ok COD-BO what setting and system spec get LESS than 100% GPU usage?

[CVSiN]

mine doesnt..
not even close..

i7 920 runs about 30-50% in game bursts to 80 or so when loading and then back down.
6 gigs of DDR3 1333 and 2 Evga GTX460 1 gig FTWs and its ice smooth without issues.

 

[RussianSensation]

Not really, game developer companies just BLOW.

Let's face it, this game has poor graphics YET its s system hog?

Sad, really sad.

How is this game a "system hog"? A $230 GTX470 is putting out 91 fps at 1920x1080 4AA.

Hold on, so we now have another game that has almost perfect CPU-core scaling (along with Resident Evil 5, Arma2, GTAIV, etc.) and excellent performance per clock cycle scaling as evident by Core i5/i7s smoking everything, and game developers blow?

It's refreshing to see a game that actually takes advantage of the best processors on the market. Whether or not you think its graphics justify having a Core i5 750 is another argument altogether. The point is, the engine scales extremely well with the most modern CPU architecture and with more cores - which is how things should be. It's about time quad core processors are more heavily utilized in games considering Q6600 came out in 2007. I was able to get my Q6600 in 2007 for $300 CDN. That's more than 3 years ago; while E6400 @ 3.4ghz could be had in 2006. It's the year 2011 in less than 2 months....

The game likes Intel Cpu's

I look at it as Nehalam/Lynnfield processors having a superior performance/clock architecture than Conroe/Penryn/Phenom II processors. This is why games run faster on Intel CPUs in general, not the idea that games have somehow been designed specifically to favour Intel processors. The game engine is targeting PS3 (Cell) and Xbox360 (PowerPC), both multi-core processor systems. This probably explains why this game runs so well on multi-core CPUs in the first place.

I have personally noticed my Q6600 @ 3.4ghz bottlenecking my Radeon 4890 when I was CPU limited in Resident Evil 5 at 1920x1080 8AA. But when we are constantly bombarded with "CPU doesn't matter for game articles/threads" (such as Tom's Hardware GTX460 768mb CPU scaling), then people quickly forget how important the CPU is.

 

[notty22]

As I understand it, even with vsync on, your GPU still runs at 100% all the time. It just drops the extra frames it renders before sending them to the monitor.

No, not at least not with SLI and the couple games I just tested that on.
I usually run with v-sync off, in games where I have turned IQ settings up ,V off the load is 90% or over for both gpu's.
With Von the %load is 60-70% and if there is a spot that gets under 60fps, you see the load jump back up over 90% trying to get 60fps.

 

[BFG10K]

In general you want as close to a 100% GPU load as possible in games. If you’re not getting that then you’re either CPU limited, you have some kind of framerate cap (e.g. vsync), or you’re simply using settings that are too low for your graphics card.

 

[Sentry2]

In general you want as close to a 100% GPU load as possible in games. If you’re not getting that then you’re either CPU limited, you have some kind of framerate cap (e.g. vsync), or you’re simply using settings that are too low for your graphics card.

^Exactly. With my 470s in SLi @ 774MHz I always hover around 35-40% load on each gpu in Black Ops MP: 1920x1080 16x AA and AF / 91FPS(capped) ... Playing through the single player campaign would likely cause my gpu usage to rise as the FPS cap is probably not in place like most, if not all, older COD titles. Higher gpu usage is not a bad thing at all.

 

[james1701]

I uncapped my frame rate, and set it to use multi threading. I am seeing large fluctuations in frame rate now. I go from 180fps down to 71fps and back up at a pretty steady pace, regardless of what I am doing, I can be starring at a wall and see the frames change. I am only getting about 45% on my gpu usage, and 35% on cpu usage.

 

[nyker96]

It looks like this game is both CPU as well as GPU sensitive. very rare to see that, most games is either/or.

 

[omek]

We will probably find out that the engine is only using 1 or 2 (at the most) threads. From that CPU usage chart, it looks like 2 merely with a bit of background stuff going on.
It's like CSS. Before the recent updates that enabled multi-threading, I'd often see dips in a 40+ player session into the 40fps range (especially when the whole terrorists team rush into B and a lot of shit is happening) and 15% GPU usage with 25% CPU usage within those dips (with a 4 core and a GTX275). Turn on multi-threading and those dips turned into 80+fps, 30% GPU usage and 50% CPU usage.

This really doesn't surprise me at all be it that BO is
1. essentially built on the COD4 engine
2. and it's a port from the console

We thought GTA4 was bad but at least it uses 3 threads.

 

[ZPIGS!]

We will probably find out that the engine is only using 1 or 2 (at the most) threads. From that CPU usage chart, it looks like 2 merely with a bit of background stuff going on.
It's like CSS. Before the recent updates that enabled multi-threading, I'd often see dips in a 40+ player session into the 40fps range (especially when the whole terrorists team rush into B and a lot of shit is happening) and 15% GPU usage with 25% CPU usage within those dips (with a 4 core and a GTX275). Turn on multi-threading and those dips turned into 80+fps, 30% GPU usage and 50% CPU usage.

This really doesn't surprise me at all be it that BO is
1. essentially built on the COD4 engine
2. and it's a port from the console

We thought GTA4 was bad but at least it uses 3 threads.

this is my task manager after a BLOPS sesh..

the cpu side of things looks ok to me..

gpu slams 100%, whereas the new vietnam bc2 runs at 50-60% gpu..

 

[ZPIGS!]

i sent mine back btw!

(..and got a rebate).

 

[Vdubchaos]

How is this game a "system hog"? A $230 GTX470 is putting out 91 fps at 1920x1080 4AA.

Hold on, so we now have another game that has almost perfect CPU-core scaling (along with Resident Evil 5, Arma2, GTAIV, etc.) and excellent performance per clock cycle scaling as evident by Core i5/i7s smoking everything, and game developers blow?

The game doesn't even look as good as MW2. It's outdated engine with MINOR IF ANY upgrades to graphics engine.

YET it requires MORE resource then MW2?

Think about that for a second.....

It's refreshing to see a game that actually takes advantage of the best processors on the market. Whether or not you think its graphics justify having a Core i5 750 is another argument altogether. The point is, the engine scales extremely well with the most modern CPU architecture and with more cores - which is how things should be. It's about time quad core processors are more heavily utilized in games considering Q6600 came out in 2007. I was able to get my Q6600 in 2007 for $300 CDN. That's more than 3 years ago; while E6400 @ 3.4ghz could be had in 2006. It's the year 2011 in less than 2 months....

It's 2011 and 2-3 year old engine requires more hardware/resource then MUCH better games out there (say Crysis).

Wow I'm impressed.....NOT

If the game actually offerered something new or advanced in Graphic image....my opinion would be different.