F5F Stay Refreshed Software PC Gaming Minimal graphics card and processor activity

Minimal graphics card and processor activity

Minimal graphics card and processor activity

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
G
gluonic
Member
234
05-13-2018, 01:12 PM
#1
I just assembled a fresh computer, and its performance in tests such as 'Time Spy' is respectable—both the graphics card and processor consistently operate at over 90%. However, when playing games, my frame rates are disappointingly low despite high GPU and CPU utilization.

Here’s the hardware configuration:

- 8GB Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 Nitro+
- 16GB (2x 8192MB) G.Skill Trident Z RGB DDR4-2400
- MSI B450 TOMAHAWK AMD B450 Motherboard
- AMD Ryzen 5 2600
- 550 Watt Corsair CX Series CX550M Modular 80+ Bronze Power Supply
G
gluonic
05-13-2018, 01:12 PM #1

I just assembled a fresh computer, and its performance in tests such as 'Time Spy' is respectable—both the graphics card and processor consistently operate at over 90%. However, when playing games, my frame rates are disappointingly low despite high GPU and CPU utilization.

Here’s the hardware configuration:

- 8GB Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 Nitro+
- 16GB (2x 8192MB) G.Skill Trident Z RGB DDR4-2400
- MSI B450 TOMAHAWK AMD B450 Motherboard
- AMD Ryzen 5 2600
- 550 Watt Corsair CX Series CX550M Modular 80+ Bronze Power Supply

H
HapKiDo2000
Junior Member
3
05-21-2018, 11:21 AM
#2
Could you describe your opinion on unacceptable frame rates, and detail the CPU and GPU load experienced in various games?
H
HapKiDo2000
05-21-2018, 11:21 AM #2

Could you describe your opinion on unacceptable frame rates, and detail the CPU and GPU load experienced in various games?

F
Frinex10
Posting Freak
806
06-03-2018, 04:38 PM
#3
Hello,

I’m curious about your experiences with low frame rates—specifically, what you deem to be a poor FPS and the corresponding CPU and GPU load in various games.

In *Destiny 2*, your graphics card consistently reaches a usage of approximately 70-80%, resulting in an average of around 40 frames per second below what’s shown in YouTube benchmark tests (using stock settings) at Full HD resolution. Unfortunately, you're unable to monitor your CPU usage while playing *Destiny 2* because MSI Afterburner is preventing it. Regarding *Counter-Strike: Global Offensive*, your CPU cores rarely exceed 40% utilization, with an average GPU load of around 50%. Your frame rate is approximately 70-100 frames lower than what Vega 64 cards typically achieve, even when you decrease the game’s visual settings.
F
Frinex10
06-03-2018, 04:38 PM #3

Hello,

I’m curious about your experiences with low frame rates—specifically, what you deem to be a poor FPS and the corresponding CPU and GPU load in various games.

In *Destiny 2*, your graphics card consistently reaches a usage of approximately 70-80%, resulting in an average of around 40 frames per second below what’s shown in YouTube benchmark tests (using stock settings) at Full HD resolution. Unfortunately, you're unable to monitor your CPU usage while playing *Destiny 2* because MSI Afterburner is preventing it. Regarding *Counter-Strike: Global Offensive*, your CPU cores rarely exceed 40% utilization, with an average GPU load of around 50%. Your frame rate is approximately 70-100 frames lower than what Vega 64 cards typically achieve, even when you decrease the game’s visual settings.

H
144
06-03-2018, 06:32 PM
#4
Your modest memory will likely reduce performance somewhat, though that assessment appears unusually pessimistic for Destiny.

Counter-Strike would experience similar limitations with a GTX 1050 and your Radeon Vega 64, as it heavily relies on central processing unit performance.

www.userbenchmark.com
While not a highly accurate assessment tool, it could provide some guidance in determining areas to investigate. Please share the result it provides at the conclusion.
H
Hearth_PvP_God
06-03-2018, 06:32 PM #4

Your modest memory will likely reduce performance somewhat, though that assessment appears unusually pessimistic for Destiny.

Counter-Strike would experience similar limitations with a GTX 1050 and your Radeon Vega 64, as it heavily relies on central processing unit performance.

www.userbenchmark.com
While not a highly accurate assessment tool, it could provide some guidance in determining areas to investigate. Please share the result it provides at the conclusion.

K
karlerik_1999
Member
205
06-06-2018, 11:19 PM
#5
The relatively weak memory on your computer will likely cause some performance issues, though it appears to be minimal within Destiny. Counter-Strike would experience a similar slowdown using a 1050 Ti, mirroring the performance of your Vega 64 due to its heavy reliance on processing power.

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/14442991
K
karlerik_1999
06-06-2018, 11:19 PM #5

The relatively weak memory on your computer will likely cause some performance issues, though it appears to be minimal within Destiny. Counter-Strike would experience a similar slowdown using a 1050 Ti, mirroring the performance of your Vega 64 due to its heavy reliance on processing power.

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/14442991

A
amin112
Junior Member
3
06-14-2018, 12:34 AM
#6
Initially, you’ll need to access your motherboard settings and activate XMP/AMD-XMP/DOCP, whichever term it uses. This won’t provide a substantial improvement, but it will be beneficial nonetheless. Following this, track your graphics card’s temperature while running a game or comparable activity, and observe both the temperature readings and the maximum core clock speed. I suspect that your GPU isn’t reaching its full potential in terms of clock speeds.
A
amin112
06-14-2018, 12:34 AM #6

Initially, you’ll need to access your motherboard settings and activate XMP/AMD-XMP/DOCP, whichever term it uses. This won’t provide a substantial improvement, but it will be beneficial nonetheless. Following this, track your graphics card’s temperature while running a game or comparable activity, and observe both the temperature readings and the maximum core clock speed. I suspect that your GPU isn’t reaching its full potential in terms of clock speeds.

T
TheRARESBOSS
Junior Member
3
06-14-2018, 06:07 AM
#7
Initially, it’s important to access the system’s basic input/output system (BIOS) and activate XMP or DOCP – whatever your motherboard identifies as the profile for memory optimization. This adjustment won’t provide a substantial improvement, but it will be beneficial nonetheless.

Subsequently, observe your graphics card's temperature levels while engaging in gaming or comparable activities and carefully monitor both the temperatures and the maximum core clock speed achieved. I suspect that the card isn't reaching its full potential frequency.

I haven’t typically observed temperatures exceeding 60°C (Time Spy). The highest benchmark core clock reached approximately 1600MHz. During periods of full utilization, the card draws 270W of power (GPU-Fans at 1500 rpm). This seems somewhat atypical.
T
TheRARESBOSS
06-14-2018, 06:07 AM #7

Initially, it’s important to access the system’s basic input/output system (BIOS) and activate XMP or DOCP – whatever your motherboard identifies as the profile for memory optimization. This adjustment won’t provide a substantial improvement, but it will be beneficial nonetheless.

Subsequently, observe your graphics card's temperature levels while engaging in gaming or comparable activities and carefully monitor both the temperatures and the maximum core clock speed achieved. I suspect that the card isn't reaching its full potential frequency.

I haven’t typically observed temperatures exceeding 60°C (Time Spy). The highest benchmark core clock reached approximately 1600MHz. During periods of full utilization, the card draws 270W of power (GPU-Fans at 1500 rpm). This seems somewhat atypical.

K
ketman34
Posting Freak
834
06-18-2018, 02:39 AM
#8
Sixteen hundred is slightly below expectations, yet not so significantly low as to place you within the top 10% in a benchmark test, since many cards won't sustain higher clock speeds. It would be beneficial to explore lowering the GPU voltage using either Afterburner or Wattman and observe if this improves performance.
K
ketman34
06-18-2018, 02:39 AM #8

Sixteen hundred is slightly below expectations, yet not so significantly low as to place you within the top 10% in a benchmark test, since many cards won't sustain higher clock speeds. It would be beneficial to explore lowering the GPU voltage using either Afterburner or Wattman and observe if this improves performance.

K
kcaz56
Senior Member
664
06-21-2018, 02:58 PM
#9
A week ago, I obtained my graphics card. Currently, I’m considering returning it. I'm uncertain whether reducing the voltage of my Vega would be beneficial, as it might be preferable to send it back if its performance is unsatisfactory.
K
kcaz56
06-21-2018, 02:58 PM #9

A week ago, I obtained my graphics card. Currently, I’m considering returning it. I'm uncertain whether reducing the voltage of my Vega would be beneficial, as it might be preferable to send it back if its performance is unsatisfactory.

J
JEFF_JEFFERSON
Senior Member
627
06-23-2018, 01:43 AM
#10
Your power supply unit might not be sufficient. A completely powered-up system could require around 500 watts, potentially exceeding the capacity of your 12-volt circuit. Therefore, I was curious to see if it maintains the same performance level consistently or reduces its speed under heavy load.
J
JEFF_JEFFERSON
06-23-2018, 01:43 AM #10

Your power supply unit might not be sufficient. A completely powered-up system could require around 500 watts, potentially exceeding the capacity of your 12-volt circuit. Therefore, I was curious to see if it maintains the same performance level consistently or reduces its speed under heavy load.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next