 edges out the GTX 760 slightly in benchmarks and FPS, though not a guaranteed improvement. Here’s the breakdown: Community Deathmatch – 100-150 FPS; Friend – Stable 250-300 FPS; Casual on new maps – 70-150 FPS; Competitive 5v5 Dust 2 – 100-200 FPS; Office (best) – 150-250 FPS; Sometimes reaches 300. I’m confident my hardware and software are fine. Valve struggles to optimize AMD cards for CS:GO consistently, often leaving me with subpar performance regardless of updates. On other titles, I achieve the expected FPS for my rig. Some others claim R9 390 or similar cards still lack that stability.
U
uHP
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #1

He is evaluating my rig against his friends' setup in CS:GO. They share identical video configurations, and all drivers are current. Both players cap their FPS at 300. Key variations include my use of several launch options to boost FPS and unparking my Specs. My specs are FX-8320+ASUS R9 280 while his is i5 4670k + Gigabyte GTX 760. Although both cards are older, the R9 280 edges out the GTX 760 slightly in benchmarks and FPS, though not a guaranteed improvement. Here’s the breakdown: Community Deathmatch – 100-150 FPS; Friend – Stable 250-300 FPS; Casual on new maps – 70-150 FPS; Competitive 5v5 Dust 2 – 100-200 FPS; Office (best) – 150-250 FPS; Sometimes reaches 300. I’m confident my hardware and software are fine. Valve struggles to optimize AMD cards for CS:GO consistently, often leaving me with subpar performance regardless of updates. On other titles, I achieve the expected FPS for my rig. Some others claim R9 390 or similar cards still lack that stability.

J
jxzuzuzo
Posting Freak
750
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#2
It seems the issue is likely related to the CPU rather than the graphics cards.
J
jxzuzuzo
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #2

It seems the issue is likely related to the CPU rather than the graphics cards.

M
mateuszmamona
Member
174
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#3
You're sure your 8320 is helping improve your outcomes?
M
mateuszmamona
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #3

You're sure your 8320 is helping improve your outcomes?

A
Argora
Junior Member
37
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#4
The problem lies with the CPU, not the GPU. Also, increase your settings—there’s no benefit to 200 FPS on a 60Hz display.
A
Argora
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #4

The problem lies with the CPU, not the GPU. Also, increase your settings—there’s no benefit to 200 FPS on a 60Hz display.

W
Wicket1635
Member
157
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#5
Absolutely. The difference between them is much greater.
W
Wicket1635
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #5

Absolutely. The difference between them is much greater.

A
ash_n_brad
Posting Freak
778
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#6
It's the same as what others mentioned.
A
ash_n_brad
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #6

It's the same as what others mentioned.

G
gitty12
Member
94
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#7
The performance impact on your crosshair speed matters a lot for you. It’s unclear whether your CPU is the problem, as benchmarks suggest little change compared to Intel options.
G
gitty12
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #7

The performance impact on your crosshair speed matters a lot for you. It’s unclear whether your CPU is the problem, as benchmarks suggest little change compared to Intel options.

D
Djam95
Member
143
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#8
You could enhance the analogy by exchanging video card models and then share those findings.
D
Djam95
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #8

You could enhance the analogy by exchanging video card models and then share those findings.

R
Retrospear
Member
56
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#9
I've worked with the Source Engine prior and can confirm it tends to be CPU-intensive. Additionally, the engine limits performance to around 300 FPS.
R
Retrospear
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #9

I've worked with the Source Engine prior and can confirm it tends to be CPU-intensive. Additionally, the engine limits performance to around 300 FPS.

S
SpiritClaws
Member
217
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM
#10
Check your GPU performance on this machine
S
SpiritClaws
06-24-2020, 02:49 PM #10

Check your GPU performance on this machine

Pages (2): 1 2 Next