BF4 ~100% CPU Usage but Poor GPU Usage (Crossfire r9 280x) LOW FPS

[cookeymiceter]

First time posting after i cant find any solutions. Please go easy
Okay so here is my issue.

After buying a 144Hz monitor, I was aiming to hit 144 fps in BF4 in order to make the most of it. However, the CPU usage of the game seems to be fixed at 100% no matter what settings i choose, meanwhile, the GPU usage across both cards varies depending on the game settings. As the settings are lower, the GPU usage is lower, resulting in NO increase in fps.

This is causing me much frustration and would really appreciate some help on the issue

What ive tried so far:
1) Updating to latest GPU drivers (Were already installed)
2) Unpacking cores on my CPU (No idea if that even does anything)
3) Re-installed the game to my SSD

Screenshots for proof of issue: (Note CPU/GPU Usage and current FPS)
NOTE - Game resolution is set to 1080p no V-sync etc.

1) 200% Render resolution and default Ultra Settings.
http://i.imgur.com/d7X62x8.jpg

2) 100% Render resolution and default Ultra settings
http://i.imgur.com/hsGoM3q.jpg

3) 100% Render resolution and default low settings
http://i.imgur.com/LjLTZoK.jpg

4) 25% Render resolution and default low settings
http://i.imgur.com/6u9ozRl.jpg

Rough system specs:
I5 4670k @ 4.2 GHz
Crossfire MSI r9 280x
8.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 800MHz (9-9-9-24)
512GB SSD
850W Corsair CM PSU

Complete system specs can be found here:
NOTE - CPU is overclocked to 4.2Ghz
http://speccy.piriform.com/results/f7v2lGRCneclOHS6VUtddFm

Please please please help as i really have no idea what lest to try.

 

[st3v30]

Then it is Crossfire problem with BF games.Only solution is to wait until they fix it.Till then play with 1 card if you get better FPS that way in BF4, or you can sell those 2 cards and get gtx 970 or 980 or r9 290x if you rly want to play BF4 on high FPS with no issue,but then you will lose all that crossfire performance in other games.

 

[bystander]

The problem isn't crossfire, it is that he is CPU bound, which basically means that, at least at the point he showed us an example, the CPU is not capable of delivering the amount of FPS his cards could. That is a common problem in games.

A higher OC, or a faster CPU is all that would help alleviate this. I'd recommend a 6 core i7 (12 threads), as he has high expectations.

 

[cookeymiceter]

Then it is Crossfire problem with BF games.Only solution is to wait until they fix it.Till then play with 1 card if you get better FPS that way in BF4, or you can sell those 2 cards and get gtx 970 or 980 or r9 290x if you rly want to play BF4 on high FPS with no issue,but then you will lose all that crossfire performance in other games.

Yeah also, crossfire r9 280x should out preform any single gpu based card

 

[assyrian]

Hello. Motherboard is weak. PCIe x16 and PCIe x4. Crossfire works x4. Remember when buying a Crossfire /SLI x8 x8 least. FPS110-130 in BF4, even with i5 4430 (Crossfire R9 280x)

 

[Cageman84]

Hi guys,

It probably isn't the crossfire that's is the problem, nor a too low CPU (i5 4670k is really fast enough). I have similar problems with different setup:

I've been playing BF4 for almost a year now and always an FPS of 50-60.

Recently this was lowered to 20-35. I appaers that my GPU activity is low (~40%) during BF4 and I cannot find on internet what the problem is. Other games or benchmarks (GPU-Z) show that the GPU can be 100% without problems, but in BF4 it suddenly runs only at 40%. In my opinion the CPU is not the bottleneck since this is one of the best CPU's for BF4.

So no crossfire setup, but the same problem here. And I read more threads with this problem only no solution was found.

My setup:
FX-8350 BE
8 gb 1600 mhz
MX100 SSD 256 gb
ATI radion 6970 (5% overclocked)

What I tried so far:
- Remove BF4 config
- Update to latest Catalyst drivers
- Read a lot on internet...

 

[casualcolors]

Everyone who makes an fps brag video about BF4 and their hardware does it in settings that happen to also be good for fps. There are also several maps where fps drops by 50% regardless of hardware.

I have a 970 and my 2500k is still running at 4.8ghz. I can get 120-140 fps in a lot of areas, and then I'll turn around on Hainan Resort or one or two spots on Lancang Dam and drop to 60's. Some spots on Hainan dip to the high 40's if it's a 64man server.

It's just how this game is.

Also some of the suggestions in this thread are kind of absurd. BF4 doesn't make any notable use of Hyperthreading and the extra heat only hurts your OC potential, yet people are telling him to buy an absurdly expensive i7-six core processor for the game. This just seems irresponsible for the game section of a tech forum.

edit: Also OP, this game is super buggy. If you want *actual* Ultra settings, you need to log out with Ultra Terrain Decoration, but when you join a game you need to change it to Medium and redeploy. A good map to test this on is Golmud Railway. If you play on Ultra Terrain Decoration the landscape seems pretty barren with a lot of scrub grass, but as soon as you redeploy with Medium Terrain Decoration, suddenly there is shoulder-high tallgrass everywhere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe_amrZXNe4

 

[bystander]

The only reason I recommended a 6 core i7, is for the 2 extra regular cores, and the fact that he has a fast i5 now, but still unsatisfied. The only thing he can do, to get a faster CPU, is simply to buy one of these 6 core i7's, as he is unable to fathom playing at anything less than 100+ FPS at all times.

I sure wouldn't recommend that to a sane person.

 

[casualcolors]

6core all you want, you still won't have 100+ fps at all times in this game. It's not well optimized, and throwing hardware at it only works to a certain point. It was made a lot less carefully than BF3.

 

[bystander]

I agree, but the OP wouldn't listen to reason, but it would improve things a little.

 

[bystander]

And btw, this thread is old, and I doubt the OP will be coming back.

 

[Fishwithadeagle]

Talk about reviving an old thread but, has anyone figured this out? I seem to be having a ton of problems with this new setup and I can't seem to drop the cpu usage below 100 percent on my 4690k @ 4.6ghz. It seems absurd that this game would even require anything similar to that in hardware terms.

 

[bystander]

Talk about reviving an old thread but, has anyone figured this out? I seem to be having a ton of problems with this new setup and I can't seem to drop the cpu usage below 100 percent on my 4690k @ 4.6ghz. It seems absurd that this game would even require anything similar to that in hardware terms.

What is absurd about using the CPU to 100%? Isn't this how games are supposed to be coded, to use all the cores of a CPU?

What is your FPS and GPU? What settings are you using? If you expect to hit 144 FPS, like the OP, you may find that impossible.

 

[Fishwithadeagle]

Talk about reviving an old thread but, has anyone figured this out? I seem to be having a ton of problems with this new setup and I can't seem to drop the cpu usage below 100 percent on my 4690k @ 4.6ghz. It seems absurd that this game would even require anything similar to that in hardware terms.

What is absurd about using the CPU to 100%? Isn't this how games are supposed to be coded, to use all the cores of a CPU?

What is your FPS and GPU? What settings are you using? If you expect to hit 144 FPS, like the OP, you may find that impossible.

I'm running two 7870s and a 4690k overclocked to 4.6, that should be more than enough to run this game. I've seen it run as high as 130fps, but usually about 120 average before I had this CPU glitch. Even when I cap it to sixty I'm getting one hundred percent usage. Same thing with thirty. It doesn't really matter what the fps, it is a straight line going across at one hundred as if prime 95 was running and its all coming from battlefield.

 

[bystander]

Talk about reviving an old thread but, has anyone figured this out? I seem to be having a ton of problems with this new setup and I can't seem to drop the cpu usage below 100 percent on my 4690k @ 4.6ghz. It seems absurd that this game would even require anything similar to that in hardware terms.

What is absurd about using the CPU to 100%? Isn't this how games are supposed to be coded, to use all the cores of a CPU?

What is your FPS and GPU? What settings are you using? If you expect to hit 144 FPS, like the OP, you may find that impossible.

I'm running two 7870s and a 4690k overclocked to 4.6, that should be more than enough to run this game. I've seen it run as high as 130fps, but usually about 120 average before I had this CPU glitch. Even when I cap it to sixty I'm getting one hundred percent usage. Same thing with thirty. It doesn't really matter what the fps, it is a straight line going across at one hundred as if prime 95 was running and its all coming from battlefield.

I don't know why it would continue at 100% either, if you capped it at 60 FPS, but you have nothing to complain about 120 average FPS.

Perhaps it uses the CPU to help prerender stuff, or uses all it can for more accurate physics. I have no idea on that. Do other games do this?

 

[Fishwithadeagle]

Talk about reviving an old thread but, has anyone figured this out? I seem to be having a ton of problems with this new setup and I can't seem to drop the cpu usage below 100 percent on my 4690k @ 4.6ghz. It seems absurd that this game would even require anything similar to that in hardware terms.

What is absurd about using the CPU to 100%? Isn't this how games are supposed to be coded, to use all the cores of a CPU?

What is your FPS and GPU? What settings are you using? If you expect to hit 144 FPS, like the OP, you may find that impossible.

I'm running two 7870s and a 4690k overclocked to 4.6, that should be more than enough to run this game. I've seen it run as high as 130fps, but usually about 120 average before I had this CPU glitch. Even when I cap it to sixty I'm getting one hundred percent usage. Same thing with thirty. It doesn't really matter what the fps, it is a straight line going across at one hundred as if prime 95 was running and its all coming from battlefield.

I don't know why it would continue at 100% either, if you capped it at 60 FPS, but you have nothing to complain about 120 average FPS.

Perhaps it uses the CPU to help prerender stuff, or uses all it can for more accurate physics. I have no idea on that. Do other games do this?

Ah, you see it may be 120 fps at some point, and run at the capped 60, but it will drop down to 30 randomly, and the game is jerky as all hell. There is major input lag, and that is one of the side effects of have 100 percent cpu usage

 

[bystander]

Ah, you see it may be 120 fps at some point, and run at the capped 60, but it will drop down to 30 randomly, and the game is jerky as all hell. There is major input lag, and that is one of the side effects of have 100 percent cpu usage

Do other games do this? If so, you have a virus or another app stealing resources. If not, then you may need to turn up GPU settings or use a cap. Other people aren't having a stuttering mess with the game, so clearly something is different if you do. Perhaps you are having a heat issue that is causing throttling.

 

[bystander]

Oh, and you should start your own thread if you want help on this.

 

[schaft]

Guys, my experience are only in bf3 and bf hardline. I think hardline should represent bf4 as its newer version in term of fps. My i5 2320 oc 3,5GHz and cf r9 280 + 7950 (indentified as 280) could run 80-95 fps on 1080 ultra. Fortunate my cheap msi z77a-g45 can run 8x in crossfire, so it should not become bottleneck. I saw my cpu always above 90%. So i believe in my case my cpu is bottleneck. But my point is the 4670 and cf 290x should get better fps than my pc.