[SOLVED] i5 9600K lack of cores/threads(?!)

[janis.riekstins]

Hi guys,

I would highly appreciate if you could spare your thoughts on this matter that I'm wondering about.

I get stutter playing games I like the most(CPU related or is it?).

CPU: Intel - Core i5-9600K 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor
CPU Cooler: Thermalright - Le Grand Macho RT 73.6 CFM CPU Cooler
Motherboard: ASRock - Z390 Extreme4 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard
Memory: Crucial - Ballistix Sport LT 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory
Storage: Crucial - P1 500 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive
Storage: Western Digital - Caviar Blue 1 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Video Card: PowerColor - Radeon RX VEGA 56 8 GB Red Dragon Video Card
Case: Cooler Master - MasterBox MB520 RGB ATX Mid Tower Case
Power Supply: Xilence - Performance X 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply

I am pretty sure it is CPU related as I get decent FPS. And I was thinking... 6c/6t is not much. Yes, good clock speed(!) but even for near future games(not to mention some of mine in library) lack of threads will be more and more dissatisfying. I am looking to upgrade but gradually. First buy obv is a CPU. Since I have a decent MOBO(not looking to invest in a new one) Coffee Lake is what I have to stick with. Should I go with i7-9700K or add roughly $100 and go for i9 9900k? Is it worth spending this money to get additional 8threads? Gaming is all I do. I have a 165hz ASUS screen. The system I have cannot use its full potential but with this upgrade I would like to be able to. Also, how you feel about second hand CPU/GPU? Not that I'm looking to spend the least I can... Good long-term performance is what I'm looking for, but why not save if you can?

GPU is next on my list and I'm thinking of switching to Nvidia but not sure which one. This buzzzzz about new 3000 series... It should bring 2000 pricing down but will it be worthwhile price/performance wise?

Storage is something I won't bother with at all. RAM might be the last on the list if at all(what you think?).

PSU and cooling is something that kind of worries me once new CPU and GPU is put together. I won't OC neither(yes, I know I have a MOBO for doing so but it was my first built suggested by someone, I just really don't feel comfortable playing around with voltage and I won't). On top of that I am not fan of RPGs therefore no additional power consumption there. Also no AIO cooling. I'm happy with air( Macho I have is quiet enough and keeps i5@4.6GHz turbo boost bellow 70*C even after 5/6h of gaming. But how will it cope with i7@4.9GHz?). Do you think I will have to switch to 750w PSU or should I stick? I'd rather stick.

I know some questions are off topic(CPUs) but for you to understand full picture it was a necessity. Just a beginner here who wants to learn more. Reading lots of info that can be quite confusing at times but still, nothing compares to actual experience that you guys might have come across or are dealing with on a daily basis.

Many thanks in advance.

 

[TerryLaze]

I get stutter playing games I like the most(CPU related or is it?).

Start with listing the games you get stutter in.
Playing games at 165hz or near there is a special challenge because many game engines just freak out at high FPS and don't know what to do.

Also depending on your settings the 8gb GPU might be a more probable cause of the stutters than the CPU if you use very high settings.

 

[boju]

Which games and have you monitored cpu usage?

I recommend watching this as it explains about frame pre-rendering the cpu is involved in.

Cpu intensive games + high fps, can expect some cpus to max out.

9700k would be a decent upgrade to improve cpu usage but what this and 8600k have in common is lack if Hyperthreading. HT improves command queuing. A command can already start while the last finishes and can result in a core less likely to hang for a split second causing a hiccup here or there.

9900k would be great if the thing could be cooled. Another option, which I'd choose over the 9700k, would be the 8700k. 9700k might appear to be quicker but i would much prefer sacrificing a couple of cores for HT, especially on the first core where majority of stuff happens.

 

[janis.riekstins]

Start with listing the games you get stutter in.
Playing games at 165hz or near there is a special challenge because many game engines just freak out at high FPS and don't know what to do.

Also depending on your settings the 8gb GPU might be a more probable cause of the stutters than the CPU if you use very high settings.

Hi Terry,

The game that stutters the most is Insurgency Sandstorm. To start with, when I open AMD Adrenaline software under this title my CPU is marked as ''meets minimum criteria''. Now, there are only few games where I use native refresh rate. For Sandstorm I adjust my screen to 100Hz, settings on High, FPS limiter at 90. There are only 2 maps from the whole map pool where FPS counter goes down to 70 and back(without FPS limitation the avg is around 130 in general). Based on HWmonitor my CPU usage whilst gaming is anywhere between 50-72%. Temp doesnt go above 70C. AT the same time GPU is not working at max(not even close) and VRAM doesnt go above 4gb. The only thing that caught my eye and Im not sure of is memory temp 75C. Based on these readings all should look really good, right? But its not. There is a video on Youtube that best describes my issue(I hope I am wrong and someone can help me to fix this stutter by simply adjusting something ). Go to 3m50sec mark.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F92byoMgptU
. After an hour or two of gameplay, as I quit the game, PC feels exhausted. It takes time to load browser, open folders etc. Not so quick.

The other game is SCUM. I know this game has a rather bad optimization but nonetheless. To get the best performance I set refresh rate to 60Hz. Settings on High, with render resolution down to 90 from 100. Here my GPU work at max, as well as VRAM. RAM works up to 50%, and CPU same - 50%. As soon as I get close to POIs I get stutter. Once it has loaded all is fine.

As you can see settings are not that high, taking in consideration that I`m adjusting refresh rate manually to make it easy on system.

 

[janis.riekstins]

Which games and have you monitored cpu usage?

I recommend watching this as it explains about frame pre-rendering the cpu is involved in.

Cpu intensive games + high fps, can expect some cpus to max out.

9700k would be a decent upgrade to improve cpu usage but what this and 8600k have in common is lack if Hyperthreading. HT improves command queuing. A command can already start while the last finishes and can result in a core less likely to hang for a split second causing a hiccup here or there.

9900k would be great if the thing could be cooled. Another option, which I'd choose over the 9700k, would be the 8700k. 9700k might appear to be quicker but i would much prefer sacrificing a couple of cores for HT, especially on the first core where majority of stuff happens.

Hi Boju,

Well... thats the thing. I dont really know when CPU max out because the highest load ive seen in-game is 72%. Maybe you could have a read of what Ive replied to Terry. That covers your question.

RE your suggestions, you say 6c/12t beats 8c/8t for gaming performance? Clock speed is not the most important indeed, especially if its 4.8/4.9/5.0GHz turbo boost.

 

[janis.riekstins]

Which games and have you monitored cpu usage?

I recommend watching this as it explains about frame pre-rendering the cpu is involved in.

Cpu intensive games + high fps, can expect some cpus to max out.

9700k would be a decent upgrade to improve cpu usage but what this and 8600k have in common is lack if Hyperthreading. HT improves command queuing. A command can already start while the last finishes and can result in a core less likely to hang for a split second causing a hiccup here or there.

9900k would be great if the thing could be cooled. Another option, which I'd choose over the 9700k, would be the 8700k. 9700k might appear to be quicker but i would much prefer sacrificing a couple of cores for HT, especially on the first core where majority of stuff happens.

I did some additional testing that didnt lead me anywhere First off in Sandstorm I set my graphic presets at very high, Anti-aliasing ON at TAA, refresh rate at 100HZ and FPS limit at 90(couldn`t do 100 in-game) just to see what happens. In the beginning it was all fine to my surprise. FPS was around 70, sometimes more, VRAM around 6500MB and GPU usage at 98%. But then GPU usage begun to fluctuate, not within 10% or so but much more. At times it dropped down to 0% and obv it was stuttering. Temperature was around 70* and VRAM was used less than in the beginning. At some point it got unplayable and I quit. I looked up some stress test and came across FURMARK. I did 1080 testing for 30min. It didnt glitch, didnt artifact, didnt crash. Max temp of 70* reach on min 6 and run at the same temp for another 25 min. I am confused here. What does it tell?

 

[boju]

High usage stutters is common on these processors but it's also dependent on game. Not sure how intensive these games are compared to BF1 or 5. If cpu isn't reaching 100% then problem seems to be elsewhere.

Id try look for stutter issues online specific to your game. Figure out if maybe the pagefile is building up too big over time. How much space is left on the ssd? Assuming this is where the pagefile is?

Pagefile (virtual memory) on the system drive stores data dumped from system ram to be used later.