CPU upgrade and Memory speed

[stevesideas]

So, I need to know. Would upgrading my CPU (currently i7-4770) to something like a i7-6800k and getting faster memory (currently 1600hz - 32gb) help to speed up VR ? I have a 1080gtx (overclocked).

Does ED make full use of all cores efficiently ?

 

[sbdags]

You'd have to get a new mobo as well. You are looking at a 15% increase in CPU performance.

However, you have a top of the range GTX 1080 and I can't see the cpu and memory upgrade helping what is already a stellar card.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Bear in mind that AMD should be releasing their first Zen based consumer CPUs later this year - 8 core / 16 thread - which might be an option or might bring sufficient competition to Intel to make their prices a bit more competitive....

 

[Cornelius lucius]

I have pretty much the same set up as you with memory and CPU, but with a 980ti for gfx. You don't mention what motherboard you have, this may give you a performance increase for much cheaper than a new CPU if you have an old/slow board.
I upgraded my PC to become VR ready late last year, and the ~15-20% performance increases (at best) in upgrading to a newer CPU, did not seem worth the price tag. Especially since I'd already spent over $2000 on the PC + plus another $1000 on the rift.

 

[HeavyGroovez]

So, I need to know. Would upgrading my CPU (currently i7-4770) to something like a i7-6800k and getting faster memory (currently 1600hz - 32gb) help to speed up VR ? I have a 1080gtx (overclocked).

Does ED make full use of all cores efficiently ?

Yes it does. In RES sites especially you will see very high CPU utilisation across all cores.

 

[[HJ]-RedRaven]

To be honest, your cpu probably isn't really your bottleneck in VR. It' s Haswell 3.4GHz, up to 3.9Ghz; no slouch, even when left at stock speeds.

It probably is the technical bottleneck, but with a 1080GTX and a 3.5GHz or faster cpu, you've got the best VR experience right there.
Anything faster will only be incremental; you might spend money and not even notice a difference.

You could upgrade cpu, motherboard and RAM to future-proof your PC, but its a fair whack of money to spend for arguably little payback in frame rate.

Easiest way to check imo;
- Go back to 2D monitor as main output,
- Turn off V-Sync so you see the real fps output of the 3D card
- Load into the take-off/landing traning, so you end up in a Coriolis station for reasonable and repeatable load (you can't easily replicate a busy RES)
- Ctrl-F to flip up the frame rate. Note frame rate at normal cpu speed.
- Overclock the cpu using Bios tool etc, just mildly (+5% or so; I am simplifying this step a lot since there are many different tools and motherboards etc)
- Repeat Coriolis station environment test, note frame rate. It should be the same, or faster (not slower)

- If the cpu was limiting your framerate at the lower clock speed, then you'll see an increase now you're mildly overclocked (your graphics card is waiting for new geometry data from the cpu for each frame).
- If the frame rate stays the same, your 1080 is the limiting factor (unlikely, even at high settings so long as in-game SS is at 1.0 and not using the debug tool).
- Consequently, any time you increase a detail setting and the frame rate drops, you know the 1080GTX is the limiting factor.

 

[Karnath]

The question is are you having problems running ED in VR with your current set up ?

Personally I wouldn't think you would unless your cranking up super sampling, remember back to when we used to try and squeeze some extra performance out of the DK2's it was recommended you switch physics to be handled by the CPU in the Nvidia control panel. Well I've still stuck by this rule just in case it still makes a difference.

FYI I have a i7 5820K and 16GB DDR4 2400Mhz with a Titan X and if I start messing around with SS to much it causes performance issues and your card s far faster than mine

BTW Ctrl-F will still display your FPS on the screen of the second window, give me some shout if you want to compare some like for like settings


If you use programs like afterburner etc you can easily log or monitor your CPU and graphic card usage

 

[Xebec]

To be honest, your cpu probably isn't really your bottleneck in VR. It' s Haswell 3.4GHz, up to 3.9Ghz; no slouch, even when left at stock speeds.

It probably is the technical bottleneck, but with a 1080GTX and a 3.5GHz or faster cpu, you've got the best VR experience right there.
Anything faster will only be incremental; you might spend money and not even notice a difference.

You could upgrade cpu, motherboard and RAM to future-proof your PC, but its a fair whack of money to spend for arguably little payback in frame rate.

Easiest way to check imo;
- Go back to 2D monitor as main output,
- Turn off V-Sync so you see the real fps output of the 3D card
- Load into the take-off/landing traning, so you end up in a Coriolis station for reasonable and repeatable load (you can't easily replicate a busy RES)
- Ctrl-F to flip up the frame rate. Note frame rate at normal cpu speed.
- Overclock the cpu using Bios tool etc, just mildly (+5% or so; I am simplifying this step a lot since there are many different tools and motherboards etc)
- Repeat Coriolis station environment test, note frame rate. It should be the same, or faster (not slower)

- If the cpu was limiting your framerate at the lower clock speed, then you'll see an increase now you're mildly overclocked (your graphics card is waiting for new geometry data from the cpu for each frame).
- If the frame rate stays the same, your 1080 is the limiting factor (unlikely, even at high settings so long as in-game SS is at 1.0 and not using the debug tool).
- Consequently, any time you increase a detail setting and the frame rate drops, you know the 1080GTX is the limiting factor.

This ^^^.

I think a 4790k would be faster than a 6800k stock for Elite VR. Most likely No motherboard or ram change required. The 4790k and 6700k are neck and neck in games also.

The other option if your motherboard supports it is a i7-5775c. 128mb l4 cache makes this a beast and faster than even 6700k for games despite lower click speeds (see tech reports review of the 5775c and 6700k).

 

[Cybermykl]

I currently have a MSI gaming MB with 8 core cpu and twin frozr 980 gtx graphics with 16 gb ram overclocked at 4.6 mhz and running highest setting in ED and my fans barely turn 580 to 600 rpm staying a modest 60 deg C. I've used Heaven to test and the graphics are superb with framerates in the 100-200 fps range. I should think that it would run VR with no problems at all.

 

[shadragon]

I've always contended that CPU, GPU, memory and motherboard are equal partners in performance. Cheap out on any one and you'll impact performance.

As Robert Maynard said Zen is coming out Q4 and I'll be getting one of those, although I'm hoping for 16 cores to be honest. I'll be getting the Zen CPU, new AM4 motherboard and DDR4 RAM with (hopefully) an 1180 GPU to run my Vive. Can't be more specific about performance until I see details on Zen numbers and mobo.

 

[Nerwan]

So, I need to know. Would upgrading my CPU (currently i7-4770) to something like a i7-6800k and getting faster memory (currently 1600hz - 32gb) help to speed up VR ? I have a 1080gtx (overclocked).

Does ED make full use of all cores efficiently ?

I don't have VR but there's an easy way to find out if you need more CPU power. Simply open task manager and look at your cores using the graph. Now go and do some VR stuff. Did your CPU become heavily loaded (i.e. 100% on the graph for any of the cores)? If the answer is no then a better CPU will not help. My guess is that this will be the case since I doubt VR is a CPU bottle-necked activity. I'd have thought it'd be GPU intensive.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I've always contended that CPU, GPU, memory and motherboard are equal partners in performance. Cheap out on any one and you'll impact performance

This is usually not the case with any performance issue. Almost all performance problems come down to the problem of a bottleneck... a piece of hardware (or sometimes software) that can't keep up with everything else and slows down the whole system. For years sales people have sold people new laptops on the basis that the old one was slow.. They bought a new processor, they bought new graphics hardware, they bought a new and shiny case. And yet for many years now, the bottleneck that made laptops slow in almost all cases was the disk. Because that had been the bottleneck for a long time. I imagine VR also has a bottleneck.

Of course.. once you remove a bottleneck you can sometimes hit another bottleneck in a different area but that really depends on the application and generally there's going to be one component which is most likely to be the hold up.

 

[shadragon]

Almost all performance problems come down to the problem of a bottleneck... a piece of hardware (or sometimes software) that can't keep up with everything else and slows down the whole system

Yup and the hardware that causes those issues is (pause for dramatic effect) CPU, GPU, memory and motherboard. Poorly designed software causing bottlenecks (like games that do not use multi-cores) are beyond a PC designers control.

 

[Nerwan]

CPU, GPU, memory and motherboard

I'd have to do some measurements on wait times in perfmon, but like I say, I'd be surprised if CPU is a bottleneck for VR.. Until you measure you can't really know.