Best upgrade for $300~ for better performance in PUBG?

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by elite.mafia, Oct 17, 2018.

  1. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Been looking around at benchmarks and stuff to see what I could get to see a decent inprovement in this game. It looks like most low end CPU's won't make much of a difference, so I was looking at Intel i5 8400 and 8600k, as well as a few Ryzen benchmarks. Is my best option to upgrade my CPU/board/RAM ? Or should I stick with the 2500k and spend a bit more and get a better graphics card? I can probably get a 1070Ti for pretty close to $300 used

    My current specs are -

    i5 2500k @ 4.6ghz
    1060gtx 6gb
    16gb ddr3 PC3-12800
    850 EVO SSD

    I think the obvious weak link is the CPU and slower RAM. But looking at a lot of benchmarks, all the cheaper AMD Ryzens have about the same single core performance. The 8400 looks like the sweat spot for me, plus I can get it, a board and RAM for about $300. I was eyeing some of these combos on Microcenter for the 8400 and a board, links here:

    This is the link to the CPU, combos are below the pictures but above the specs

    This is the cheapest board and CPU combo that I see, $225 for the board and CPU (but this board is really crap, slow memory speeds)

    This is the cheapest board that is half decent:
     
  2. TheFlayedMan

    TheFlayedMan Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    149
    Joined:
    May 29, 2015
    Where I live an i5-8400 is $300 on its own. What resolution do you play at ?
     
  3. Archaea

    Archaea [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,649
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Looks like the GPU is more important in PubG
    You've got a nice CPU overclock on your RIG - just upgrade your GPU to a 1070 from a 1060 and you should be good for at least 30 FPS more according to this article. A 1070TI is better yet.

    https://www.pcgamer.com/best-pubg-settings/



    MCNt9zBUX6bcr89ieSU5Hm-650-80.png

    upload_2018-10-17_18-2-12.png
     
  4. Dermen

    Dermen Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    297
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2017
    What kind of fps are you getting at Medium settings and what resolution are you playing?

    Looking at those PUBG benchmarks a 1060 6G should be getting 86-112fps with an 8700k at medium settings 1080p. If you are getting a lot less than your CPU/Memory may be the bottleneck. If you are getting around that but want more or higher settings than a 1070ti seems like a great choice.

    No matter what I would not buy a locked CPU and MB. Clock speed is what will get you FPS. Maybe look for a used 6700/7700/8600k. Microcenter doesn't seem to carry Ryzen 3s or i3-8350Ks, so you are looking at Ryzen 2600 or 8600k for overclocking. One thing to note is you can bundle any motherboard and get the $30 bundle discount, so don't even bother looking at their bundles page as it doesn't list all the boards they have available.
     
  5. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Thanks for the info. I play all very low settings at 1080p. I'm chasing fps not visuals. I have a 144hz monitor. My fps is pretty high for the most part it's around 120 and up, but sometimes there are major dips and stuttering, and the fps can get really bad when I get into big cities or when lots of players are around. If I hot drop my fps takes a dump and I'm lucky if I get a kill with the awful frame rates. I upgraded from a r9 280 to this 1060 about a year ago.., it was a pretty big jump in performance.

    Would overclocking this cpu more help? I can get it to like 4.9 but it starts overheating, so I would need something better than this corsair h50 water cooler.


    GPU prices are too damn high.
     
  6. Dermen

    Dermen Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    297
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2017
    For high FPS gaming Intel is usually better than AMD and the higher the clock speed the better. Memory speed makes a difference here too. A while ago somebody benchmarked PUBG with a 6700k/1080ti and there was a 14% increase in FPS going from 2400mhz to 3200mhz memory.

    I think a newer CPU/MB/Ram should help with the minimum fps issues and give you slightly higher max fps. With the new Intel chips coming out this month there should be some decent used stuff popping up in the FS section. I'd look for a 6700k/7700k if it were me. I haven't been watching the prices on these lately, but I would also price out a new 8600k/MB from Microcenter to compare. Sometimes used prices are crazy and it is not much more to get new, especially with the kind of deal you can get at Microcenter.
     
  7. horrorshow

    horrorshow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,265
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    If you can scrounge up a 2600/2700k for cheap, that should help quite a bit with your fps minimums.
     
    fullvietFX and IdiotInCharge like this.
  8. lukart

    lukart Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    160
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2014
    I would even say get a X1700 that has 8 cores for less than 180$ and a decent B450..

    PCPartPicker part list: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/WPb44q
    Price breakdown by merchant: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/WPb44q/by_merchant/

    CPU: AMD - Ryzen 7 1700 3GHz 8-Core Processor ($179.99 @ Newegg Business)
    Motherboard: ASRock - Fatal1ty B450 GAMING K4 ATX AM4 Motherboard ($83.99 @ Newegg)
    Total: $263.98
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2018-10-18 16:37 EDT-0400
     
  9. MacLeod

    MacLeod [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    8,176
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    I think you're fine as is. PUBG runs like shit and has frequent large dips in FPS. My 290x runs around 80 FPS most of the time but often and randomly it'll drop down to 30-40 for a little bit then back up.

    I think if you bought a new CPU just for an increase in PUBG, you'd be disappointed.
     
    Maddnotez and Archaea like this.
  10. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Well the 290x is a worse card than my 1060gtx, so of course you are having dips.
     
  11. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge Not the Idiot YOU are Looking for

    Messages:
    8,089
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    If we're talking felt minimum framerates due to long maximum frametimes, then the OP just might not be. Having just four threads for gaming and OS/other system processes could easily lead to stuttering, and even just adding hyper-threading a la the suggested 2600k/2700k drop-in replacements might be enough.

    Of course, those are quite hard to find, and the boards they run on weren't the longest lasting, so an upgrade to something with more cores/threads would certainly be useful, and given that the OP is already hitting 120FPS on the top-end a 2600X or i5 8400 might just do the trick.
     
  12. Archaea

    Archaea [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,649
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    I think this video is interesting.

     
  13. MacLeod

    MacLeod [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    8,176
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    No. Cruising around at around 75 fps just fine for several minutes then all of a sudden drop to the 30's for a few seconds then back up to the 75 range all while viewing the same scene is not because my card is slower than yours.

    As in your case, running at 120 fps most of the time but with random stuttering and large frame drops, those are more symptoms of a poorly optimized game and not necessarily underpowered hardware.

    Don't get me wrong, it's never a bad idea to upgrade, just that I don't think hardware is your problem.
     
    Maddnotez likes this.
  14. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    I never said I expect to get 144hz fps 100% of the time. I just want to make the game run better in general. Look, can we not make the thread about how shitty PUBG's optimizations are? I am just looking for what would be a better upgrade, CPU or GPU.
     
  15. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    I wish he'd have done PUBG but I see a trend that the minimum FPS and maximum frametimes are both improved with the newer CPU.
     
  16. MacLeod

    MacLeod [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    8,176
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    You serious?

    Alrighty then. Sorry for offering an opinion in a thread asking for opinions. Enjoy your new CPU.
     
  17. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    It's not impossible to get this game to run smoothly. You're acting like the game is going to run exactly the same if I upgrade my CPU, which is nonsense.
     
    IdiotInCharge likes this.
  18. MacLeod

    MacLeod [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    8,176
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    No, what I'm saying is that you're looking to spend $300 on some new hardware to fix a problem that is most likely due to a poorly optimized game. PUBG is well known to run like shit, there wouldn't be a "Fix PUBG" campaign that is linked on the very main menu of the game if it ran fine.

    As for the CPU, the benchmarks posted above show that the CPU doesn't really matter in this game, IPC but not cores. Quad core AMD getting the same fps as the 8 core. 4 core Intel getting the same fps as the 6 core. You'll pick up some speed simply off the IPC boost from a 2500K to an 8400 but I don't see that jump solving random frame drops from 120 down to 40, it could just make them less noticeable going from 144 to 60. PBUG is not that graphically demanding a game. Your rig is still pretty potent especially at 1080p and so frame drops and stuttering like that in a game that's not that demanding points more to software than hardware problems. I just looked it up and a 1060 can play Crysis 3 at maxed settings and still average nearly 70 fps. No way PUBG is more demanding than that game especially with lowered settings.

    I'm not saying don't upgrade. A faster CPU and faster RAM is always a good thing and it may smooth the game out more for you with the added horsepower but I don't think it'll fix the problems you're seeing.

    I'm not trying to argue here and maybe I'm wrong, I'm definitely no coding expert but you're describing pretty close to the exact same symptoms I have when playing the game regardless of settings and the same problems I've seen complained about on forums for a while now.
     
    Maddnotez and Archaea like this.
  19. horrorshow

    horrorshow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,265
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    True, true.

    With the specs in my sig, I can run Monster Hunter World, Assassins Creed Odyssey, Destiny 2, and Witcher 3 REALLY well.

    But PUBG still gets random dips into the mids 40's no matter the preset.

    It's just trashy coding.
     
  20. Archaea

    Archaea [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,649
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    And you’re acting like you already had your mind made up which course to take before you asked.

    So despite the benchmarks, logic and experiences, posted to the contrary, just go ahead and upgrade your CPU as you had already planned to do. You’ll probably gain 10-15 FPS, and yes it’ll be an improvement over what you have now.


    Another course entirely might be to buy a $350 gsync 25” 1080p monitor for $350.

    Gsync will make it so you don’t care if you get 40fps, because it will all feel buttery smooth in gsync range. I play Hunt Showdown often and it is perhaps the most demanding game out there. My FPS often dips into the 40s from the average 60-70s and I’d NEVER know it if I wasn’t looking at the FPS counter because gsync (or freesync) makes everything feel so smooth. VRR is a game experience changer — truly.
     
    Maddnotez likes this.
  21. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    No, that's not true at all. I am asking if it would be better to upgrade my CPU or GPU. I only said I was eyeing some deals. I never said my mind was made up. The only thing in my head that is made up is that I need an upgrade. What upgrade? I don't know, that's the point of the thread. But to come here just to say the game is poorly optimized and that upgrading is pointless, in itself is pointless
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2018
  22. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    All I'm saying is streamers run this game at 120-160 fps all day long with an i7 8700k and a 1080Ti. I can't afford that shit though as that's basically a $2000 upgrade....
     
  23. MacLeod

    MacLeod [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    8,176
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    And I've heard a few of them bitch about frame drops. Tfue did on one I watched just the other day, lagging and dropping fps into the 30's, granted it was an old video and an old version of the game.

    If the question is only CPU or GPU then I vote CPU/mobo/RAM. All that should give you a nice bump in performance regardless what application you're using. Ride the 1060 out a little while longer and see what shakes out when AMD brings their new cards in a few months. It's still a very capable card and should hold you over.
     
  24. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    So, despite this benchmark you posted, which shows a pretty big improvement between the Ryzen and Intel CPU's (over 20fps in some cases), you think I would only get a 10-15 FPS improvement? My CPU is slower than all the CPU's in this benchmark. So I'd expect a bigger bump in performance.


    165367_upload_2018-10-17_18-2-12.png
     
  25. Archaea

    Archaea [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,649
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    I do think you’ll notice and improvement and it’s hard to argue against upgrading to a 8400 for $250 range. (Though I’d prefer to see you buy the K version so you can overclock)

    I think you are more GPU limited with that 1060 than that PCGamer benchmark shows with their 1080ti — which at 1080p a 1080Ti is clearly waiting on the CPU and thus CPU limited. You have a nice overclock and 4 true cores. So I’m guessing 10-15fps based on my years of being a PC hardware enthusiast and the various factors. It’s my guess, not hard facts.

    I suspect that hardwarecanucks video more accurately represents what you’ll see. (Less about 25% because the 1070 is quite a bit stronger than a 1060) He’s testing a 8700k which is better than what you are buying, and he’s testing a 2600k which is better than what you have, and he’s testing a 1070, instead of a 1060... but at the end of the day he recommends against upgrading the CPU to the 8700k for a 1070 owner because the juice wasn’t worth the squeeze If you were already a 2600k owner.


    You’re in a tough spot on the upgrade options. 1070 is old, but newer significantly higher performing cards are very pricey! Your 2500k is old, but still actually a pretty decent performer when overclocked for gaming. I think if I were you I’d want my next upgrade to be more significant than either option you are currently considering. I expect the next consoles to have 8 cores and be based on ryzen so since console development drives pc games is it short sighted to buy less than 8 cores? Maybe. Maybe if I were you I’d try to find a used 1070 for $200 and sell your 1060 for like $125. That should get you 20-30 FPS in most games for like $75 bucks and then you can stall out to upgrade with the next generation with a bigger clump of cash to throw at a larger upgrade.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2018
    elite.mafia likes this.
  26. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004

    I think if I go the GPU route I'll probably go for a used 1070Ti. Regarding CPU, you make a solid point about the overclocking, I guess I didn't realize the 8400 was locked. I'm thinking I'm better off trying to get some used stuff, I have seen some really good CPU/board/RAM combos go through the FS/FT forum, but I don't see any currently. I guess my idea is I'd upgrade a little bit now and a little bit later? like get a decent CPU/ram/board and get a GPU a bit later or vise versa
     
  27. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge Not the Idiot YOU are Looking for

    Messages:
    8,089
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Something to consider with benchmarks- way too many places halfass their x% numbers that mentally take the place of 'minimum FPS' for them.

    Unless that number is 0.1%, it's not catching all of the hard drops, and ideally you'd want to be looking at maximum frametimes. This is how long the longest frames take, and it tells you exactly what you'll see/feel.

    That 97% metric from PCGamer is as nearly useless as minimum FPS. 140FPS with 100FPS at 97% can still feel choppy.

    And that's what you want to know for a CPU vs. GPU upgrade.
     
  28. Archaea

    Archaea [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,649
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    That's why I suggested variable refresh rate tech for consideration ---

    IE - I've never felt anything go choppy with g-sync above about 40FPS. (unless the game doesn't work well with it - Path of Exile for instance).

    I game at 3440x1440 on a single 1080TI. My monitor refresh rate is 120hz. It doesn't matter what my frame rate is - so long as it's above about 40FPS - it feels silky smooth.

    Before I used freesync or g-sync I could tell when it deviated off 60hz with my old monitors -- and it really annoyed me to be swinging around in the 40's or 50's FPS. Now I can't even tell.
     
  29. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge Not the Idiot YOU are Looking for

    Messages:
    8,089
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Let me say that the reason that I didn't bring that up is because it may not actually help- G-Sync is good for 30Hz i.e. it can handle frametimes up to 33ms, but anything longer than 33(.3333...)ms is going to stutter jarringly. So it'll help, but you don't know how much if you're just looking at 97 percentiles. You need to be looking at 99.5 percentiles to be sure, if you're not looking directly at frametime results.

    To bring it back to the OP: you need more threads. As many as you can get, given that the CPU and GPU pair you have is enough on the highs- you just need to make sure that your hardware is optimized toward taking care of the lows.
     
  30. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    regardless I'm not considering a monitor. Also I think G-Sync is cool but I'm not a fan of the cost. I have a 144hz monitor but it's a bottom end monitor. Still way smoother than my old 60hz monitor.
     
  31. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Would overclocking my CPU a bit higher help? I'm basically at the heat limit for this CPU, mid 80's celsius on my Corsair H50 water cooler. I have a pusher and puller fan on it and can't seem to get the temps down any lower iwth it running at 4.6ghz. I have it perfectly stable so I don't really want to fuck with it too much.

    What about overclocking my 1060? I haven't really played with the clocks much, but I have managed to get a bit of a decent overclock but haven't tried the overclock with PUBG, only with some other games. I have gotten up to +75 core clock and +450 memory easily. I see people are getting way higher than this so I might try pushing a bit more.
     
  32. Dermen

    Dermen Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    297
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2017
    Overclocking your CPU can't hurt, other than you will have to spend money on a cooler.

    5 minutes on Google and I found 3 different people who upgraded from 2500k to 6700k/7600k/7700k. They all said they were having fps drops to 35-50 before hand and fps drops to 75-90 afterwards.
     
    horrorshow and elite.mafia like this.
  33. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Yeah, I think the CPU is probably a better route honestly. My CPU is maxed out the entire time I play, whereas my GPU is averaging around 75%
     
  34. horrorshow

    horrorshow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,265
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    The day of the quad-core is dead friendo.

    You need 4c/8t nowadays minimum.....

    (just went through same thing)
     
    IdiotInCharge likes this.
  35. TheFlayedMan

    TheFlayedMan Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    149
    Joined:
    May 29, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2018
  36. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    So, I was looking and I see that I can get a 1070Ti for like $350, probably less used, or a 1080 (non TI) for about the same used.

    How bad of a bottleneck will my 2500k be? I keep looking at benchmarks of the 2500k versus cheap CPU's and the only thing that is really cheap and better is something like a 8350k from Intel - which is still a $180 CPU, plus a decent board and RAM I'm looking at close to $400. I could skimp and get a cheap board but I'm worried I won't be able to overclock very well. AMD's processors in my price range only seem to have better multi-threaded performance from the benchmarks I have looked at, and the single core performance from Ryzen 1 and lower end Ryzen 2 CPU's seems to be only marginally better. I could get a Ryzen 7 1700x but I just don't see the performance difference being enough. Seems like the 8350k beats it in everything except for the core count, and its a few bucks cheaper.
     
  37. MacLeod

    MacLeod [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    8,176
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    I wouldn't think it would be a bottleneck at all at least not enough that would be worth worrying about. Sandy Bridge is still a very capable gaming chip especially with an overclock. I'd say it will easily hold you over til you can save up enough scratch for a new CPU/mobo.
     
  38. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge Not the Idiot YOU are Looking for

    Messages:
    8,089
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Biggest issue isn't Sandy Bridge, it's the lack of hyperthreading on the 2500K specifically. A 2600K, 2700K, or 3770K drop-in would do a lot.

    The 1060 is a competent GPU and will deliver performance so long as higher in-game settings aren't abused.

    But given that GPU pricing is basically ready for the bottom to drop out, a platform upgrade makes more sense today. Just tossing in a 1070Ti would push average FPS way up and perhaps up where it matters, but also perhaps not, due to the CPU limitation adding in some 'jerkiness'. Personally I'll take a smoother framerate over a higher but erratic framerate every time.
     
  39. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004

    I could get a 2700k for like $100 and sell my 2500k for about $50, so a $50 upgrade. A 3770k is more like $200 (crazy price)
    But I don't think it's worth it for $200. I might get the 2700k and 1070Ti. That'd be a pretty solid jump I think.
     
    Archaea and IdiotInCharge like this.
  40. elite.mafia

    elite.mafia Broke Back [H]

    Messages:
    11,103
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    I found a craigslist deal for $150 for a 3930k 6core/12thread cpu, 16gb of quad channel ddr3-1866, and a ASUS ROG Rampage IV EXTREME. Probably gonna get that plus the 1070ti I ordered already... I don't know much about that CPU though, its one of the higher end LGA 2011 sockets. Is there any issues with it? Do they overclock well?

    quick google search shows this thing is massively faster than anything available on the socket I have.