CPU/Mobo upgrade for Triple screen rig

So I recently bought GTX 980 Ti and I'm having some strange FPS issues which could be because of CPU bottleneck (but without high CPU usage). Don't know if that's even possible but since I've already planned CPU upgrade for near future I may as well do it earlier just to see if it makes any difference.

But this is the moment when things gets tricky. It is really hard to decide what CPU is enough but not overkill when using 5760x1080 resolution. Because the stress for CPU is much smaller on higher res. Ofcourse it would be possible to choose some high end i7 but what's the benefit if not running lower resolutions at all?

In case of motherboard I'll need tons of USB's, good quality components, ATX layout, nice sound card and not so much overclocking abilities.

So I have two questions for you:

1. Which CPU do you think is the best bang for buck in triple screen/high resolution rig?

2. Which Mobo would fit my needs?

Thanks for advices! I'm open for AMD / Intel but please let's not do CPU manufacturer warz this time.

 

I think you'll get as many opinions as there are suns in the galaxy

My personal experiences, and I am in no way an expert on putting hardware together, is that my previous setup had an FX8350 with two R7 290X's in Crossfire that suffered from major stutters. With my limited knowledge and a little bit of researching I headed down the Intel route with an up to date (at the time) I7 5820K, the reasoning behind this was the "dedicated" Pcie lanes on the processor which I perceived would help out with the stutters. I also was thinking in terms of other processing jobs such as video production with Premiere and After Effects etc. Anyway, the stutters are gone and AC runs nice and smooth - and I'm not knocking AMD versus Intel/Nvidia etc.... - as do the Adobe Suite softwares. I finished up getting a package with the I7 (already overclocked to 4.4 and with water cooling), DDR4 Ram and an Asus X99 deluxe m/board. The m/board has plenty of USB 3.0 hubs. Maybe a post at overclockers might give you some good ideas and maybe @Kunos can jump in and give you some idea of where the bottlenecks need widening as they should know the ins and outs of how their code is processed.

It really depends on what other things you are planning to do with the system, the most demanding software should set the spec imho with some future proofing too. Next gen gpu and cpu's aren't that far away, maybe it's worth waiting a while.

One other thing I would mention, but I'm biased on this, is to maybe think about using a DAC instead of a sound card. I thought I'd give it a shot on the current pc build. Admittedly I've spent a fair bit on studio monitors and a sub but it sounds so much better than any sound card I've ever used and m/boards generally have pretty good audio on board now. I just run an optical digital out of the on board sound and into the DAC. The next project for me is to update that and go for 5.1

Good luck and have fun putting your system together.

 

Depends on your budget. If you have a "medium" budget, get a 4690K or 6600k and a cheaper (but overlooking capable) motherboard.

I run a HEDT (High-End Desktop Line) system myself but it's honestly not needed for the vast majority.

 

I'm only a simmer and don't have time and interest for other games so my PC is built for driving only. That's why I even don't have a place for mouse and keyboard in my rig..

Thanks for the advices. It was an interesting reading.

I think I'm usually somewhere between mid and high-end. I was looking for 6600K and 4690K but wasn't sure if it's enough for simming needs. My couple of last builds have been AMD powered so I'm not feeling very comfortable with Intel line-up.

 

From what I've read the i5 is plenty powerful enough for gaming. When I built my system I went for a 4670k and I think it will last for my next graphics card upgrade as well (I'm on a Gtx 780 with triple 1080p monitors currently) as it's a powerhouse. It's running at 4 GHz and I never have CPU issues

 

I run 980Ti with triple and I have noticed that 2 graphic options can lead to FPS issues: 1 - Reflection rendering frequency (mine is low), 2 - Glare quality (mine is high). Also DOF for replay can trouble the FPS, so I set it to high as well.

Other options are on max (AA 4x, AF 16x and FXAA on, Vsync On). I have 60FPS at start on multi.

 

At the moment I can almost get stable 60FPS when everything maxed out but the troubles start when I'm trying to lower settings to achieve my target. Lowering graphics settings does not give me any FPS boost but lower GPU usage instead.

Ironically when I found the issue for the first time the it was worst in rF2 (load sometimes close to 30%) but now it's the only sim working perfectly with stable +90% load and +100 frames per second. Firestrike also gets very nice results in-line with other users.

 

Both systems that Sleepservice and Spinelli would be my choice, not from a gamers stand point.

if going down the route of SLI, I would lean more towards spinelli system with the option of upgrading to m.2/pci-e storage @ a later date.
X16 X16 Gpu, X4 PCI-e (m.2) and still have 4 lanes free to do what you want with.(Maybe PCI-E USB3.1 Adapter for VR)

Single GPU, with option of upgrading to m.2/pci-e storage then Sleepservice would be my cheapest option and as you say it best bang for buck.

Anyhoo don't take my advice as I don't do triple screens.
Just something to ponder.

 

CPU does seem to have a big effect in AC as far as I can tell. For example my i5 2500k OC'd to a heavy 4.9 GHz with a single 980 vs Andrew_WOT's i7 5930k with a single 980, with both our 980s running at 1530 MHz OC to keep the GPUs on a level playing field... when running the same settings he has a noticeably huge advantage over me.

- My bench at 4k -

AC VERSION: 1.4.3 (x64)
POINTS: 9566
FPS: AVG=65 MIN=6 MAX=198 VARIANCE=2 CPU=31%

LOADING TIME: 34s
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (3840x2160)
OS-Version: 6.1.7601 (Service Pack 1) 0x300-0x1
CPU CORES: 4
FULLSCREEN: ON
AA:4X AF:16X SHDW:2048 BLUR:0
WORLD DETAIL: 5 SMOKE:1
PP: QLT:5 HDR:1 FXAA:0 GLR:5 DOF:5 RAYS:1 HEAT:1

- Andrew's bench at 4k -

AC VERSION: 1.4.3 (x64)
POINTS: 10836
FPS: AVG=73 MIN=4 MAX=147 VARIANCE=0 CPU=28%

LOADING TIME: 14s
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (3840x2160)
OS-Version: 6.2.9200 () 0x300-0x1
CPU CORES: 12
FULLSCREEN: ON
AA:4X AF:16X SHDW:4096 BLUR:0
WORLD DETAIL: 5 SMOKE:1
PP: QLT:5 HDR:1 FXAA:0 GLR:5 DOF:5 RAYS:1 HEAT:1


So yeah, I'd say go for an i7 if you have the budget for it as it will future proof you pretty nicely as well as keeping you satisfied for now. As far as mobo I'd suggest asus boards since they usually have a ton of features crammed into them.

 

Just tried Tom Clancy's The Division which was bundled with the GPU and holy sheit how good looking and smooth image can be. No signs of bottleneck even the CPU loads looked quite heavily stressed. GPU usage stayed perfectly stable in 98% when not using V-sync or frame capping. Dreaming of a similar ( https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B17D_jHma1bfc191ckx0VTBXQTg/view?usp=sharing ) experience in AC, DiRT Rally or in ETS2 so this thread would be absolutely pointless.

Anyway, Thanks for the replies so far! You guys have made myself a lot more confident about the possible upgrade. Keep it coming...

 

Check this post. https://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/i...ics-and-ff-frequency.31453/page-4#post-667481
Stefano explains how to find out if AC is CPU bound.

 

For reference my GTX 980 Classified usage during AC run (4k)

 

4690k and 6600k are pretty much the fastest CPUs money can buy. They are the non-hyperthreaded versions of the 4790k and 6700k which are pretty-much the fastest CPUs around and the 5930k is more-or-less a 4790k with 2 more cores. Basically they're all pretty much the same.

 

The best compromises cost/performance for me at the moment are:
CPU: i7 5820k
MoBo: MSI X99A

 

Just ordered i5-6600K.

I'll do some pre-after benchmarking between these builds and will report my findings.

Thanks for the advices!

 

Although it's too late, my 980 is also fired by an old 3770K at base clock for triples, so it should be enough.

 

First impressions are really good. Seems to me like everything sped up nicely. Did notice a nice fps increase ( because of the stable 98% GPU load ) but will do proper benchmark tests soon.

Ps. Bloody h*ll MSI Fast Boot function is FAST. It literally takes just a few seconds to start up the PC! O_O

Edit: This is a good example of what I think is fast:

 

I have tested 5760x1080 on 2 systems:
1. GTX 970 + i3 4150 and an
2. R9 290 + i5 4670k @ 4.4GHz

All other things are equal on those systems.

Both systems perform nearly identical when you have 12 or less AI on the road as far as average FPS goes. Once you have more than 12, the i3 begins to have reduced average FPS. Also, although rare the i3 system has very slight but noticeable stutter perhaps once every two laps lasting for less than a second.
The i3 never gets more than 80% overall CPU usage but this doesn't mean is not loaded 100%. For example, if I run 7-zip with two threads, Windows and MSI Afterburner report only 2 virtual cores loaded 100%, 2 virtual cores loaded 0% and an overall 50% CPU load which is very misleading, the CPU is really loaded 100% since it is a 2-core CPU (4 virtual cores). I suspect AC's CPU usage report is similarly misleading. The same 7-zip test on the i5 gives identical results (2 at 100%, 2 at 0% and overall 50%), although they are believable since its a true 4 core CPU.

You have a 980Ti which should tilt the bottleneck a bit further from the GPU than my 970 or 290 systems, thus benefiting further from a faster processor.

On this day and age, I would not recommend going lower than a i5 4790k or 6600k. If you go lower, the price difference is not that great and I can guarantee you will very soon want to have a DeLorean to go back in time and redo your purchase.