4-way SLI 680 and BF3 MP = ~70% GPU Usage

Vega said:
Something doesn't sound right with the setup to have that low of FPS numbers. I get 120-190 FPS pushing 5x 120Hz 1080P screens with four 7970's in BF3 multi-player. Granted, all settings aren't maxed. Are you trying to max all settings, even silly 4x MSAA?

Oh BTW turn mesh quality to low, that is a huge CPU hog. I bet your GPU usage and FPS get a decent boost by doing that.
Click to expand...

Good point, thanks! I overlooked outlining this because of my stubborn insistence that I should be able to max everything out...here's a screenshot of all of my settings (which matches the results I get in my original post and past posts in this thread)...any other tips?


(click to enlarge)
 
I had 3-way 670's and was seeing terrible usages (~70%) with a 2600K and Z68 platform. I traded one of the 670's for a 3930K and unfortunately can't compare. I was pretty sure at the time that I was seeing a a PCI-E 2.0 bottleneck thanks to some early testing Vega did. That convinced me to upgrade to X79, and while I have no clue if that helped anything or not I'm very glad I did. Two cards see very high usages and with X79 I'm as ready for anything as you can currently be today.


boxleitnerb said:
What utter sillyness is spread here...

It is NOT the drivers. Of course it is a CPU bottleneck in BF3 MP. And if you play with MSAA/FXAA, in most other titles as well.

People...for the love of god, I cannot read this anymore. Test it yourself before coming here to complain. Anyone who has the money to buy more than 2 cards is expected to know how to find a CPU bottleneck.
Click to expand...

I'm going to have to disagree with this buddy. Dude is running a 3960X at 4.5 Ghz. Absolutely no way that is a CPU bottleneck. I run my 3930K at 4.8 GHz and see about a maximum of 30% usage in game (not including loading spikes). It's bored out of its fracking mind playing BF3 MP, and I seriously doubt 300 MHz is going to make all the difference in the world.
 
Last edited:
thebski said:
I'm going to have to disagree with this buddy. Dude is running a 3960X at 4.5 Ghz. Absolutely no way that is a CPU bottleneck. I run my 3930K at 4.8 GHz and see about a maximum of 30% usage in game (not including loading spikes). It's bored out of its fracking mind playing BF3 MP, and I seriously doubt 300 MHz is going to make all the difference in the world.
Click to expand...

Good point there - I need to see what my CPU utilization looks like. Because when I played MP after OCing further (4.9 GHz) the utilization numbers from my GPU were very similar.

It's so hard to pinpoint things exactly or replicate scenarios so I just run with the OSD from PrecisionX and FRAPS on and just play BF3 MP like I normally do and compare that way. So far I haven't had a good way to capture CPU utilization. PrecisionX only does GPU. I leave Task Manager open but that only goes back so far.

Funny thing is, when NVIDIA does benches (can't find a link now, of course) of 690 quad-SLI they just use a 3960X at STOCK...so...???
 
thebski said:
I'm going to have to disagree with this buddy. Dude is running a 3960X at 4.5 Ghz. Absolutely no way that is a CPU bottleneck. I run my 3930K at 4.8 GHz and see about a maximum of 30% usage in game (not including loading spikes). It's bored out of its fracking mind playing BF3 MP, and I seriously doubt 300 MHz is going to make all the difference in the world.
Click to expand...

Just because he is using the fastest CPU available and overclocked it, doesn't mean it is enough. He is using 4 (four!) GPUs with a resolution that is smaller than 4k! Multiplayer puts a heavy burden on the CPU with all the interactions and players and synchronisation to compute. You say "no way", but what do you base that on? The 30% CPU usage you are seeing is global, meaning across all 12 threads. If there are four threads fully loaded and others not so much, this will be a CPU bottleneck, too, no matter what the global usage says. This value is utterly useless. Also consider inter-thread dependencies.

300MHz are not going to make a difference, it was just meant to prove that he in fact is CPU bottlenecked. Nothing one can do about that except crank up the image quality even further.
 
Last edited:
Clearly the problem is that you aren't running your cpu at 6ghz. That should fix your gpu usage.You want 30% more gfx usage... Put 30% more into cpu clock. amirite?

I've also read about people baking their graphics cards in the oven when they didn't work right. You could try that too. ;)
 
Last edited:
sk3tch said:
Good point, thanks! I overlooked outlining this because of my stubborn insistence that I should be able to max everything out...here's a screenshot of all of my settings (which matches the results I get in my original post and past posts in this thread)...any other tips?


(click to enlarge)
Click to expand...

Alright I turned mesh to low and disabled all post-processing (4x MSAA) - that helped...now touching 120 FPS but it definitely does not maintain near there. It's still more in the 50-90 FPS range. Just so many variables in multiplayer. I'm back to 4.5 GHz too since that's my daily overclock. Will try the test that boxleitnerb recommended earlier but with all the MP variables I'm skeptical. I will do my best to make the tests consistent.


Homer said:
Clearly the problem is that you aren't running your cpu at 6ghz. That should fix your gpu usage.You want 30% more gfx usage... Put 30% more into cpu clock. amirite?

I've also read about people baking their graphics cards in the oven when they didn't work right. You could try that too. ;)
Click to expand...

LOL...I think I am going to try to take a piss on them to unlock their true power. I'll make sure the rigs powered on and in a BF3 MP match, of course! Wish me luck!! :)
 
You evidently play without bezel correction? Man that would drive me nuts. And yes, pissing on the cards, or maybe even some lighter fluid and a match might help. When we're talking about support for quad sli, who knows?!
 
boxleitnerb said:
Just because he is using the fastest CPU available and overclocked it, doesn't mean it is enough. He is using 4 (four!) GPUs with a resolution that is smaller than 4k! Multiplayer puts a heavy burden on the CPU with all the interactions and players and synchronisation to compute. You say "no way", but what do you base that on? The 30% CPU usage you are seeing is global, meaning across all 12 threads. If there are four threads fully loaded and others not so much, this will be a CPU bottleneck, too, no matter what the global usage says. This value is utterly useless. Also consider inter-thread dependencies.

300MHz are not going to make a difference, it was just meant to prove that he in fact is CPU bottlenecked. Nothing one can do about that except crank up the image quality even further.
Click to expand...

Well I have Core Temp on my Logitech G19/G13 and it shows individual threads and it's hard to track, but the usages on an individual thread are no where near 100%, but that is a very good point on global usage.

I guess I'll put it this way ... if his CPU is a bottleneck then just kill this thread, because I'm not sure what you're gonna do about it.
 
There is no way his cpu is keeping his FPS in the 50-90 range LOL. My 3960X keeps BF3 64-player in the 100-200 FPS range.

All he has to do is turn graphic settings down to minimum and check FPS and GPU usage numbers. If there was a CPU limit, the FPS number's wouldn't increase.

Oh and you verified you are running PCI-E 3.0 with GPU-Z? You did the registry edit/.exe file?
 
Vega said:
There is no way his cpu is keeping his FPS in the 50-90 range LOL. My 3960X keeps BF3 64-player in the 100-200 FPS range.

All he has to do is turn graphic settings down to minimum and check FPS and GPU usage numbers. If there was a CPU limit, the FPS number's wouldn't increase.

Oh and you verified you are running PCI-E 3.0 with GPU-Z? You did the registry edit/.exe file?
Click to expand...

Yup, used NVIDIA's tool to enable PCIe 3.0 and validated with GPU-Z. I turned my settings down and I'm doing better now - is there anything else you recommend? I posted my stuff above.

Thanks for everyone's help. I will do the CPU tests but yeah...if it doesn't fix things - there's no hope haha. I guess wait for Intel's new X processor and put it on LN2? :)
 
GPU bottleneck somehow? Must be drivers at this point...(edit: since my OP, now at 304.79 and now running 4x Classifieds instead of the FTW+ 4GBs - so my GPU power is up slightly).

Render.PerfOverlayVisible 1
RenderDevice.ForceRenderAheadLimit 0 (recommended by @repi at DICE - rendering architect on Frostbite...although he says they do not have 4-way to test at DICE)
(setup via BF3 console)

(click to enlarge)

My settings:

(click to enlarge)
 
Last edited:
I just did a similar test (3930k @ 4.2, Tri-SLI 680 FTW 4gb), and got a similar PerfOverlay chart when running 6010x1080. Didn't know about the command until today, but now that I do, it sorta helps explain things.

BF3 isn't the only game with gimped surround performance either; Saints Row 3 has the same problem. Game runs at a constant 60 FPS on one screen, GPU usage around 25%...but the second I try running 6010x1080, FPS doesn't go above 45 and GPU usage is 75%.

I remember reading that nVidia is aware of the problem and actively trying to fix it, but it's not a simple fix for them, and it's taken a few driver revisions to even get to this level of performance.
 
On the bright side, DX9 games work fine :p Playing Dead Space 2 right now :)
 
I purchased another 670 GTX 4GB Card (yes even after I sold my 4th one a while back, this time I get borderlands 2 free though....)
So hopefully a newer driver release will help with performance that we've seen. Now that my CPU is at 5.0GHz, I doubt I'm seeing any CPU related issues holding me back. I have a very similar setup to Vega.
 
clayton006 said:
I purchased another 670 GTX 4GB Card (yes even after I sold my 4th one a while back, this time I get borderlands 2 free though....)
So hopefully a newer driver release will help with performance that we've seen. Now that my CPU is at 5.0GHz, I doubt I'm seeing any CPU related issues holding me back. I have a very similar setup to Vega.
Click to expand...

Based on my most recent post - I'm quite certain this is not a CPU bound issue. It's drivers and it's specifically related to NV Surround. But yeah, 5GHz - you're good. :)

Have you had better performance in BF3 MP due to the Extreme11's x16 lanes via PLX? Curious...because my RIVE is running at PCIe 3.0 x8/x16/x8/x8 for some reason (per GPU-Z and with the 2105 BIOS).
 
Last edited:
As I understand it, the professional versions of Windows 7 support two CPU sockets, so how about trying it in a dual-Xeon motherboard? :)
 
BF3 seemed as unplayable as ever at least at 7680x1600. If I drop down to 3x1080p it's much better. Looks like we need drivers or something...

I also tried using high settings and turning mesh to low, turn Ambient O. to off, MSAA off..... FPS didn't budge.

I will say that BF3 utilizing 100% of a few cores, looks like it is CPU hungry.
 
clayton006 said:
BF3 seemed as unplayable as ever at least at 7680x1600. If I drop down to 3x1080p it's much better. Looks like we need drivers or something...

I also tried using high settings and turning mesh to low, turn Ambient O. to off, MSAA off..... FPS didn't budge.

I will say that BF3 utilizing 100% of a few cores, looks like it is CPU hungry.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the follow-up. Try entering the BF3 console and turning on the overlay that gives info on your GPU/CPU utilization in-game (Render.PerfOverlayVisible 1). If it's similar to what I posted a few posts back - you're actually GPU limited. I'm pretty confident it's an NV Surround/drivers issue and not something where we need more than 4.5 GHz+ 6-core monster CPUs to power it.
 
BF3 is broken in surround with anything higher than two cards in sli. I tried everything to get it working correctly with 3 x 580's at 5760 x 1080 and utilization was all over the place, but generally crappy with 50 - 60fps, vram utilization was well under max.

On a single screen however tri-sli+ runs fine with near perfect utilization.

In the end I settled for two 670 FTW edition cards, the improvement at 5760 x 1080 was amazing.
 
Nvidia having serious internal problems right now. Very slow driver development the past few months and a support forum that was hacked and then abandoned. Something stinks with them as of late.
 
Yeah, I'm tempted to try quad-fire. Although I'm pretty happy with how things are performing now with my rig (finally, after 4 months of tweaking for BF3 MP).

flu!d said:
In the end I settled for two 670 FTW edition cards, the improvement at 5760 x 1080 was amazing.
Click to expand...

What kind of performance do you get out of this setup in BF3 MP?
 
I did the overlay graph on my BF3 and I believe it looks very similar to yours.
I don't play much BF3, but other games on the horizon (Borderlands 2) I hope have decent driver support from Nvidia.
 
clayton006 said:
I did the overlay graph on my BF3 and I believe it looks very similar to yours.
I don't play much BF3, but other games on the horizon (Borderlands 2) I hope have decent driver support from Nvidia.
Click to expand...

You're just the guy I want to talk to, again! :) Did you have another X79 board prior to your Extreme11 or is the Extreme11 your first X79 platform? I guess from your BF3 MP results you're just as driver-bound as I am...but I wanted to see if the Extreme11 helps NVIDIA 4-way 6xx series users due to having more bandwidth (PCIe 3.0 x16 via PLX natively)...join the discussion here if you're not already over there. :)

http://www.overclock.net/t/1224285/official-asrock-x79-discussion-owners-club/1010#post_18002624
 
Last edited:
I had an ASUS Rampage IV Extreme before and with 3 cards in PCI-E 3.0 same results (couldn't get the fourth card to work).

Overall it seems better having this Extreme 11 board from ASRock. I can't say I've done any side-by-side comparisons though.
 
Cool. Thanks. It's definitely a better board...just wondering if there's a big bandwidth difference between the Extreme11 and the RIVE. Vega already confirmed that the AMD side of the house has no big difference (at the thread I just linked to, above).
 
I would say there probably isn't. Like Vega mentioned though, it's better for Nvidia users due to the "compatibility" issues with the PCI-E 3.0 and SB-E. I haven't had too many issues (a lot less than my RIVE) getting four cards up and running.
 
4-way scaling on both NVIDIA and AMD has never been good. Frankly I am surprised you are seeing 70% GPU utilization at only 5760x1080. That resolution is playable for me with 2 680s and a Nehalem @ 4.4GHz if I disable some graphical features.
 
Last edited:
Astrodave said:
Nvidia having serious internal problems right now. Very slow driver development the past few months and a support forum that was hacked and then abandoned. Something stinks with them as of late.
Click to expand...
This is pure BS. Their driver development has been just as steady this year as it was in 2011. They tend to release a WHQL driver every few months and a beta driver every 1-2 months, which is what we've seen this year same as always.

The support forum being hacked has nothing to do with their driver development team.
 
Question for OP: are you seeing thread utilization beyond 6 threads? I know that Frostbite 2 is pretty heavily multithreaded but I don't know if it leverages more than 6 cores (physical, virtual or otherwise). One thing you could try is disabling hyperthreading and overclocking the CPU further. People are usually able to get much better temperatures and overclocks with hyperthreading off, so if you could push the CPU to 5GHz and beyond, you might get enough of an IPC increase to make a difference if you are CPU-bound.

Personally I don't think you are GPU constrained with BF3 at that resolution given the graphics processing power you have.
 
Rizen said:
Question for OP: are you seeing thread utilization beyond 6 threads? I know that Frostbite 2 is pretty heavily multithreaded but I don't know if it leverages more than 6 cores (physical, virtual or otherwise). One thing you could try is disabling hyperthreading and overclocking the CPU further. People are usually able to get much better temperatures and overclocks with hyperthreading off, so if you could push the CPU to 5GHz and beyond, you might get enough of an IPC increase to make a difference if you are CPU-bound.

Personally I don't think you are GPU constrained with BF3 at that resolution given the graphics processing power you have.
Click to expand...

In the last page I ran a test that was recommended by DICE and the graph showed that the GPUs are holding the CPU back (if anything). My conclusion is it is immature NV Surround drivers. fomoz had found in his threads earlier that single screen performance was scaling way better than NV Surround. Apparently there's a problem with NVIDIA drivers when multiple screens are put into play via NV Surround.

I've OC'd to 4.5, 4.8, and 4.9 GHz with the 3960x and I have not noticed any difference in in-game performance (BF3 MP).

I have not tried turning HT off. I will give that a whirl sometime.
 
boxleitnerb said:
What utter sillyness is spread here...

It is NOT the drivers. Of course it is a CPU bottleneck in BF3 MP. And if you play with MSAA/FXAA, in most other titles as well.

People...for the love of god, I cannot read this anymore. Test it yourself before coming here to complain. Anyone who has the money to buy more than 2 cards is expected to know how to find a CPU bottleneck.
Click to expand...

this.

I was running xfire 6950's and I was just barely CPU bound at 4.4 on a 2500K

I dont think BF3 uses more than 4 cores either.
 
sorry was on my phone, couldnt read everything

looks like I didnt get past the first page
 
I bought two 4gb 680 FTWs and i must say im disappointed.

Im experiencing the same issue the op is. While playing bf3, it doesn't matter what settings i use, i get 40-70fps at about 70% gpu usage.

Im also running at 5760x1080 and my old 1gb 460gtxs did a better job of running bf3 on low settings than my new 680s do on low settings. I don't know whether i should wait for better drivers or just get my money back while i can.

i really expected two 680s to be able to handle at least medium settings without dropping under 60fps.
even on my i7 950 @ 3.68ghz

all pics are from karkand
2exo7io.jpg

fyl445.jpg

123tmci.jpg

ivhaoo.jpg
 
New drivers are due any day now, I would say. If you can wait a bit, try that first. Otherwise, if I were you - I'd seriously consider going the 7970 route to see if that's better. It appears NV Surround has gimped driver support right now. As long as you're single monitor (whatever the resolution) you can do real well with NVIDIA.
 
I bought two 4gb 680 FTWs and i must say im disappointed.

Im experiencing the same issue the op is. While playing bf3, it doesn't matter what settings i use, i get 40-70fps at about 70% gpu usage.
Click to expand...

You have other issues, two 4GB 670's should run BF3 in surround just fine, I run two 2GB 670 FTW's and my utilization is near perfect 99% on both GPU's - It's only tri/quad sli that's not working correctly.

I used to run my cards on an x58 i7 920 @ 4.0ghz based system and utilization was near perfect, personally, if I was you I would try upping the overclock on that 950 to 4ghz and see what happens, also, if you're not creating a GPU bottleneck by increasing graphical settings you may not get full GPU utilization as Kepler seems to dynamically change it's max clocks depending on load.
 
So I just did more BF3 testing with the performance monitor in game turned on. I started with native resolution in game (7680x1600) then dropped it to 5760x1600. Then I started the game with the graph and everything was smooth as butter (utilization was in the 50's, I have vsync on...)

Then I switched back to native resolution and went to the CUSTOM settings (was previously on ultra). I could see the Green Bar drop quite a bit every time I turned down an option lower. I was able to play with everything on the highest setting but motion blurr and no MSAA in single player. Utilization ranged from the 50's through the high 70's.

So it still appears to be GPU, my CPU at 5GHz (yellow line) mostly stayed towards the bottom of the graph and didn't spike a lot.
 
It looks like that was short lived. I went back into the game later and performance was horrible. Nothing running in the background, GPU usage was at 10-20 % and no matter what graphics settings I tried performance wouldn't increase. I have to think drivers or something with the game is causing some screwyness.

I don't play the game much at all, but just testing things out for you guys here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top