Will a GPU upgrade help, or am I already CPU limited?

[Sandman1330]

Currently operating off an older OEM style pc, specs as follows:

 

AMD Phenom X6 1065T (6 core, 2.9ghz / 3.4 turbo)

Generic Foxconn mobo (PCI-e gen 2)

EVGA 750ti superclocked

12gb RAM

Samsung 840 pro SSD

 

I am planning on a new computer in the near future, but am tempted to wait for Skylake-X and the new chipset architecture that will come out with it. Thus far, I have stuck with low power GPUs to avoid buying a new power supply, but now I am thinking of upgrading my power supply and stepping up to a GTX 1060 or 1070 to hold me over until next year. I would then transfer this card to the new computer.

 

I am wondering if I will see much benefit from this. I believe from reading the hardware testing pinned in this forum that DCS is quite CPU bound, and scales well with faster CPUs. I currently average about 20-30fps, medium settings. Would a hi end card help? Or is my older CPU going to be the bottleneck?

 

Thanks!

[rtimmons]

It depends on whether the problem is due to AI running or slow graphics processing. You can check both issues.

For graphics check to see if you get any better FPS when you play on online servers. If you are getting low FPS on online servers chances are you need more graphics power.

For computing power check to see if more or less AI moving in the game causes problems. If more AI moving causes problems you need more computing power.

My guess is both....DCS is graphics intensive and AI intensive. But you can use low AI or play online with a good graphics card and a slower PC pretty well. For heavy AI use you will need both....

 

slyfly

[cichlidfan]

My guess, I am not an AMD person so I don't know how good your CPU could be, is that you are limited in both areas. Without a doubt, a better graphics card will improve things a noticeable amount.

 

However, as said by rtimmons, it does depend, a bit, on your style of play.

 

If you have the budget, start with a new GPU. Replacement of the CPU is going to probably involve a new motherboard and memory as well, making that upgrade to be the more expensive of the two.

[Penshoon]

It's pretty easy to check whether you are cpu or gpu bottlenecked with a gpu monitoring tool like msi afterburner/evga precision.

Run DCS and monitor gpu usage with said program. If usage is less than 100% then you are cpu bound and a faster graphics card wont help.

[hollowman8904]

Gpu-z is a good lightweight program to check your gpu utilization.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spacehamster]

Buy an Intel CPU. I replaced my system, similar AMD like you have, with an i7 + 16gb ram and a 1060 card. It went from 20fps to 70-150fps, under the most crowded conditions in multiplayer (20 players on the same airfield).

[cichlidfan]

I won't enter into the AMD/Intel debate as I have never owned an AMD CPU and haven't owned a low end Intel CPU since the Celeron 300A, twenty years ago.

 

However, trying to get great performance while trying to cut corners is a bit fruitless with this sim, unless you really know your hardware very well.

[Sandman1330]

So I did some testing with MSI Afterburner, running a campaign mission from Operation Piercing Fury (typical usage for me, I don't MP).

 

Starting out, I was seeing ~80% usage on one of my six CPU cores, and between 50%-90% on GPU usage. The only time GPU usage spiked was during external views. Averaging about 40FPS.

 

From this, I concluded I had some headroom on the GPU side, and upped the draw distance and terrain textures. GPU usage flatlined at 100%, processor stayed at 80-90% single core, and FPS drop was minimal. There is still room to increase graphical settings higher by a fair margin. The only thing I don't understand is why either CPU or GPU wouldn't be at 100% in the first test, you would think FPS would continue to rise until one of them hit the limit...

 

Therefore, I've concluded that a higher end GPU would allow me to further amp up graphics settings while staying within the limitations of the CPU. I would at least see some decent returns from upgrading just the GPU, but would probably soon run into CPU limitations.

 

I definitely intend on upgrading the entire platform, either to Intel or maybe even AMD Zen, if it shakes out to be as good as it looks like it will be. I think I will wait to see how Zen performs, and maybe even long enough for Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X, which appear to have some exciting features in their chipset (not the least of which will be a common platform and chipset for Mainstream and HEDT chips - a first).

 

Long story short - I'm still undecided, but am leaning towards a new GPU to hold out until the next gen of Intel / AMD chips.

[BitMaster]

Gpu-z is a good lightweight program to check your gpu utilization.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

In DCS 1.5.x you will not see any GPU beyond about 45-60% max usage whereas in 2.0 it easily hits the 99% usage at least on my system.

[dburne]

In DCS 1.5.x you will not see any GPU beyond about 45-60% max usage whereas in 2.0 it easily hits the 99% usage at least on my system.

 

That has been my experience as well.

 

When I upgraded from a GTX 970 to an GTX 1080, I saw very little difference in 1.5, however 2.0 really shines with the new card - major improvement.

[Sandman1330]

That has been my experience as well.

 

When I upgraded from a GTX 970 to an GTX 1080, I saw very little difference in 1.5, however 2.0 really shines with the new card - major improvement.

 

That's interesting. I am seeing 100% use now that I've upped some of the settings, but then again the 750Ti isn't that powerful of a card...

[BitMaster]

Ehhh yes, the 45-60% applies for 970/80 equivalent card. My son runs the 750Ti and that one struggles...

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[Malefic Rage]

Hello. You have a fairly low-spec system however I would say the foremost the CPU is the biggest bottleneck. Since DCS is primarily single-threaded the number of cores on the CPU doesn't matter much. The current generation of AMD CPUs have poor single-thread performance so even the best of them will keep you down, even with an overclock. That was my experience. After upgrading to a Core i5 6600K I ended up with 100 fps.

 

edit: The new generation of AMD CPU coming out soon is supposed to have substantially better single-core performance however you'd have to wait for it to come out.

 

Secondly the 750Ti is pretty old and slow now. I would suggest either a Radeon 390, Radeon 480, GeForce GTX 970 or Geforce 1060 for a mid-range card with good DCS performance.

 

As for PSU, I have gotten by with a 500W Antec unit for many years now. Since modern CPUs and GPUs use less power, you are unlikely to need more unless you want to get some pretty beefy hardware.

 

Hope it help.

Edited September 27, 2016 by Malefic Rage

[Sandman1330]

Hello. You have a fairly low-spec system however I would say the foremost the CPU is the biggest bottleneck. Since DCS is primarily single-threaded the number of cores on the CPU doesn't matter much. The current generation of AMD CPUs have poor single-thread performance so even the best of them will keep you down, even with an overclock. That was my experience. After upgrading to a Core i5 6600K I ended up with 100 fps.

 

edit: The new generation of AMD CPU coming out soon is supposed to have substantially better single-core performance however you'd have to wait for it to come out.

 

Secondly the 750Ti is pretty old and slow now. I would suggest either a Radeon 390, Radeon 480, GeForce GTX 970 or Geforce 1060 for a mid-range card with good DCS performance.

 

As for PSU, I have gotten by with a 500W Antec unit for many years now. Since modern CPUs and GPUs use less power, you are unlikely to need more unless you want to get some pretty beefy hardware.

 

Hope it help.

 

You've read my mind. All of what you've said above is pretty much what I suspected.

 

By way of update, I picked up a 1060 today (and a PSU to power it). Frames went from 20-30 at current settings to 40-50. I then upped all settings to high, and now run at around 30. GPU usage is only about 50%, CPU usage on one core is in the 90s. Definitely, without a doubt, CPU limited now.

 

What graphical settings are CPU heavy? I'd like to shed some of the CPU intensive stuff to bring the frames back up a bit, while leaving the GPU heavy settings on full. Any ideas?

 

About AMD's new Zen, I've been reading, very intriguing. It's actually the whole reason I am trying to get another year out of my current system - to wait and see how Zen performs, and how Intel responds (may drop prices?). I may still end up buying Intel, but it may end up being cheaper! Bring on the competition!

 

Edit - So I noticed that the "high" setting also ramped up civilian traffic. Turned that off and, bam, 50-60FPS. Sweet!

Edited September 27, 2016 by Sandman1330

[Malefic Rage]

I've found that View Distance is the biggest killer. Reducing clutter/tree distance should help a bit too. Civ traffic as well since they are calculated with the CPU. Take a look around the forums, there are lots of threads about optimising settings. Good luck.

[Art-J]

Plus anything shadows-related (medium should still be a good compromise between eyecandy and fps), plus water (remember that as of now in 1.5.4, DCS uses quite a chunk of resources on water rendering under the whole map - so your fps are affected even when there's no water around the place you're flying over)