Poor Crossfire Performance in BF3?

[Eureka]

I just got another 7950 to crossfire with my WF3. I have a Sapphire card now, overclocked to match the WF3. I've got it up and running, Crossfire is checked, and I'm getting good framerates in Heaven. But in BF3, it's performing worse than my one card did alone. Even on low, in 64 TDM I'm getting 80-110 FPS. Before I was getting 100-120. CPU utilization is still at 70%, so I don't think it's coming from that. I'm running latest 13.6 beta drivers.

I set enableULPS to 0 in registry. I'm also using RadeonPro dynamic framerate control to keep it at 120 FPS.

What else is there to do? This is pretty bad.

 

[bystander36]

Crossfire has some microstutter issues that are particularly bad in BF3, you will want to look into RadeonPro or some form of FPS limiter to fix that after you get the performance you want.

That said, your issue is a CPU bottleneck. The game just doesn't let you go much higher on FPS than you have due to CPU limitations. 70% CPU utilization is very high, and likely has at least one core running at 99% and not able to keep up. There are 4 cores on the CPU, so 70% is the average of all the cores. It only takes 1 core to hold back performance. With Crossfire enabled, it uses a bit more CPU power to run Crossfire, so it makes the CPU bottleneck worse, and why your FPS drops a bit.

 

[Eureka]

Well, the main thing I wanted to get was to be able to run it on higher settings than low. However, when I bump up the video quality, I still lose frames, so there's still some GPU bottleneck at play, I think. With 2x 7950 at 1000 Mhz, I should be able to run Ultra Settings at 100 FPS+ but it's dropping down to 60.

 

[bystander36]

Well, the main thing I wanted to get was to be able to run it on higher settings than low. However, when I bump up the video quality, I still lose frames, so there's still some GPU bottleneck at play, I think. With 2x 7950 at 1000 Mhz, I should be able to run Ultra Settings at 100 FPS+ but it's dropping down to 60.

In multiplayer at least, BF3 will always drop to the 60's at times. At least on the big maps.

 

[sushiwarrior]

100-120 with a 7950 is really, really high... Yeah two in CF should be running at 100+ at least. Try using 13.5 drivers? BF3 normally has excellent CF scaling.

 

[Eureka]

In multiplayer at least, BF3 will always drop to the 60's at times. At least on the big maps.

Well, I can understand that, but this is a small TDM map, and basically I can see the frame-rates change with different presets. Unless going to Ultra is increasing my CPU utilization, I am still seeing a GPU bottleneck, which shouldn't be happening with 7950 CF.


@sushi: The 7950 should be able to hold 120 FPS at low settings, maybe medium, with a good enough CPU. I can live with drops to 100 FPS, but 60 on noshahr should be far too low for just CPU bottlenecking. I did use 13.4 but it was the same issue.

 

[bystander36]

100-120 with a 7950 is really, really high... Yeah two in CF should be running at 100+ at least. Try using 13.5 drivers? BF3 normally has excellent CF scaling.

Keep in mind, he is doing it at low settings, so while CF scales well with high/ultra settings, it bottlenecks easily on low. And MP is different than SP.

That said, BF3 has horrid crossfire microstutter issues without v-sync or FPS limiter, but he appears to be into high FPS/low latency and is doing it without either atm, so that'll have to be addressed too, although CPU bottlenecks often fix microstutter as well.

 

[Eureka]

Ah well, I was hoping to wait until later to pick up a 4770K, but it looks like I may have to do it earlier than expected.

 

[bystander36]

Even with the 4770k, it will not make a huge difference. Maybe 20% at most. BF3 has had people complaining about 60 FPS dips in multiplayer for a long time. I've yet to see someone change their fortunes on 64 man maps. Though servers also have an affect that sometimes change from time to time.

 

[Stuka87]

BF3 is arguably the most CPU hungry game out there. My CPU hits 95% utilization in 64 player games.

BF3 will use up to 6 threads, so an i7 does perform better than an i5 by a bit. FX 8350's actually do quite well, as do 1100T's as they have 6 real cores.

 

[hawtdawg]

Sounds like something is definitely wrong. I was running CF 6950 1 gig cards for a few weeks here recently, and with everything on high, I had no problems staying over 60fps@ 1440p. I did notice microstutter, but that went away if i turned on vsync. I was limited by Vram as well, as far as being able to put anything on ultra or turn on msaa

 

[Eureka]

Well, I can stay over 60 easily, but I'm trying to hold 120 FPS (makes a difference going from 60 to 120 with a 120hz monitor). I did a HWInfo log, and alas, my CPU's at 90-95% straight while my two cores are being utilized around 60%. In single player, one card at ultra gives me around 80 fps but having CF I get 110-120.

I'm just surprised that there's still a drop going from low to ultra, since it's not a graphics bottleneck.

If the 4770K isn't enough, I don't know what is. I can't see myself shelling out $400 for a 3930K.

 

[Termie]

Well, I can stay over 60 easily, but I'm trying to hold 120 FPS (makes a difference going from 60 to 120 with a 120hz monitor). I did a HWInfo log, and alas, my CPU's at 90-95% straight while my two cores are being utilized around 60%. In single player, one card at ultra gives me around 80 fps but having CF I get 110-120.

I'm just surprised that there's still a drop going from low to ultra, since it's not a graphics bottleneck.

If the 4770K isn't enough, I don't know what is. I can't see myself shelling out $400 for a 3930K.

As with most modern games, increasing quality settings DOES affect the CPU load.

You are CPU-bottlenecked, plain and simple, and I highly doubt Haswell is going to fix this for you. 120fps in BF3 multiplayer is going to be very difficult to hold.

And if only the 3930K were $400...

 

[Eureka]

Well, this is quite the disappointment. At least I can now push 60 fps in Crysis 3.

That being said, for me it's about getting past 60fps in online multiplayer. It's not so much about competitive advantage as it is just about fatigue... it's been easier on my eyes at 120 Hz than it has been at 60 Hz and so maintaining it means a better QoL while gaming.

In any case, what is necessary to hold 110+ FPS? 100 FPS on ultra?

 

[bystander36]

It is not possible to hold 110+ FPS in some games. There are no extreme CPU's that double the performance of what you have now.

 

[Final8ty]

Crossfire has some microstutter issues that are particularly bad in BF3, you will want to look into RadeonPro or some form of FPS limiter to fix that after you get the performance you want.

That said, your issue is a CPU bottleneck. The game just doesn't let you go much higher on FPS than you have due to CPU limitations. 70% CPU utilization is very high, and likely has at least one core running at 99% and not able to keep up. There are 4 cores on the CPU, so 70% is the average of all the cores. It only takes 1 core to hold back performance. With Crossfire enabled, it uses a bit more CPU power to run Crossfire, so it makes the CPU bottleneck worse, and why your FPS drops a bit.

Keep in mind, he is doing it at low settings, so while CF scales well with high/ultra settings, it bottlenecks easily on low. And MP is different than SP.

That said, BF3 has horrid crossfire microstutter issues without v-sync or FPS limiter, but he appears to be into high FPS/low latency and is doing it without either atm, so that'll have to be addressed too, although CPU bottlenecks often fix microstutter as well.

The OP said nothing about microstutter issues and yet twice you bring that up when that's not what he was complaining about.

He wants his 120fps and that's all, his said his actual fps dropped with CF in BF3 on multiplayer and not that's the FPS increased but it felt less.
So that is likely CPU bottleneck.

You should drop your fixation on bring microstutter into every thread about CF when its not about that issue at all, your not saying anything that we don't already know in that regard.

 

[bystander36]

The OP said nothing about microstutter issues and yet twice you bring that up when that's not what he was complaining about.

He wants his 120fps and that's all, his said his actual fps dropped with CF in BF3 on multiplayer and not that's the FPS increased but it felt less.
So that is likely CPU bottleneck.

You should drop your fixation on bring microstutter into every thread about CF when its not about that issue at all, your not saying anything that we don't already know in that regard.

Why are you so defensive about it? He was having issues, I gave him tips to fix it and any other issues he may not even be aware of.

When I had my 6950 CF setup, I wish someone pointed me to the RadeonPro or FPS limiter fix as I had issues that caused me nausea from it, and never realized it and BF3 is about the worst offender.

 

[Final8ty]

Why are you so defensive about it? He was having issues, I gave him tips to fix it and any other issues he may not even be aware of.

We could bring and endless list of possible issues, that does not mean we have to contually repeat them, that fact is you brought it up twice and twice he didn't respond to those parts of your comments in this thread.

He is not a noob and is fully aware of the issue already, its hard to miss with the amount of microstutter threads and reviews talking about it.

When someone asked for specific help then give them that help. You come across as a sales man trying to sell extended warranties because you may have other issue.

He has made comments about microstutter in another thread.

 

[bystander36]

Seriously, get over it. He's having an issue, I wanted to make sure he didn't ignore all the issues, because he seems to want to hit high FPS and I'm sure he wants those FPS to count. He clearly is not using v-sync, and by the fluctuations, he's clearly not using a limiter which means he is probably getting half those FPS in all reality.

So now you bring it up 2 more times.

 

[Final8ty]

Seriously, get over it. He's having an issue, I wanted to make sure he didn't ignore all the issues, because he seems to want to hit high FPS and I'm sure he wants those FPS to count. He clearly is not using v-sync, and by the fluctuations, he's clearly not using a limiter which means he is probably getting half those FPS in all reality.

So now you bring it up 2 more times.

If he was noticing Micro stuttering issues in BF3 at those FPS he would of said already.
The only person who needs to get over it is you because im not having Micro stuttering issues in BF3 with the way i play and neither did he say he was either, but your going to tell us all about it again anyway.
You need to stop telling us that we are all having a bad time without this or that, if someone is having a bad time with Micro stuttering and wants help then they would say so.

If someone is thinking about going CF for the first time then the Pros and Cons need to be made which includes Micro stuttering and possible workaround.

 

[bystander36]

If he was noticing Micro stuttering issues in BF3 at those FPS he would of said already.
The only person who needs to get over it is you because im not having Micro stuttering issues in BF3 with the way i play and neither did he say he was either, but your going to tell us all about it again anyway.
You need to stop telling us that we are all having a bad time without this or that, if someone is having a bad time with Micro stuttering and wants help then they would say so.

If someone is thinking about going CF for the first time then the Pros and Cons need to be made which includes Micro stuttering and possible workaround.

Not everyone knows they have microstutter when they do. Look at this board. Look at you. But when review sites get gamer panels together, and have them compare, everyone sees a difference. I was the same way. Why should I not give him a tip on fixing something he is most likely experiencing and doesn't know it?

I'm not telling him he is having a bad time. I AM telling him how to have a better time.

 

[Termie]

The OP stated in his original post that he was using RadeonPro.

Microstutter was never the issue.

 

[bystander36]

Cool, good to know.

 

[Eureka]

I'm going to tip-toe around this discussion.....

Anyway, in response to Termie: I can find BNIB 3930Ks in the low 400s on FS/FT in here and other forums (meaning I can probably negotiate one to 400). However, would it make a real difference over an i7-x770K? I also don't believe LGA2011 comes in mITX, and that would be a real drawback as I've been waiting for the NCASE M1 to switch over to a mITX system.

If I can't hold 120 FPS on Ultra, I want to be able to at least do 100+ FPS, and right now I've been getting dips as low as 60 in 64 TDM on Noshahr. Would a 3770K or 4770K make the difference to get to 100 FPS?

 

[Durvelle27]

I'm going to tip-toe around this discussion.....

Anyway, in response to Termie: I can find BNIB 3930Ks in the low 400s on FS/FT in here and other forums (meaning I can probably negotiate one to 400). However, would it make a real difference over an i7-x770K? I also don't believe LGA2011 comes in mITX, and that would be a real drawback as I've been waiting for the NCASE M1 to switch over to a mITX system.

If I can't hold 120 FPS on Ultra, I want to be able to at least do 100+ FPS, and right now I've been getting dips as low as 60 in 64 TDM on Noshahr. Would a 3770K or 4770K make the difference to get to 100 FPS?

I don't think there's any CPU available that will allow you to keep 100+ FPS all will have dips in the 60s or less.

My FX 8320 @4.5GHz Dips in the 40s on Caspian Border 64MP w/vehicles



Try AMD CCC 13.6 BETA and 13.5 CAP1