MSI R9 390 8GB graphics card and Intel Xeon E5 1620 CPU give me lower than expected frames.

[seamarine]

To preface, I used to own an HP pre-built that had an i7 4790 and that I had added my GPU (MSI R9 390) to, and I had this problem for a while before I switched to my current build, which is an HP Z420 workstation (Intel Xeon E5 1620 @ 3.6 GHz, MSI R9 390 8GB, 32GB DDR3 ram, 512GB SSD).
I expect around 150+ fps in games like cs and for them to perform consistently. Instead, I get a stuttery 80-120 fps in cs, 110 fps in R6 and 50-110 fps in Fortnite, all on the lowest settings.
The temperatures are fine (around 70C) when playing games like CS, which leads me to think that it's not a temp problem. I have a feeling something is wrong with the chipset of the GPU, but I could be mistaken.
http://speccy.piriform.com/results/t3xVnhn6gGszigdd5teuMzr (speccy snapshot from this morning, while playing CSGO). You'll also find a Time Spy benchmark that I ran attched.
Thanks in advance.

 

[xman2007]

just going off your 3dmark score thats about right for a 390, your xeon is likely bottlenecking you in some instances at only 3.6ghz, the 4790 would be a better choice with the 390 imo, not too mention it's a newer arch with higher IPC as well as base/boost clocks.

Also what resolution are you playing at?

 

[seamarine]

I play CS and R6 at 1920x1080, Fortnite at 1600x900 (for frames).

just going off your 3dmark score thats about right for a 390, your xeon is likely bottlenecking you in some instances at only 3.6ghz, the 4790 would be a better choice with the 390 imo, not too mention it's a newer arch with higher IPC as well as base/boost clocks.

Also what resolution are you playing at?

 

[Toothless]

Not sure why you went with the Xeon, that's a tad backwards.

You sure your 390 isn't having issues? The 390 isn't exactly a powerhouse but you should be fine in those games.

 

[seamarine]

Also I should still be getting better fps right? My cpu load is like 45% when I play CS.

just going off your 3dmark score thats about right for a 390, your xeon is likely bottlenecking you in some instances at only 3.6ghz, the 4790 would be a better choice with the 390 imo, not too mention it's a newer arch with higher IPC as well as base/boost clocks.

Also what resolution are you playing at?

Not sure why you went with the Xeon, that's a tad backwards.

You sure your 390 isn't having issues? The 390 isn't exactly a powerhouse but you should be fine in those games.

Yes, that's what I was thinking, something's wrong with the card. I just don't know what. And I'm afraid to upgrade just in case it's *not* the card, but something else I didnt find.

 

[tabascosauz]

Also I should still be getting better fps right? My cpu load is like 45% when I play CS.



Yes, that's what I was thinking, something's wrong with the card. I just don't know what. And I'm afraid to upgrade just in case it's *not* the card, but something else I didnt find.

CSGO is essentially a single threaded game. Total CPU utilization means nothing. Your 4790 ran at higher boost speeds and also benefits from the Haswell arch which has a not insignificant IPC uplift compared to SB-E. I saw a noticeable improvement in old games in 1% lows when upgrading from a 1230v2 (Ivy, 4C/8T) to a 4790K at stock speeds because those games focused only on loading one or two threads. I really don't think the 390 is hitting its limits in this game.

But it depends on what you're playing, too. Every new "revamped/reshaded/redesigned" map to come out of valve as of late has been exponentially worse optimized than the last (cough new cache cough).

The lower resolution you go, the more CPU bound you are. At sub-1080p CSGO, your 390's performance becomes borderline irrelevant.

Add to that the increasing number of vulnerability fixes to come to Intel platforms and you've not got yourself a winning combination.

 

[Toothless]

CSGO is essentially a single threaded game. Total CPU utilization means nothing. Your 4790 ran at higher boost speeds and also benefits from the Haswell arch which has a not insignificant IPC uplift compared to SB-E. I saw a noticeable improvement in old games in 1% lows when upgrading from a 1230v2 (Ivy, 4C/8T) to a 4790K at stock speeds because those games focused only on loading one or two threads. I really don't think the 390 is hitting its limits in this game.

But it depends on what you're playing, too. Every new "revamped/reshaded/redesigned" map to come out of valve as of late has been exponentially worse optimized than the last (cough new cache cough).

The lower resolution you go, the more CPU bound you are. At sub-1080p CSGO, your 390's performance becomes borderline irrelevant.

Add to that the increasing number of vulnerability fixes to come to Intel platforms and you've not got yourself a winning combination.

I can tell you right now unless his cpu isn't clocking/is throttling it won't be it. CS:GO can run on a sweet potato. I wonder if since it's a Xeon it's down locking with the heat or there is a serious issue with the gpu.

 

[xman2007]

Also I should still be getting better fps right? My cpu load is like 45% when I play CS.



Yes, that's what I was thinking, something's wrong with the card. I just don't know what. And I'm afraid to upgrade just in case it's *not* the card, but something else I didnt find.

Your pretty much using 4 cores of that 4c/8t low clocked, older xeon compared to the 4790, so chances are your HTT isnt giving you any benefit and you are hitting a bottleneck due to the older arch and lower CPU clocks, as I previously said, your graphics score in Timespy looks normal, your CPU score however is pretty abysmal and I think you'll find that's where your problem lies, for the most part that Xeon will be fine, but in a scenario where it is getting fully utilised on all 4 physical cores then you will see frame rate drops and stuttering as a consequence.

 

[seamarine]

Your pretty much using 4 cores of that 4c/8t low clocked, older xeon compared to the 4790, so chances are your HTT isnt giving you any benefit and you are hitting a bottleneck due to the older arch and lower CPU clocks, as I previously said, your graphics score in Timespy looks normal, your CPU score however is pretty abysmal and I think you'll find that's where your problem lies, for the most part that Xeon will be fine, but in a scenario where it is getting fully utilised on all 4 physical cores then you will see frame rate drops and stuttering as a consequence.

What about games like Fortnite and R6? I run them both at lowest settings, Fortnite gives me terrible stutters and R6 cant get above 120fps.

 

[xman2007]

What about games like Fortnite and R6? I run them both at lowest settings, Fortnite gives me terrible stutters and R6 cant get above 120fps.

Running at lower settings puts more emphasis on your CPU rather than GPU

 

[seamarine]

Wow, I didn't realize I downgroaded CPUs... That's unfortunate, I thought this CPU would handle better. Thank you for your help.

Running at lower settings puts more emphasis on your CPU rather than GPU

 

[Toothless]

What about games like Fortnite and R6? I run them both at lowest settings, Fortnite gives me terrible stutters and R6 cant get above 120fps.

You're not gonna get over 100fps with a 390 in R6, just saying. My neighbor has a 1070 and can't hit 144 fps on lowest settings in that game.

 

[steen]

Wow, I didn't realize I downgroaded CPUs... That's unfortunate, I thought this CPU would handle better. Thank you for your help.

Yeah, SNB->HSW = ~15% IPC + AVX2. Worse still, with security mitigations enabled all CPUs pre HSW suffer substantially more due to software side workarounds. In particular I/O suffers.

IMO while these OE workstations appear great value, they're a trap unless they're free/dirt cheap/come optimally configured/you've got parts laying around. I rescued a number of the previous gen Z400 from work over 6yrs ago, but they all had W3680/AIO/SSD/K2000. They've been perfect for the kids & run @4ghz 6c/12t. The pressure has been on for at least GPU upgrades, but I can't bring myself to tip funds into these old platforms. I also have access to Z420s (I have a Rev2 at work with a 2680V2), but IPC wise it makes no sense when even prev gen Ryzen/MB/RAM combos leave these old systems in the dust. You also don't have the sagas of dealing with less flexible OE gear in case of failures.

 

[seamarine]

Yeah, SNB->HSW = ~15% IPC + AVX2. Worse still, with security mitigations enabled all CPUs pre HSW suffer substantially more due to software side workarounds. In particular I/O suffers.

IMO while these OE workstations appear great value, they're a trap unless they're free/dirt cheap/come optimally configured/you've got parts laying around. I rescued a number of the previous gen Z400 from work over 6yrs ago, but they all had W3680/AIO/SSD/K2000. They've been perfect for the kids & run @4ghz 6c/12t. The pressure has been on for at least GPU upgrades, but I can't bring myself to tip funds into these old platforms. I also have access to Z420s (I have a Rev2 at work with a 2680V2), but IPC wise it makes no sense when even prev gen Ryzen/MB/RAM combos leave these old systems in the dust. You also don't have the sagas of dealing with less flexible OE gear in case of failures.

I'm gonna be honest, I'm not sure waht that first line meant at all. Can you dumb it down for me into a verdict?

 

[Toothless]

I'm gonna be honest, I'm not sure waht that first line meant at all. Can you dumb it down for me into a verdict?

Sandy Bridge is under Haswell by about 15% for per thread performance, and doesn't have AVX2. I think.

 

[seamarine]

You're not gonna get over 100fps with a 390 in R6, just saying. My neighbor has a 1070 and can't hit 144 fps on lowest settings in that game.

Ha, now that's unfortunate.

 

[eidairaman1]

You are 400 mhz slower now. Replace thermal compound on 390 and keep the entire rig cool.

 

[bobbybluz]

Have you considered a Xeon 1680 v2? The best CPU there is for the X79 mobos.

 

[Toothless]

Have you considered a Xeon 1680 v2? The best CPU there is for the X79 mobos.

The 2687w v2 has a higher clock and higher boost for the same amount of cores. You sure it's the best?

 

[seamarine]

Since I'm now obviously in the market for a new CPU, is there any CPU out there you would recommend? Potentially non-Xeon that would work with my motherboard? I just want to make sure I won't be bottlenecking my GPU when I decide to upgrade and be able to play high frames. From the wikipedia page of the LG2011 socket, I saw a lot of compatible i7s, are those viable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGA_2011#Compatible_processors) ?Thanks in advance.

The 2687w v2 has a higher clock and higher boost for the same amount of cores. You sure it's the best?

Have you considered a Xeon 1680 v2? The best CPU there is for the X79 mobos.

 

[Caring1]

X79 uses the Socket 2011, not compatible with 2011-3.
i7-4820K and i7-4960X Extreme Edition are the optimal 2 for your board, with the highest clock speeds.

 

[seamarine]

X79 uses the Socket 2011, not compatible with 2011-3.
i7-4820K and i7-4960X Extreme Edition are the optimal 2 for your board, with the highest clock speeds.

Thank you, and just to be clear, the 4820k is noticeably better for gaming and will not hold back my GPU, when I decide to upgrade, correct?

 

[Caring1]

I can't guarantee the CPU won't limit some games.
But it is better than the Xeon Processor.

Intel product specifications

Intel® product specifications, features and compatibility quick reference guide and code name decoder. Compare products including processors, desktop boards, server products and networking products.

ark.intel.com

 

[bobbybluz]

The E5 1680 V2 and 4960X use the same socket (2011 aka X79 platform). Both are unlocked and can overclock very nicely if you win the silicon lottery. I own both and have them in Asus Sabertooth X79 motherboards. The 1680 V2 has eight cores while the 4960X has six. Both of mine are running at 4.7Ghz. I'm seriously considering selling the 4960X and getting another E5 1680 V2. I also have a X99 (2011-3) rig with a 5960X in it. The 1680 V2 and 5960X have nearly identical performance at the same clock speed. Both are eight core CPU's. The 4960X is a six core CPU.

 

[Keullo-e]

3dmark score looks normal, I had a slightly higher score with R9 290 (same card but with 4GB VRAM) and R5 2600 at stock.

I scored 3 853 in Time Spy

AMD Ryzen 5 2600, AMD Radeon R9 290 x 1, 16384 MB, 64-bit Windows 10}

www.3dmark.com

Also it's highly recommended to undervolt these 290/390 cards, they run with pretty overvoltaged on factory settings.