Question Low frame rate question

[jamesdsimone]

I just finished playing Crysis and Crysis Warhead. I played Crysis with all max settings at 1080p. My frame frame rate was usually 80-100 with lows of 60. I am using a w-2145 with an RX 6800XT and 64 gb of quad channel DDR2666. Bur playing Crysis Warhead I was only getting 40-50 fps. That seems really low. The game was designed to run on a core 2 duo. I know the w-2145 boasts to 4.1ghz on all 8 cores. The fastest card available in 2008 was the GTX280 less than 10% the performance of the RX 6800XT. Is the game that badly optimized or is there something wrong with my system?

 

[Thunder 57]

I just finished playing Crysis and Crysis Warhead. I played Crysis with all max settings at 1080p. My frame frame rate was usually 80-100 with lows of 60. I am using a w-2145 with an RX 6800XT and 64 gb of quad channel DDR2666. Bur playing Crysis Warhead I was only getting 40-50 fps. That seems really low. The game was designed to run on a core 2 duo. I know the w-2145 boasts to 4.1ghz on all 8 cores. The fastest card available in 2008 was the GTX280 less than 10% the performance of the RX 6800XT. Is the game that badly optimized or is there something wrong with my system?

What is your CPU usage while playing?

 

[jamesdsimone]

What is your CPU usage while playing?

How would I do that? I can't get it to play in a window.

 

[Thunder 57]

How would I do that? I can't get it to play in a window.

Can you have task manager open to the CPU and alt-tab out of the game to see? That'd be the easiest way.

 

[jamesdsimone]

Can you have task manager open to the CPU and alt-tab out of the game to see? That'd be the easiest way.

I can but the game is idle. I have 0% CPU usage. The game is using 40 threads if that tells you anything.

 

[Thunder 57]

Yes but you can see CPU useage over the past 60 seconds. It should give you an idea of where it was at. Otherwise you would have to use perfmon I'd imagine.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Fired it up just now on a 5600X3D + 7800XT; anywhere from 90s min to over 200 fps at 1080 max settings. At 1440p I get similar FPS, it's heavily CPU bound.

If you are on a 1080 display, open the AMD software, click on the settings icon - toggle on virtual super resolution. Next go to the performance tab - metrics - overlay tab and toggle it to enable metrics overlay. Go to windows display settings and set desktop res to 4K. Set it to 4K max settings in game next. See if loading the GPU more helps fps any or not.

Digital Foundry revisited it for the 10th anniversary and a 8700K at 5GHz dropped below 60fps in one section. So it is definitely your CPU holding you back.

 

[Tup3x]

Can you have task manager open to the CPU and alt-tab out of the game to see? That'd be the easiest way.

It's Crysis. Basically single threaded game. CPU usage tells you pretty much nothing.

 

[Thunder 57]

I, among others, told you not to go with the Xeon months ago. You thought you were getting a deal but this is finding out the hard way that you messed up. I don't know what to say other than ditch that platform and build something modern.

 

[Thunder 57]

It's Crysis. Basically single threaded game. CPU usage tells you pretty much nothing.

Tells you everything if you are maxing out one or two cores while the rest sit idle.

 

[Tup3x]

Tells you everything if you are maxing out one or two cores while the rest sit idle.

You aren't going to see one core at constant 100% unless you manually set the affinity.

 

[mikeymikec]

It's Crysis. Basically single threaded game. CPU usage tells you pretty much nothing.

Huh, it didn't ever get a multithreading patch?

---

One other tool that's handy for plotting processor usage is Sysinternals Process Explorer because it allows you to point at a past point on each of the resource usage graphs and it will give you a readout of what the usage figure and predominant user of that resource (in the case of cpu) was at that point in time. It also gives GPU usage and VRAM graphs in a similar manner.

 

[Thunder 57]

You aren't going to see one core at constant 100% unless you manually set the affinity.

Perhaps not today. We are talking about a 15 year old (or so) game though.

 

[jamesdsimone]

Yes but you can see CPU useage over the past 60 seconds. It should give you an idea of where it was at. Otherwise you would have to use perfmon I'd imagine.

It is the GOG version so not sure if they updated it. The game seems to use 4 cores but 30-40% most of the time. There were a couple spikes to 100%.

Perhaps not today. We are talking about a 15 year old (or so) game though.

I know I should be getting 200+ fps. The current hardware is literally 10x faster than what it was originally designed for. The game is perfectly playable but wondering. I'll try launching it through the AMD launcher.

 

[jamesdsimone]

I, among others, told you not to go with the Xeon months ago. You thought you were getting a deal but this is finding out the hard way that you messed up. I don't know what to say other than ditch that platform and build something modern.

More testing and it turns out Crysis Warhead just has bad optimization. Crysis 2(cryengine 3) is running 120-180fps at 1080p with all settings maxed. Prey(cryengine 5) is running at 120-145 fps at 1080p with all settings maxed. That is perfectly good performance for my 145 dollar Xeon system. I'm guessing the newer engines use more cores. I don't consider that messing up. I did a lot of research into relative performance before I decided to go with the P520.