• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

GTX 460 low usage

F

foxnews

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
378
Starcraft 2 used to use 100% of my old GTX 250 but it now uses only 35% of my new GTX 460. I heard that SC2 uses alot of CPU. it is kind of a waste to upgrade to 460 with this low GPU usage. is there any way to increase GPU usage?
 
foxnews said:
the game does not even use all the power of GPU. overclock does not help
Click to expand...

You're not understanding... you're being CPU limited, meaning your CPU (not gpu) is not powerfull enough to keep the GPU fed with data. If you overclock the CPU more data can be streamed to your GPU causing the usage to go up and performance to get better.
 
RamonGTP said:
You're not understanding... you're being CPU limited, meaning your CPU (not gpu) is not powerfull enough to keep the GPU fed with data. If you overclock the CPU more data can be streamed to your GPU causing the usage to go up and performance to get better.
Click to expand...

I misread your post. I thought you said GPU.

my cpu is Q6600. I don't understand why SC2 uses CPU for graphic
 
Have you upped the settings in SC2 to the max?
What resolution are you playing at?

For SC2, it was shown that even the HD 4850 1GB would be enough for SC2 at 1920x1080.
 
Danny Bui said:
Have you upped the settings in SC2 to the max?
What resolution are you playing at?

For SC2, it was shown that even the HD 4850 1GB would be enough for SC2 at 1920x1080.
Click to expand...

I maxed all setting, ultra, and play at 1920x1200.
 
I dont understand what that has to do with anything. Your 460 is a lot more powerful than your 250, so i makes sense that usage would be less, especially for a non graphically demanding game. Do you get good performance from the game>?
 
CPU bottleneck. Either overclock and see if it helps or time to upgrade.
 
lloose said:
CPU bottleneck. Either overclock and see if it helps or time to upgrade.
Click to expand...

I can't upgrade since I also have to upgrade RAM, motherboard, etc.

I can't believe that even quad core cpu is a bottleneck.
 
RamonGTP said:
I dont understand what that has to do with anything. Your 460 is a lot more powerful than your 250, so i makes sense that usage would be less, especially for a non graphically demanding game. Do you get good performance from the game>?
Click to expand...

at some intense battle, FPS drops below 30
 
You need more CPU power, plain and simple. If you can't upgrade you have to overclock, if you can't do either you're pretty much SOL.
 
RamonGTP said:
Then overclock, which is what I said in post #2
Click to expand...

+1

foxnews, you are being CPU bottlenecked, the Q6600 is a 3-4 year old processor. It's time to upgrade or OC.

Also, it's GTS250, not GTX250. ;)
 
foxnews said:
I can't upgrade since I also have to upgrade RAM, motherboard, etc.

I can't believe that even quad core cpu is a bottleneck.
Click to expand...
Well that's because SC2 doesn't take advantage of quad-core CPUs. It needs sheer clock speed and just 2-3 cores.

It's GTS 250. There's no such thing as GTX 250.
 
foxnews said:
it is renamed from GTX8800. then it is GTX
Click to expand...

Yeah... no.

An 8800GTX is not a GTS250, and there is no such thing as GTX250, period. Also, it's 8800GTX, not GTX8800.

It went like this: 8800GTS512 (not 640 or 320MB), then 9800GTX, then 9800GTX+, then GTS250.

Each one had sequential changes such as die shrinks and higher clock frequencies as well as power efficiency improvements, but in the end, they are all (at the base) the same card with the same memory bus and SP count. All which use the G92 or G92+ GPU.

The 8800GTX was based on the G80 GPU using much older technology.

Just fyi. ;)
 
I overclocked my CPU from 2.4 to 3.42GHz and up volt from 1.212 to 1.325v
SC2 now uses 75-80% of my GTX 460, from 35%.

it is sad that sc2 only uses 2 cores of Q6600.
 
Make sure that OC is stable. An hour isn't enough IMO to see if an OC is stable.
 
foxnews said:
I overclocked my CPU from 2.4 to 3.42GHz and up volt from 1.212 to 1.325v
SC2 now uses 75-80% of my GTX 460, from 35%.

it is sad that sc2 only uses 2 cores of Q6600.
Click to expand...

Even if the game is only using 2 cores, the remaining processing power is what is feeding the video card, and it still sounds like it wasn't enough, though getting 80% is a hell of a lot better than 35%, so grats.

This is why Phenom II X4/X6's and Core i5/i7's are needed for modern mid-range to high-end video cards, mainly to keep them fed properly.

3-4 year old quad cores would bottleneck a single GTX260 by about 20%, so anything higher is a waste of money.

Best of luck to you to keep your CPU OC stable.
 
Red Falcon said:
Even if the game is only using 2 cores, the remaining processing power is what is feeding the video card, and it still sounds like it wasn't enough, though getting 80% is a hell of a lot better than 35%, so grats.

This is why Phenom II X4/X6's and Core i5/i7's are needed for modern mid-range to high-end video cards, mainly to keep them fed properly.

3-4 year old quad cores would bottleneck a single GTX260 by about 20%, so anything higher is a waste of money.

Best of luck to you to keep your CPU OC stable.
Click to expand...

this is something new I just learned. I never heard that CPU is a bottleneck feeding GPU. So the old convention of upgrading just GPU is no longer hold. you need to upgrade CPU/RAM/Mombo in addition to GPU in order to fully utilize GPU.

is the above statement still true if a game is FPS which is designed to use more of GPU? Can nvidia blame Intel for slow game performance due to cpu bottleneck?
 
foxnews said:
this is something new I just learned. I never heard that CPU is a bottleneck feeding GPU. So the old convention of upgrading just GPU is no longer hold. you need to upgrade CPU/RAM/Mombo in addition to GPU in order to fully utilize GPU.

is the above statement still true if a game is FPS which is designed to use more of GPU? Can nvidia blame Intel for slow game performance due to cpu bottleneck?
Click to expand...

The statement isn't true with GPU heavy games. However many games these days are going towards being heavy on both the CPU and GPU like BC2 and GTA4 for example. RTS games have generally been CPU heavy.

Nvidia cannot blame Intel. It's the user's fault for pairing a fast card with a slow CPU or vice versa for gaming.
 
something must be wrong with EVGA Precision. I just used MSI Afterburner and it shows 99% GPU usage (though FPS does not improve) but EVGA shows only 60-80%. Afterburner seems like a much better tool.

so the theory of CPU being a bottleneck is questionable here or Afterburner is not working right.
 
foxnews said:
something must be wrong with EVGA Precision. I just used MSI Afterburner and it shows 99% GPU usage (though FPS does not improve) but EVGA shows only 60-80%. Afterburner seems like a much better tool.

so the theory of CPU being a bottleneck is questionable here or Afterburner is not working right.
Click to expand...

Why do you care so much? As long as you are getting a good gameplay experience just play the damn game. Let your hardware do it's job.
 
Proof of CPU bottlnecks that people say don't exist. Woot. I'm going to link to this thread a few times now. :p
 
Superdemon said:
Why do you care so much? As long as you are getting a good gameplay experience just play the damn game. Let your hardware do it's job.
Click to expand...

I agree. It it plays smooth, whatever, just play. If it doesn't overclock your CPU until you're happy or else go buy a new CPU/mobo/ram.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top