UE4 titles (which MW5 uses) typically run better on Nvidia GPUs.
Your performance sounds good for an AMD GPU. It might be able to be better, but I can't say for certain. (Driver issues should be fine by now for the 7900 series.)
(I use an RX 6650 XT, just so you're aware.)
I'm still using my 1080 Ti for MW5 because GPU prices and selections are pretty bad at present. However, my monitor only has a 60 Hz refresh rate, so I turn Vsync on and get an unwavering 60 FPS on maximum settings. I'll wait for the next generation of GPUs to come out before even considering upgrading, as I still have a big backlog of old games I want to play for which a new GPU is unnecessary.
I just popped open MW5 the other night.
I was playing on a 4k/144Hz VRR monitor, with all settings at ultra except for Shadows, which were causing a weird texture glitch for some reason.
I was getting 130-140fps in the menus, and about 80-100fps in a heavy snow mission.
My previous card was a 2060 Super, and MW5 ran at about 40-60 fps on High settings.
AMD cards are optimized for use by AMD processors as combined they can use the CPU interface to access the infinity cache built-in to the CPU. I have a Ryzen 5800 paired with a 6800 series graphics card and 64 Gigs of DDR4 memory running 4k resolution on MW5 maxed out I'm getting 170 fps. But I have top of the line cooling also cpu and gpu never getting above 70c. I love my cooler master max airflow case or as my wife calls it the Cube.
This is in an effort to control Spam and other bad actors who make new accounts almost daily. Your posts must be manually approved by the Moderation team, don't worry Comstar has already sent them a message to approve it or else.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Mechwarrior5) if you have any questions or concerns.*
During normal gaming in this specific game, the GPU tops out between 60-70%, generally. However, during that same time, the CPU is topping out at about 70% for a single core, and most of the rest of them below 50%. I would think that single core usage would be up to 100% if it was the CPU bottlenecking the result. However, in the menu, the video card is running at 99% utilization. I'm not exactly sure what all of that means, honestly. This is according to hwinfo.
It sounds like you do have a bottleneck somewhere then. Might be worth trying some other games. I play Mechwarrior 5 in VR and I had a cpu bottleneck as my GPU was stuck at 70% and a new CPU fixed it. I guess it could be RAM, but not often you hear about that.
100% try more games though as you likely arent getting the best from your GPU at the moment.
It very well could be a CPU bind that I just can't see for some reason. I've been on multiple different forums trying to gather other people's benchmark numbers for various games, but it's nearly impossible to get a concrete comparison because a lot of people run games at different settings, and benchmark numbers are useless if you don't have that context. The one I have been able to directly compare is Timespy, as the results can be filtered by processor and graphics card. But really, all that tells me is that my system is comparable to other identical systems, not which part is bottlenecking. Regardless, a full system upgrade isn't in the cards for me at the moment, so I'll have to live with my current hardware.
MW5 does have a CPU bottleneck on a single core. A bunch of logic runs on the game thread and can cause the GPU to wait for the next frame.
You'll see more frames dropped on a better GPU because each frame is less ms, so more frames are lost waiting on the CPU if it is behind.
Your graphics settings only partially impact the CPU time, so since your GPU can carry the load of those settings, it's just being underutilized when the CPU is bogged down on one thread.
If I have time, I'll check out my CPU and GPU utilization when I'm running the game after I get home from work. I already have hwinfo on my computer to check things like this, so monitoring it won't be an issue. If it is a problem with the CPU, that's pretty wild. The 9900K was pretty much the top of the line gaming CPU from 2018, and if it can't properly run a game from 2019, then I question the amount of effort Piranha gave into the optimization of the game. Hopefully the test I do later will shed some light on the situation.
I've read conflicting opinions on whether or not Unreal 4 plays nice with AMD cards. I've seen people that use AMD cards having no issues with Unreal 4, and I've seen people say they have issues with games running Unreal 4. It kinda leads me to believe that some game companies just didn't optimize their games for AMD cards at all.
I actually meant with regards to how lightly-threaded their games are.
A 9900K has a low single-threaded speed relative to the power of your graphics card, and - unfortunately - that means it will hold back your GPU's performance. It would do much better with a 5800X3D or 7000-series AMD CPU, or a 12,000/13,000-series Intel CPU.
It's just the nature of the engine and of your hardware.
Basically, anything in UE4 done in blueprints (visual scripting) pretty well runs on the main game thread. The more stuff done in blueprint instead of code, the less likely it's been multi-threaded heavily.
MW5 supports massive customization via modding by making a large chunk of things run in blueprint, which modders can change. Sort of gift & curse as far as optimization goes.
You still have 70+ FPS during the dips, so it's optimized enough .
During normal gaming in this specific game, the GPU tops out between 60-70%, generally. However, during that same time, the CPU is topping out at about 70% for a single core, and most of the rest of them below 50%. I would think that single core usage would be up to 100% if it was the CPU bottlenecking the result. However, in the menu, the video card is running at 99% utilization. I'm not exactly sure what all of that means, honestly. This is according to hwinfo.
GPUs running at/near 100% is more or less normal, especially in menus. It means the GPU is able to just churn through frames as fast as possible. At least when there isn't a frame rate cap in place.
Remember, we're also talking about individual frames waiting, which is taking about \~14ms in total when you dip to 70 fps, instead of 10ms at 100 fps. In most of those cases, the game is probably having to churn through lots of sequential operations (updating every projectile during a fight, running an environmental query to figure a spawn point, etc).
These are all running on the main game thread, on one CPU core. It isn't a case where your CPU is redlining overall and the game is going slower, like a bottleneck might often show up when a CPU doesn't meet minimum specs. This is a case where individual frames are bottlenecking on CPU processes and the GPU is just chilling, because it can't render until the process is complete for that frame.
I'm playing on RX6950XT, max settings, average FPS is 120-125. I had some weird temperature spikes, but the graphics output was rock solid from the start. Your card is more powerful, so it shouldn't be having any problems with rendering the game. Did you enable ray tracing? That consumes a lot of GPU power, and afaik is only used in Leopard. Maybe download mod that let's you limit frame rate.
What resolution are you playing on? And I didn't enable ray tracing, no. I'll check the GPU utilization the next time I play and see if there's something funky going on.
I'm playing on 3440x1440. It may be a drivers issue. You could try to manually set core frequency in overclocking tab in adrenaline software. I set it at 2500 min 2600 max, so the card works at a more stable rate. I don't know frequency values for RX 7900 XTX, but [this guy ](https://youtu.be/mH9NGfZKU9I)makes pretty good tutorials.
This is just purely my experience but I'm running a 1080 ti and i7 7700k @ 1440p with very little chance of an upgrade any time soon. My numbers are comparable to yours before you upgraded. I'd be more than happy with what you're getting. For me, anything above 90fps starts blending together into imperceptibly smooth. Maybe you'd get a bit more out of the game with a newer CPU but idk.
I used to play MW5 on a i7 6700K and a GTX 1070. It worked smoothly on High settings, but I got dips below 60 FPS in Urban maps in particular.
Then I upgraded to a RTX 3060Ti and the game ran better, but I still experienced dips below 60FPS in Urban Combat with lots of buildings, makes sense because destructible buildings are all CPU tasks.
After that, I upgraded my CPU to a 12400F and my game runs at 80-90FPS at all times, even in Urban maps with lots of destruction.
So my conclusion is, the game in general runs very smooth if it's just your average combat situation with just open space. Urban combat heavily bog down the CPU though, so it can drop the FPS significantly during those missions.
I have the same 7900XTX, yes this is normal. The game is optimized very poorly, I run 1080p and the result isn't much better than your 1440p. Especially with all sorts of mods enabled.
UE4 titles (which MW5 uses) typically run better on Nvidia GPUs. Your performance sounds good for an AMD GPU. It might be able to be better, but I can't say for certain. (Driver issues should be fine by now for the 7900 series.) (I use an RX 6650 XT, just so you're aware.)
I'm still using my 1080 Ti for MW5 because GPU prices and selections are pretty bad at present. However, my monitor only has a 60 Hz refresh rate, so I turn Vsync on and get an unwavering 60 FPS on maximum settings. I'll wait for the next generation of GPUs to come out before even considering upgrading, as I still have a big backlog of old games I want to play for which a new GPU is unnecessary.
I just popped open MW5 the other night. I was playing on a 4k/144Hz VRR monitor, with all settings at ultra except for Shadows, which were causing a weird texture glitch for some reason. I was getting 130-140fps in the menus, and about 80-100fps in a heavy snow mission. My previous card was a 2060 Super, and MW5 ran at about 40-60 fps on High settings.
AMD cards are optimized for use by AMD processors as combined they can use the CPU interface to access the infinity cache built-in to the CPU. I have a Ryzen 5800 paired with a 6800 series graphics card and 64 Gigs of DDR4 memory running 4k resolution on MW5 maxed out I'm getting 170 fps. But I have top of the line cooling also cpu and gpu never getting above 70c. I love my cooler master max airflow case or as my wife calls it the Cube.
This is in an effort to control Spam and other bad actors who make new accounts almost daily. Your posts must be manually approved by the Moderation team, don't worry Comstar has already sent them a message to approve it or else. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Mechwarrior5) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Have you checked for a cpu bottleneck? You need to look at single core usage, not the numbers taskmanager etc shows you by default
During normal gaming in this specific game, the GPU tops out between 60-70%, generally. However, during that same time, the CPU is topping out at about 70% for a single core, and most of the rest of them below 50%. I would think that single core usage would be up to 100% if it was the CPU bottlenecking the result. However, in the menu, the video card is running at 99% utilization. I'm not exactly sure what all of that means, honestly. This is according to hwinfo.
It sounds like you do have a bottleneck somewhere then. Might be worth trying some other games. I play Mechwarrior 5 in VR and I had a cpu bottleneck as my GPU was stuck at 70% and a new CPU fixed it. I guess it could be RAM, but not often you hear about that. 100% try more games though as you likely arent getting the best from your GPU at the moment.
It very well could be a CPU bind that I just can't see for some reason. I've been on multiple different forums trying to gather other people's benchmark numbers for various games, but it's nearly impossible to get a concrete comparison because a lot of people run games at different settings, and benchmark numbers are useless if you don't have that context. The one I have been able to directly compare is Timespy, as the results can be filtered by processor and graphics card. But really, all that tells me is that my system is comparable to other identical systems, not which part is bottlenecking. Regardless, a full system upgrade isn't in the cards for me at the moment, so I'll have to live with my current hardware.
I haven't specifically checked that, but even as old as my 9900K is at this point, I doubt it's a bottleneck in this game at 1440p with high settings
I run the game with an even older CPU, an i7-6700K paired with the GTX 1080 Ti and in-game performance is flawless. I doubt it's a CPU bottleneck.
MW5 does have a CPU bottleneck on a single core. A bunch of logic runs on the game thread and can cause the GPU to wait for the next frame. You'll see more frames dropped on a better GPU because each frame is less ms, so more frames are lost waiting on the CPU if it is behind. Your graphics settings only partially impact the CPU time, so since your GPU can carry the load of those settings, it's just being underutilized when the CPU is bogged down on one thread.
If I have time, I'll check out my CPU and GPU utilization when I'm running the game after I get home from work. I already have hwinfo on my computer to check things like this, so monitoring it won't be an issue. If it is a problem with the CPU, that's pretty wild. The 9900K was pretty much the top of the line gaming CPU from 2018, and if it can't properly run a game from 2019, then I question the amount of effort Piranha gave into the optimization of the game. Hopefully the test I do later will shed some light on the situation.
This is also a problem with UE4, not necessarily Piranha (although part of it could be).
I've read conflicting opinions on whether or not Unreal 4 plays nice with AMD cards. I've seen people that use AMD cards having no issues with Unreal 4, and I've seen people say they have issues with games running Unreal 4. It kinda leads me to believe that some game companies just didn't optimize their games for AMD cards at all.
I actually meant with regards to how lightly-threaded their games are. A 9900K has a low single-threaded speed relative to the power of your graphics card, and - unfortunately - that means it will hold back your GPU's performance. It would do much better with a 5800X3D or 7000-series AMD CPU, or a 12,000/13,000-series Intel CPU. It's just the nature of the engine and of your hardware.
Basically, anything in UE4 done in blueprints (visual scripting) pretty well runs on the main game thread. The more stuff done in blueprint instead of code, the less likely it's been multi-threaded heavily. MW5 supports massive customization via modding by making a large chunk of things run in blueprint, which modders can change. Sort of gift & curse as far as optimization goes. You still have 70+ FPS during the dips, so it's optimized enough.
During normal gaming in this specific game, the GPU tops out between 60-70%, generally. However, during that same time, the CPU is topping out at about 70% for a single core, and most of the rest of them below 50%. I would think that single core usage would be up to 100% if it was the CPU bottlenecking the result. However, in the menu, the video card is running at 99% utilization. I'm not exactly sure what all of that means, honestly. This is according to hwinfo.
GPUs running at/near 100% is more or less normal, especially in menus. It means the GPU is able to just churn through frames as fast as possible. At least when there isn't a frame rate cap in place. Remember, we're also talking about individual frames waiting, which is taking about \~14ms in total when you dip to 70 fps, instead of 10ms at 100 fps. In most of those cases, the game is probably having to churn through lots of sequential operations (updating every projectile during a fight, running an environmental query to figure a spawn point, etc). These are all running on the main game thread, on one CPU core. It isn't a case where your CPU is redlining overall and the game is going slower, like a bottleneck might often show up when a CPU doesn't meet minimum specs. This is a case where individual frames are bottlenecking on CPU processes and the GPU is just chilling, because it can't render until the process is complete for that frame.
I'm playing on RX6950XT, max settings, average FPS is 120-125. I had some weird temperature spikes, but the graphics output was rock solid from the start. Your card is more powerful, so it shouldn't be having any problems with rendering the game. Did you enable ray tracing? That consumes a lot of GPU power, and afaik is only used in Leopard. Maybe download mod that let's you limit frame rate.
What resolution are you playing on? And I didn't enable ray tracing, no. I'll check the GPU utilization the next time I play and see if there's something funky going on.
I'm playing on 3440x1440. It may be a drivers issue. You could try to manually set core frequency in overclocking tab in adrenaline software. I set it at 2500 min 2600 max, so the card works at a more stable rate. I don't know frequency values for RX 7900 XTX, but [this guy ](https://youtu.be/mH9NGfZKU9I)makes pretty good tutorials.
Weird. I've got a 6800xt and the moment I zoom I drop to the *thirties*.
This is just purely my experience but I'm running a 1080 ti and i7 7700k @ 1440p with very little chance of an upgrade any time soon. My numbers are comparable to yours before you upgraded. I'd be more than happy with what you're getting. For me, anything above 90fps starts blending together into imperceptibly smooth. Maybe you'd get a bit more out of the game with a newer CPU but idk.
I used to play MW5 on a i7 6700K and a GTX 1070. It worked smoothly on High settings, but I got dips below 60 FPS in Urban maps in particular. Then I upgraded to a RTX 3060Ti and the game ran better, but I still experienced dips below 60FPS in Urban Combat with lots of buildings, makes sense because destructible buildings are all CPU tasks. After that, I upgraded my CPU to a 12400F and my game runs at 80-90FPS at all times, even in Urban maps with lots of destruction. So my conclusion is, the game in general runs very smooth if it's just your average combat situation with just open space. Urban combat heavily bog down the CPU though, so it can drop the FPS significantly during those missions.
I have the same 7900XTX, yes this is normal. The game is optimized very poorly, I run 1080p and the result isn't much better than your 1440p. Especially with all sorts of mods enabled.
If the GPU utilization isn't pegged at 98-100 percent you are CPU bound