Graphics card Upgrade does worse!

jeandrouin

New member
PRIVATE FIRST CLASS
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
9
Hi All,

After running a performance test, I purchased a MSI Radeon RX580 8Gb card to replace my 2014 MSI GeForceGT740 1Gb card. My old monitor was connected thought VGA, so I purchased a new monitor that supports HDMI & DP. Currently connected with DP

But I observe LOWER performance from what I had before!!!!  Longer load times for games, worst precision in my video editor projects, etc. Very disapointing.

I have reverted my video and graphics displays to the LOWER settings possible (even lower than they were before!), my screen at the lowest resolution possible, but it still does the same problem.

Any idea what could be the problem?

Specs: Win 10 Family Edition 64-Bit (Built 18363); ASRock Z97 Fatality Killer (BIOS 1.50); Intel i5-4590 CPU @ 3.3GHz (4 CPUs); 24GB RAM; Radeon RX580 Series

Thank you.
 

Svet

Active member
Administrator
Joined
Nov 20, 2003
Messages
75,884
Can you do test benches and shows some results?
Like 3dmark, unigine heaven benchmarks or something else that you have in mind.


After running a performance test,
What performance test did you run?



But I observe LOWER performance from what I had before!!!!  Longer load times for games,
That also depends of other factors, like storage speed, memory sped and quantity, CPU power,
in games settings, effects and resolutions.
What games you have tried?
 

jeandrouin

New member
PRIVATE FIRST CLASS
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
9
UserBenchmarks: Game 55%, Desk 68%, Work 43%
CPU: Intel Core i5-4590 - 60.5%
GPU: AMD RX 580 - 58%
SSD: Crucial MX100 256GB - 70.1%
HDD: WD Blue 1TB (2012) - 81.3%
HDD: WD Blue 1TB (2012) - 55.3%
USB: WD My Book 1230 2TB - 59%
RAM: Unknown F3-2133C10-8GSR 0420 F3-14900CL9-4GBXL 0420 F3-2133C10-8GSR 0420 F3-14900CL9-4GBXL 24GB - 50.3%
MBD: Asrock Z97 Killer


I have tried Assasin's Creed Origins. Used to run smoothly on the lower settings with the old card, now runs even slower with same low settings and even lower screen resolution.
 

flobelix

Well-known member
Global Moderator
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
39,409
This user benachmark thing is absolutely useless. Try running games and real game benchmarks. Check temps and clockrates under load.
 

flobelix

Well-known member
Global Moderator
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
39,409
:think: what do you think we can see in such a small graph?
 

darkhawk

Active member
Global Moderator
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
12,821
why do you have 24GB of RAM?
Do you have 3 sticks of memory installed?

What happens if you take 1 stick of memory out and actually run it in dual channel mode then in the proper slots?

That GPU will be bottlenecked a bit by your CPU. It can't provide enough data to it. It should still get decent performance, but I wouldn't expect it to do as good as even an i3 9300 CPU nowadays.
 

jeandrouin

New member
PRIVATE FIRST CLASS
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
9
Well, I don't know. I see it just fine on my end,

Could you please be a little more helpful in your comments? Tell me how I should do it instead of just criticizing please.

Thanks
 

jeandrouin

New member
PRIVATE FIRST CLASS
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
9
darkhawk date=1595550048 said:
why do you have 24GB of RAM?
Do you have 3 sticks of memory installed?

What happens if you take 1 stick of memory out and actually run it in dual channel mode then in the proper slots?

That GPU will be bottlenecked a bit by your CPU. It can't provide enough data to it. It should still get decent performance, but I wouldn't expect it to do as good as even an i3 9300 CPU nowadays.
Well, I had 2 * 4 Gb in my initial build, and recently purchased 2 * 8Gb to fill in the blanks

I can try removing some, but at the same time, it ran just well (even better!) with the old 1Gb card...
 

darkhawk

Active member
Global Moderator
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
12,821
jeandrouin date=1595550442 said:
Well, I had 2 * 4 Gb in my initial build, and recently purchased 2 * 8Gb to fill in the blanks

I can try removing some, but at the same time, it ran just well (even better!) with the old 1Gb card...
OH, it's 2x8GB and 2x4GB. Ok, that makes a bit more sense, and that should be ok for the most part.

I can't say much more. It should run better.

I would honestly suggest using a REAL benchmark, like 3DMark or something similar, to benchmark it and get an idea. Running game benchmarks is good for a game, but to get an idea of relative performance, it's not very helpful.
 

jeandrouin

New member
PRIVATE FIRST CLASS
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
9
Hey. here are 3D MArk results. Let me know if you need more.

<a href="https://ibb.co/4W0xM2K"><img src="https://i.ibb.co/qB2w9C7/Capture-3-D-MArk-2020-07-23.png" alt="Capture-3-D-MArk-2020-07-23" border="0"></a>
 

darkhawk

Active member
Global Moderator
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
12,821
Could you use MSI Afterburner, set it up to log data, log data, and then run the same Timespy again, and provide the .cvs file from the logging?

I'm wondering if it's just not going up to the right clock speeds.

I checked out on HWBOT and other benchmarking sites to compare, and users with CPU's that are similar to yours aren't getting much higher (high 3k's compared to your 3345 for the GPU side), so it might just be a fact that the CPU really is holding it back at this point.

At the same time, I see some people with Kaby Lake Pentium G CPU's that are doing better than you, and that kinda makes me wonder since the Pentium G CPU's are really toned down a lot.
 

jeandrouin

New member
PRIVATE FIRST CLASS
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
9
Hi 

Thanks for all your help!  Here is the .csv file of the Afterburner log you asked for.

Let me know if you need anything else!!
 

Attachments

darkhawk

Active member
Global Moderator
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
12,821
As best as I can tell.....the GPU is going to nearly 1400 MHz core clock  ( https://us.msi.com/Graphics-card/radeon-rx-580-gaming-x-8g.html ) and 2 GHz memory (which should equate to 8 GHz to match the specs, I believe).
It does it a number of times, so I can only guess that it's working correctly.

The best I could suggest is that maybe your CPU/system is just not able to feed it enough data to keep it going?
I see a number of times where the GPU dips to 0% usage during testing, and I'm not sure if that's an anomaly of afterburner or it's an issue with the computer, but I would guess it's probably a problem with the computer feeding the GPU enough data.
 

jeandrouin

New member
PRIVATE FIRST CLASS
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
9
Thanks darkhawk,

I tend to agree that it seems like a CPU problem.  But how come the new graphics card works worse than the prior one?

But then, a second question is: should I keep the old system whole, find him a new home, and start from scratch? Or put another way: is my 6-year-old Z97 Fatal1ty Killer with its LGA1150 socket able to support my new graphics card (the best CPU I could get is the i7-4790k), or am I just going to waste money down that path for a series of disapointments?

Any enlightment on this?

Many thanks again!
 

darkhawk

Active member
Global Moderator
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
12,821
jeandrouin date=1595691262 said:
Thanks darkhawk,

I tend to agree that it seems like a CPU problem.  But how come the new graphics card works worse than the prior one?

But then, a second question is: should I keep the old system whole, find him a new home, and start from scratch? Or put another way: is my 6-year-old Z97 Fatal1ty Killer with its LGA1150 socket able to support my new graphics card (the best CPU I could get is the i7-4790k), or am I just going to waste money down that path for a series of disapointments?

Any enlightment on this?

Many thanks again!
So......
With the i9 9900K, people were finally feeling that it was WORTHWHILE to upgrade from their i7 4790K systems.....That's a 'general' statement. It might not be true for everyone, but in general, people that were holding out finally felt the performance increase was enough to do it.
We now have the 10900k and 10700 and 10500's. 

My general recommendation? 
An i7 4790K will run you between $150 to $200 on ebay, and you'll have to HOPE it works well. It'll definitely feed the card more data and probably do a good bit better in games, especially if you can overclock it a little bit.
But I doubt you'll still fully utilize that card to it's best benefit. (in my opinion)

Now, if you replace your MB/CPU/RAM, you're probably looking at around $180 + $290 + $100 to get a MSI Z490 Gaming Plus or Tomahawk, i5 10600K, and 16 gigs DDR4. You should be able to use the rest of your components if you wanted.......
That would work pretty damn well overall. But you're looking at a good $600 to get there. vs $200 for a i7 4790K. 

I can't tell you which is the BEST route for you. But I will say this. I'm not a HUGE fan of the 10th gen stuff, but it works well, it won't have problems (like an AMD system will), and it'll push that GPU very hard. And, if you read into the overclocking side of things, you can easily make that 10500K perform as good as a 10900K under MOST user circumstances.......

My general opinion would be upgrade the CPU/MB/RAM if you have the money.
 
You must log in or register to reply.
Top