Less FPS after upgrading from nvidia 1660s to amd 6700 (not xt,10 gb vram)

[Melvis]

Who would have thought that he is making stuff up? Color me surprised

Oh really? well how about this for you, and this is from the game its self!

I didn't notice this option before ( I dont play the game overly much) must of been added recently? *shrugs* but this proves my point!

 

[Chrispy_]

Just wow, I'm going to tap out, much like OP has tapped out.
This thread is a madhouse now, and you can't reason with mad people.

 

[agent_x007]

nah mate stutters stand still but my fps on ets2 is between 160-200 i did something on radeon program and its good now but i still have some more stutters...

Check main window of GPU-z for anomalies (a screenshot would be great), if that's fine - check Core/Memory in sensor tab with monitor in background option. Weird spikes, under utilization or hitting very low power limits can be clearly visible that way (screenshot of GPU-z sensor tab after load/game would also be very helpful).

 

[Waldorf]

@Melvis
dont care to play it again (already uninstalled), i know it ran perfect no problems whatsoever, not even when playing at ~20 fps, no crashes or any other strange behavior.
you dont believe it? not my problem.

besides, steam isnt really relevant to compare global numbers, as not everyone uses it.
even i dont, and i only installed it (temporary) to run Marvels.

steam has listed +90% of their users as gaming at FHD or lower, while no one i got to know (friends/customers) in the past 10y that i fixed/upgrade a pc for, plays below FHD,
90% are playing at least 1440p, the rest UHD, even those with non-nintendo consoles.

fact is, OP fixed the problem with a clean install of win, proving again, it was not the 16GB ram that was causing problems.

 

[Melvis]

Just wow, I'm going to tap out, much like OP has tapped out.
This thread is a madhouse now, and you can't reason with mad people.

Cant handle the truth? Good! we don't want your BS and misinformation anyway. Cya!

@Melvis
dont care to play it again (already uninstalled), i know it ran perfect no problems whatsoever, not even when playing at ~20 fps, no crashes or any other strange behavior.
you dont believe it? not my problem.

besides, steam isnt really relevant to compare global numbers, as not everyone uses it.
even i dont, and i only installed it (temporary) to run Marvels.

steam has listed +90% of their users as gaming at FHD or lower, while no one i got to know (friends/customers) in the past 10y that i fixed/upgrade a pc for, plays below FHD,
90% are playing at least 1440p, the rest UHD, even those with non-nintendo consoles.

fact is, OP fixed the problem with a clean install of win, proving again, it was not the 16GB ram that was causing problems.

That's fair enough, you do you, facts are facts, and we all now know that games (like Marvel Rivals) can take more then 16GB of RAM, even the devs themselves have now confirmed this as shown above, so doesn't matter if I don't believe ya or not, don't really care anymore honestly, all has been proven so my work is done here!

 

[Waldorf]

@Melvis
except "can use more" does not equal "will need more".

 

[JustBenching]

@Melvis
except "can use more" does not equal "will need more".

It literally cannot even use more, his own screenshot shows 10gb of ram

 

[Melvis]

@Melvis
except "can use more" does not equal "will need more".

Thats not what even the devs said themselves if you bothered to even look at the screen shot I put up.......

Marvel Rivals is experiencing high RAM consumption on PC, causing crashes and performance issues, especially for players with less than 32GB of RAM. The development team is aware of the problem and working on a fix, with an experimental checkbox in the Season 2 update expected to significantly reduce memory usage.

In Marvel Rivals, the "Switch Shader Compilation Mode" is an experimental feature designed to improve loading times and reduce stuttering, particularly for players with 16GB of RAM or less. It works by compiling shaders only once at the start of a game session after a game version or graphics driver update, rather than every time a new match starts. This can lead to faster initial loads and reduced memory usage. However, it may cause temporary glitches with textures rendering abnormally at the beginning of a match before stabilizing.

It literally cannot even use more, his own screenshot shows 10gb of ram

It literally can use more then 16GB of RAM my own screen shot shows that! Stop trolling for god sake! and stop playing games without a OS/Steam since thats how you think games run in 2025.....

You kids really need to learn to read and admit defeat when shown a whole lot of proof not just by myself but the devs themselves, if you think there wrong then go tell them! I know I wont as there right!

 

[JustBenching]

It literally can use more then 16GB of RAM my own screen shot shows that!

Oh yeah buddy

 

[Waldorf]

@Melvis
which comes back to the fact its not the problem of having 16gb, its an issue with the game developers being unable to rein in ram use.
especially considering there are games with better visuals that have no problems with 16gb or less.

wanted to do a deep clean after deleting the game, turns out game folder was still there (i dont use installer path), so i reinstalled steam and ran it,
first without shader compilation:

and right after only closing the game, nothing else, ILSC reports free ram:

fact is, i cant have less than 10gb free, if the game ever used more than 10gb.

and the best one: turning shader compilation on, didnt do anything on ram use.

but not surprised given what i have read from ppl with "engine" knowledge, or the fact that even R6 Siege (no matter if vulcan or not) looks same/better than Marvels,
while i get double the fps.

 

[josge]

as 16GB for me is no good for gaming anymore and needed 32GB. Just thought id ask

I'm 100% sure it's not a ram related issue, i don't think that RDR2 (A game that can work perfectly fine in 12gb or even less) should underperform if that's the case.

 

[io-waiter]

OP,
Can you provide some metrics on clock and temp, e.g through the adrenaline overlay, or GPU-Z?
Also make sure you have relevant settings on your games, the 1660S does not have DLSS, so they should be similar in settings, e.g FSR or XeSS if you use an upscaler.
The 6700 should be faster, but in some games it might not be much faster depending on the game, but Valorant should be a healthy 30% and most games a bit more than that.

Also ensure you do not have aggressive power save or low tdp in adrenaline, vsync on or something like that =)

 

[Chrispy_]

OP,
Can you provide some metrics on clock and temp, e.g through the adrenaline overlay, or GPU-Z?
Also make sure you have relevant settings on your games, the 1660S does not have DLSS, so they should be similar in settings, e.g FSR or XeSS if you use an upscaler.
The 6700 should be faster, but in some games it might not be much faster depending on the game, but Valorant should be a healthy 30% and most games a bit more than that.

Also ensure you do not have aggressive power save or low tdp in adrenaline, vsync on or something like that =)

OP is gone. He said he "did something on radeon program and its good now"

Either vsync-related or possibly HyperRX profiles not working as intended. Whatever the case, the issue was solved 10 days ago.