Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
dfsgsfa

i5 2500 100% load at 4k youtube

Recommended Posts

Posted · Original PosterOP

yes chrome as browser., and playback is quite choppy

will better gpu help?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dfsgsfa said:

yes chrome as browser., and playback is quite choppy

will better gpu help?

That depends. What is your current GPU, OS, Browser (version)?


Main: AMD Ryzen 3 1200, Nvidia GTX 780, 16 GB 2667 MT/s DDR4

Secondary: Intel Xeon X5670, Nvidia GTX 660, 24 GB 1333 MT/s DDR3

Server: Intel Xeon X5670, 60 GB 1333 MT/s DDR3-R

Laptop: Intel Core i5-3320M, 16 GB 1600 MT/s DDR3

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dfsgsfa said:

yes chrome as browser., and playback is quite choppy

will better gpu help?

 

Not really, a better GPU isn't going to help you much if the CPU is being a bottleneck, some video streaming platforms are more CPU intensive and don't use that much GPU. Would consider upgrading your CPU if you are looking for better video playback, there are some streaming platforms which can take advantage of GPU decoding, although most tasks in your browser will be dependent significantly on your CPU.

 

Have you enabled hardware acceleration in your browser, if not try enabling hardware acceleration in your browser and see if that helps your playback performance?


Hope this information post was helpful  ?,

        @Boomwebsearch 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I5-2500 does not have hardware decode support for modern Youtube videos (VP9 decoding), so it has to use "brute force". An AMD Polaris or newer (ie RX 480), or an NVIDIA Maxwell or newer (ie GTX 960) GPU will provide the hardware decode support that you lack.


BabyBlu (Primary Rig): 

  • Intel Core i9 9900K @ Per Core 5.2Ghz - 5.2Ghz - 5.2Ghz - 5.2Ghz - 5.1Ghz - 5.1Ghz - 5.0Ghz - 5.0Ghz
  • Asus Maximus XI Hero
  • G.Skill Trident Z RGB 4x8GB DDR4-3200 CL14 @ 4000Mhz 17-18-18-35
  • MSI RTX 2080 Sea Hawk EK X
  • Phanteks Evolv X
  • 3x ADATA Ultimate SU800 1TB (RAID 0), Samsung 970 EVO Plus 500GB NVME
  • Corsair HX1000i
  • Dell S2417DG 23.8" 2560x1440 165 Hz Gsync
  • Custom water loop (CPU & GPU), Radiators: 1x140mm(Back), 1x280mm(Top), 1x420mm(Front)
  • Corsair Strafe RGB (Cherry MX Brown), Corsair Scimitar Elite, Corsair Void Pro RGB
  • Windows 10 Pro

Roxanne (Wife Build):

  • Intel Core i7 4790K @ Per Core 5.0Ghz - 5.0Ghz - 4.9Ghz - 4.8Ghz, De-lidded and Liquid Metaled
  • Asus Z97A
  • G.Skill Ripjaws X 4x4GB DDR3-2133 CL9 @ 2200Mhz 9-11-10-28
  • EVGA GTX 1080 FTW2 Gaming ICX
  • Corsair Vengeance C70, With Custom Side-Panel Window
  • Samsung 850 EVO 250GB, Samsung 860 EVO 1TB
  • Corsair AX760
  • Samsung C27JG56 27" 2560x1440 144Hz Curved Freesync
  • Noctua NH-U14S
  • Rosewill RK 9000V2(Cherry MX Blue), crap wireless mouse she insists on using (lol), SteelSeries Arctis 7
  • Windows 10 Pro

BlackBox (HTPC):

  • Intel Core i7 6700 slightly under-volted
  • Asus H110T/CSM Thin Mini-ITX
  • G.Skill 1x8GB DDR4-2400 SO-DIMM CL16
  • iGPU
  • Akasa Euler Fanless Solid Aluminum THIN Mini ITX Case (passively cooled)
  • Samsung 850 EVO 250GB
  • External 120W Power Adaptor
  • 4K TV
  • Passively cooled by the Akasa case. No moving parts!
  • Handheld QWERTY keyboard and trackpad.
  • Windows 10 Pro, Kodi autostarts on boot

NAS:

  • Synology DS216J
  • 2x8TB WD Red NAS HDDs in RAID 1. 8TB usable space
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
10 minutes ago, svmlegacy said:

current GPU, OS, Browser (version)?

sapphire 6850 1 gb, windows 10, lastest chrome i think

 

had got the gpu to run 4k 30fps  unnatively using quite some mods

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Boomwebsearch said:

 

Not really, a better GPU isn't going to help you much if the CPU is being a bottleneck, some video streaming platforms are more CPU intensive and don't use that much GPU. Would consider upgrading your CPU if you are looking for better video playback, there are some streaming platforms which can take advantage of GPU decoding, although most tasks in your browser will be dependent significantly on your CPU.

 

Have you enabled hardware acceleration in your browser, if not try enabling hardware acceleration in your browser and see if that helps your playback performance?

Youtube does use VP9 when it can, which can be accelerated by supported GPU's. This will offload the CPU workload substantially.

 

This is exactly how cellphones play extremely 4K youtube, while having a much inferior processor than a 2500K.


Main: AMD Ryzen 3 1200, Nvidia GTX 780, 16 GB 2667 MT/s DDR4

Secondary: Intel Xeon X5670, Nvidia GTX 660, 24 GB 1333 MT/s DDR3

Server: Intel Xeon X5670, 60 GB 1333 MT/s DDR3-R

Laptop: Intel Core i5-3320M, 16 GB 1600 MT/s DDR3

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dfsgsfa said:

sapphire 6850 1 gb, windows 10, lastest chrome i think

 

had got the gpu to run 4k 30fps  unnatively using quite some mods

Definitely you could improve the scenario by getting a GPU that can decode VP9 natively.

 

RX 400 series or newer (Polaris (GCN 4th gen), not GCN 1/2 gen arch.)

NVIDIA 900 series or newer (Maxwell, not Keplar arch.)

 

I include the arch, as some GPU's from those series (particularly low-end) use previous gen architectures, and do not support it.


Main: AMD Ryzen 3 1200, Nvidia GTX 780, 16 GB 2667 MT/s DDR4

Secondary: Intel Xeon X5670, Nvidia GTX 660, 24 GB 1333 MT/s DDR3

Server: Intel Xeon X5670, 60 GB 1333 MT/s DDR3-R

Laptop: Intel Core i5-3320M, 16 GB 1600 MT/s DDR3

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, svmlegacy said:

Youtube does use VP9 when it can, which can be accelerated by supported GPU's. This will offload the CPU workload substantially.

 

This is exactly how cellphones play extremely 4K youtube, while having a much inferior processor than a 2500K.

 

The processor of a smartphone is based on a different instruction set architecture that a computer processor (ARM instead of x86 that computers would use) since less power consumption, less heat, fewer transistors needed, smaller die size, etc. Smartphones usually have some graphics accelerators, although it is much easier to drive a high-definition video on a small tablet/phone screen than it is to do that on a larger monitor/s or TV. For these reasons, you can't really compare the 2500K or other laptop/desktop CPU to a smartphone's processor in it's ability to playback video at a certain resolution (screen size varies and more pixels need to be controlled on larger displays, different processing architecture that is efficient for the workloads that it can run, although which are more limiting in terms of what software can be run, etc).


Hope this information post was helpful  ?,

        @Boomwebsearch 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boomwebsearch said:

 

The processor of a smartphone is based on a different instruction set architecture that a computer processor (ARM instead of x86 that computers would use) since less power consumption, less heat, fewer transistors needed, smaller die size, etc. Smartphones usually have some graphics accelerators, although it is much easier to drive a high-definition video on a small tablet/phone screen than it is to do that on a larger monitor/s or TV. For these reasons, you can't really compare the 2500K or other laptop/desktop CPU to a smartphone's processor in it's ability to playback video at a certain resolution (screen size varies and more pixels need to be controlled on larger displays, different processing architecture that is efficient for the workloads that it can run, although which are more limiting in terms of what software can be run, etc).

4k60 is still 4k60. That's the signal. The display size has no affect on how easy or hard that is to process, in fact it should be easier for larger displays, as they have their own processing for the signals to drive whichever technology they use. x86 and ARM can be compared by the results they produce: 4k60. Dedicated hardware to decode is what we are talking about, and that's included in more modern GPU's than the HD 6850, and is also included on the SoC's of smartphones.


Main: AMD Ryzen 3 1200, Nvidia GTX 780, 16 GB 2667 MT/s DDR4

Secondary: Intel Xeon X5670, Nvidia GTX 660, 24 GB 1333 MT/s DDR3

Server: Intel Xeon X5670, 60 GB 1333 MT/s DDR3-R

Laptop: Intel Core i5-3320M, 16 GB 1600 MT/s DDR3

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, svmlegacy said:

4k60 is still 4k60. That's the signal. The display size has no affect on how easy or hard that is to process, in fact it should be easier for larger displays, as they have their own processing for the signals to drive whichever technology they use. x86 and ARM can be compared by the results they produce: 4k60. Dedicated hardware to decode is what we are talking about, and that's included in more modern GPU's than the HD 6850, and is also included on the SoC's of smartphones.

 

This is only true if the aspect ratios of the displays are kept the same. If you are keeping the refresh rate, resolution, and aspect ratio consistent then it won't require more processing power for larger displays, although if you are watching from the same viewing distance then the picture quality will appear worse. Having a larger display does not necessarily mean that it will have its own processing for received signals if we are speaking of tablets/smartphones, for computer monitors that is controlled by drivers for your monitor which run off the connected computer (depends on the monitor but most modern digital monitors have their own processing for received video signals), and modern TVs mostly need to have their own processing to display signals since the possibility of being connected to display outputs which don't support decoding (an antenna for example).


Hope this information post was helpful  ?,

        @Boomwebsearch 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP

i got  a rx570 into the same sys, cpu usage is still high, 60~80% in most 4k youtubes, 100% in gamernexus and lags....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×