Dont know if this is a bottleneck

[Theoniblade86]

Hello i built a pc with a ryzen 7 1700x a ati rx 580 and 24 gigs of ram. I forget the motherboard i also have windows 10 anywho whrn ever i play farcry 5 i am only getting 24 to 30 fps in benchmark and ingame should i be getting more oh and also it is the 8 gig model of my grafic card i am playing on ultra if anyone has any ideas i would greatly apprecite it

[minibois]

Just check GPU and CPU performance in Task Manager and you will see either they are both hitting 100%, or only one is. That way you know what is holding back what in this specific scenario.

 

[Fasauceome]

It's possible that ultra is too demanding for your graphics card, as it is only a mid range card.

[schwellmo92]

It's your graphics card you'll need to turn down some settings.

[wojtepanik]

try different ram config, for ddr4 24gb is strange

[TH3R34P3R]

what resolution? and yeah, settings should be turned down in at least some areas. 

[AngryBeaver]

1 hour ago, wojtepanik said:

try different ram config, for ddr4 24gb is strange

It isn't that strange 8x8x4x4. I think being a ryzen system the speed of the ram is what is more important. If he is using 2133 or 2400 then that would hurt his FPS a decent bit compared to 3000 or faster.

 

There is also the fact that running ultra on that card is probably a little too demanding.

[OdinSword]

like most people here, it seems that ultra is just too much for the card

[wojtepanik]

20 hours ago, AngryBeaver said:

It isn't that strange 8x8x4x4. I think being a ryzen system the speed of the ram is what is more important. If he is using 2133 or 2400 then that would hurt his FPS a decent bit compared to 3000 or faster.

 

There is also the fact that running ultra on that card is probably a little too demanding.

8 and 16gb on each channel isn't opitmal way, I quess they need to symetrical...

[AngryBeaver]

58 minutes ago, wojtepanik said:

8 and 16gb on each channel isn't opitmal way, I quess they need to symetrical...

Please direct me to something that shows that? There shouldn't be any noticeable difference in that scenario as long as they are on different channels.

[Paul Rudd]

On 12/12/2018 at 9:18 AM, Theoninlade86 said:

24 gigs of ram

Sell the non needed 8GB of RAM while the price is skyrocketed right now. You will lose no performance whatsoever and people will pay top dollar for it. You won't need that extra 8GB of RAM for the next 5-10 years, minimum. No clue why you would go with 24GB of RAM in 2018. Especially in Far Cry 5...

Make sure you keep 16GB of dual channel RAM in your PC though. 12GB is needed in many other games but no more than 16GB is needed at all.

 

Set the following graphic settings to these settings in Far Cry 5 to improve performance.

• Texture Filtering: Set to high no matter what. Not a major performance hit there at all.
• Shadows: Try out normal here, you gain major fps in doing so. Put on high if shadows are important to you but you're fps will drop in a major way.
• Geometry and Vegetation: Set to low for major fps gain but medium is recommended for better visual fidelity. Try high if you want but you're hitting fps.
• Environment: Highest fps hit in the game. Go as low as you can then work your way up to no higher than High. Set to low for major fps gain.
• Water: Ultra. We all want our water looking the best. This impacts fps big time so if you're looking for last resort fps gains, this is where you'll find them.
• Terrain: Very little performance hit, set to Ultra in 4k or 1440p and Very High in 1080p.
• Volumetric Fog: Taxing on GPU, set to low. Major performance gain here.
• Anti-Aliasing: Set to SMAA. Had you had an NVidia GPU, then TAA is what you would go for(in Far Cry 5).
• Motion Blur: Has no impact on performance. Most people prefer to turn it off in Far Cry 5 but it's personal preference.

[wojtepanik]

10 hours ago, AngryBeaver said:

Please direct me to something that shows that? There shouldn't be any noticeable difference in that scenario as long as they are on different channels.

https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-downside-of-mixing-differently-sized-RAM-modules

[AngryBeaver]

3 hours ago, wojtepanik said:

https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-downside-of-mixing-differently-sized-RAM-modules

This is a source very similar to these forums. So let me explain what I think you are misunderstanding.

 

If we are talking dual channel memory then you have 2 channels x 2. These are normally color coded on your motherboard. So if you mix different sizes of ram on the same slot say an 8gb and a 4gb then you will have a few issues. First off on most motherboards this will go in to flex mode... so in windows you would see 12gb of ram, but in theory it is best to use 8gb or less. So in flex mode anytime the ram usages is less than 8gb you would be in dual channel mode, but as soon as it goes over 8gb you would drop back to single channel to access the additional ram.

 

Now if you run matching sizes, but different speeds it will revert back to the lowest speed stick you have. This also goes for 4 stick configs.

 

Now if you have 2 8 gig sticks in one channel and 2 4 gigs in the other channel then all will play nice and you will stay in dual channel mode... now if you ran say 8x8x8x4 then you would run into the flex scenario again.

 

The biggest reason this whole thing even got started was because of ram compatibility with other non-paired sets. Sometimes you can have 2 sticks of ram from the same brand,speed,type,etc and they will refuse to work together... that is why the manufacturers started selling all of the various matched set sizes. Now I haven't seen this occur very often, but it does happen from time to time. So that is normally where this stims. It is just best practice for maximum compatibility to run similar sticks of ram.

 

TLDR - 2 Different sizes of ram do not matter as long as the channels match. So 8x8 and 4x4 will work at full speed,  8x8 8x4 would not run at full speed at all times. When mixing ram the speed of the slowest stick will be used. 

[AngryBeaver]

12 hours ago, A Random Dude said:

Sell the non needed 8GB of RAM while the price is skyrocketed right now. You will lose no performance whatsoever and people will pay top dollar for it. You won't need that extra 8GB of RAM for the next 5-10 years, minimum. No clue why you would go with 24GB of RAM in 2018. Especially in Far Cry 5...

Make sure you keep 16GB of dual channel RAM in your PC though. 12GB is needed in many other games but no more than 16GB is needed at all.

 

Set the following graphic settings to these settings in Far Cry 5 to improve performance.

• Texture Filtering: Set to high no matter what. Not a major performance hit there at all.
• Shadows: Try out normal here, you gain major fps in doing so. Put on high if shadows are important to you but you're fps will drop in a major way.
• Geometry and Vegetation: Set to low for major fps gain but medium is recommended for better visual fidelity. Try high if you want but you're hitting fps.
• Environment: Highest fps hit in the game. Go as low as you can then work your way up to no higher than High. Set to low for major fps gain.
• Water: Ultra. We all want our water looking the best. This impacts fps big time so if you're looking for last resort fps gains, this is where you'll find them.
• Terrain: Very little performance hit, set to Ultra in 4k or 1440p and Very High in 1080p.
• Volumetric Fog: Taxing on GPU, set to low. Major performance gain here.
• Anti-Aliasing: Set to SMAA. Had you had an NVidia GPU, then TAA is what you would go for(in Far Cry 5).
• Motion Blur: Has no impact on performance. Most people prefer to turn it off in Far Cry 5 but it's personal preference.

You might not "NEED" it, but the more ram you have then the more windows will use to speed up and store applications you access frequently. There are also other scenarios where that ram can be handy like VM's or if you want to run 20+ chrome tabs on one monitor while gaming on the other. So while in most games there is no performance benefit to having more than 16gb of ram... it also doesn't mean that ram won't be used in other ways that increase the users experience.

[Paul Rudd]

1 hour ago, AngryBeaver said:

You might not "NEED" it, but the more ram you have then the more windows will use to speed up and store applications you access frequently. There are also other scenarios where that ram can be handy like VM's or if you want to run 20+ chrome tabs on one monitor while gaming on the other. So while in most games there is no performance benefit to having more than 16gb of ram... it also doesn't mean that ram won't be used in other ways that increase the users experience.

• Most gamers don't care one bit about storing applications to speed up Windows by a few seconds. I even clear my standby memory to get better performance in games when it fills up around once a week.
• I have zero reason to run 20+ Chrome tabs on one monitor while gaming on the other. 16GB is more than enough for 10+ tabs and I still wouldn't use more than 5-6 tabs. I rarely even use the other monitor while I'm gaming in general because I own an i5. I have a gigantic 4K TV 10 feet to my left for video.
• I don't even know what VM stands for, let alone care to use whatever it benefits.
• In ALL games there is no performance benefit. Name one game that I play that 24GB of RAM benefits me more than 16GB of RAM. I currently own over 589 PC games. I may own the one game you can come up with and I'd love to test out my experience with 16GB in that game.
• I'd also love to hear one way 24GB of RAM benefits 2 out of 10 random gamers in a way one would describe as an increase in their experience over what 16GB of RAM brings them.

[wojtepanik]

4 hours ago, A Random Dude said:

• Most gamers don't care one bit about storing applications to speed up Windows by a few seconds. I even clear my standby memory to get better performance in games when it fills up around once a week.
• I have zero reason to run 20+ Chrome tabs on one monitor while gaming on the other. 16GB is more than enough for 10+ tabs and I still wouldn't use more than 5-6 tabs. I rarely even use the other monitor while I'm gaming in general because I own an i5. I have a gigantic 4K TV 10 feet to my left for video.
• I don't even know what VM stands for, let alone care to use whatever it benefits.
• In ALL games there is no performance benefit. Name one game that I play that 24GB of RAM benefits me more than 16GB of RAM. I currently own over 589 PC games. I may own the one game you can come up with and I'd love to test out my experience with 16GB in that game.
• I'd also love to hear one way 24GB of RAM benefits 2 out of 10 random gamers in a way one would describe as an increase in their experience over what 16GB of RAM brings them.

pubg in first days used all ram it could xd running cities skylines is also ram hungry, especially with high amount of mods and assets

 

[JabroniBaloney]

21 hours ago, A Random Dude said:

Sell the non needed 8GB of RAM while the price is skyrocketed right now. 

 

RAM prices have been coming down.

[Paul Rudd]

3 hours ago, wojtepanik said:

pubg in first days used all ram it could xd running cities skylines is also ram hungry, especially with high amount of mods and assets

And PUBG nowadays?

 

PUBG Minimum System Requirements

Processor: Intel Core i5-4430 / AMD FX-6300
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB / AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB 
Dedicated VRAM: 2 GB

 

PUBG Recommended System Requirements

Processor: Intel Core i5-6600K / AMD Ryzen 5 1600
Memory: 16 GB RAM
Graphics: NVidia GeForce GTX 1060 3GB / AMD Radeon RX 580 4GB

Dedicated VRAM: 3 GB (4 GB AMD)

 

Cities Skylines Minimum System Requirements

 

Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo, 3.0GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+, 3.2GHz

Memory: 4 GB RAM

Graphics: NVidia GeForce GTX 260, 512 MB or ATI Radeon HD 5670, 512 MB

 

Cities Skylines Recommended System Requirements

 

Processor: Intel Core i5-3470, 3.20GHz or AMD FX-6300, 3.5Ghz

Memory: 6 GB RAM

Graphics: Nvidia GeForce GTX 660, 2 GB or AMD Radeon HD 7870, 2 GB

 

I'm not seeing it here Lloyd... 1:18 mark of the video is Cities Skylines. If you throw in 24GB vs 16GB you will see much of the same, even when heavily modding the game. It's pretty much the same story with PUBG.

If you think an extra $50.00-$75.00 is worth 107 fps instead of 100 fps I don't know what to tell you. This is just going from 8GB to 16GB. When you jump from 16GB to 24GB the fps difference is almost identical in PUBG and Cities Skylines. As well as any other game you throw at it. Listen to the 4:32-5:39 mark of the first video. Even when you're into content creation, 16GB is all that you need. 

[Paul Rudd]

39 minutes ago, JabroniBaloney said:

RAM prices have been coming down.

$54.00-$73.00 for 1 8GB stick is coming down? It's been like that for over a year now.

[AngryBeaver]

28 minutes ago, A Random Dude said:

And PUBG nowadays?

 

PUBG Minimum System Requirements

Processor: Intel Core i5-4430 / AMD FX-6300
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB / AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB 
Dedicated VRAM: 2 GB

 

PUBG Recommended System Requirements

Processor: Intel Core i5-6600K / AMD Ryzen 5 1600
Memory: 16 GB RAM
Graphics: NVidia GeForce GTX 1060 3GB / AMD Radeon RX 580 4GB

Dedicated VRAM: 3 GB (4 GB AMD)

 

Cities Skylines Minimum System Requirements

 

Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo, 3.0GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+, 3.2GHz

Memory: 4 GB RAM

Graphics: NVidia GeForce GTX 260, 512 MB or ATI Radeon HD 5670, 512 MB

 

Cities Skylines Recommended System Requirements

 

Processor: Intel Core i5-3470, 3.20GHz or AMD FX-6300, 3.5Ghz

Memory: 6 GB RAM

Graphics: Nvidia GeForce GTX 660, 2 GB or AMD Radeon HD 7870, 2 GB

 

I'm not seeing it here Lloyd... 1:18 mark of the video is Cities Skylines. If you throw in 24GB vs 16GB you will see much of the same, even when heavily modding the game. It's pretty much the same story with PUBG.

If you think an extra $50.00-$75.00 is worth 107 fps instead of 100 fps I don't know what to tell you. This is just going from 8GB to 16GB. When you jump from 16GB to 24GB the fps difference is almost identical in PUBG and Cities Skylines. As well as any other game you throw at it. Listen to the 4:32 mark of the first video. Even when you're into content creation, 16GB is all that you need.

The point is there IS a performance benefit even if small. You are the one that said their was no benefit and to proof if, he proved it and now you are saying it isn't good enough?

 

The truth is ram usage will go up over the years not down. Some games do take advantage of it and windows certainly can. Also if I remember correctly I think the recommendation is to have at least 2x ram to vram. So if you have an 11gb video card the next step for most dual channel setups would be 32gb of ram.

 

All of this aside ram amount is up to the user and what they feel they need and can come down to many factors. I think saying he should remove the rest because YOU feel it is unnecessary is pretty foolish. Like I said as long as he is matching the ram size for the channels he will not have any downsides.

 

*Edit* Also just so you know windows will adjust to the amount of memory you have. So I could play games with only 4gb of memory if I wanted, but as soon as it needs to access Virtual Memory I am going to see my FPS plummet. Now you can reduce this some with a extremely fast m.2, but if you are willing to spend that money on an m.2 you would have more ram anyways. Plus the m.2 would still be slower than the ram and also have a much higher latency.

[wojtepanik]

when usiing Vega IGPU, the difference between ram speed might be as high as 17% between 2400mhz and 3600mhz, it depends on the application

36 minutes ago, A Random Dude said:

Cities Skylines Minimum System Requirements

 

Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo, 3.0GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+, 3.2GHz

Memory: 4 GB RAM

Graphics: NVidia GeForce GTX 260, 512 MB or ATI Radeon HD 5670, 512 MB

 

during loading screen cities alone, without mods for me is using 12gb of 16gb totall in my system, during nomal game it uses 6-9gb 

[Paul Rudd]

10 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

You are the one that said their was no benefit and to proof if, he proved it and now you are saying it isn't good enough?

Nowhere near good enough. Nowhere near it. You're talking about a difference that does not make someone go out and install an extra 8GB stick of RAM.

10 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

The truth is ram usage will go up over the years not down.

Years, plural. You should have went with decade. In 10 years, 16GB will still be all that you NEED. And even if for some reason(I've still yet to care for this reason) you want to throw in another 8GB of RAM into your PC in 2025 and beyond. If you haven't created the amount of money it takes to do that in 2025, I have no words to describe that situation.

10 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

Some games do take advantage of it

WHAT GAMES?

10 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

windows certainly can

How? Where? When? For what?

10 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

Also if I remember correctly I think the recommendation is to have at least 2x ram to vram. So if you have an 11gb video card the next step for most dual channel setups would be 32gb of ram.

Where on earth did you hear this nonsense?

10 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

All of this aside ram amount is up to the user and what they feel they need and can come down to many factors. I think saying he should remove the rest because YOU feel it is unnecessary is pretty foolish. Like I said as long as he is matching the ram size for the channels he will not have any downsides.

Definitely. And you nailed it on the head with what I feel they should do. This is just from my experience with 16GB of RAM gaming. The stutter free gaming I get from every single game I play is all I ever need. I have yet to even upgrade my i5. Foolish is upgrading to a 4.0-5.0 GHz CPU just for a few dozen fps. And the downside of 24GB over 16GB of RAM is that all that RAM will go to waste for a very longgggg time. Just my opinion. Take it with a grain of salt if you wish. Forget about it even. 

[Paul Rudd]

18 minutes ago, wojtepanik said:

during loading screen cities alone, without mods for me is using 12gb of 16gb totall in my system, during nomal game it uses 6-9gb

Does it ever hit 13GB? 14GB? 15GB? Do you ever feel like paying $75.00 for an extra 8GB just for Cities Skylines?

[AngryBeaver]

29 minutes ago, A Random Dude said:

Nowhere near good enough. Nowhere near it. You're talking about a difference that does not make someone go out and install an extra 8GB stick of RAM.

For some people that matters. If you want the best FPS you can get and have the money for it... then why not?

 

29 minutes ago, A Random Dude said:

Years, plural. You should have went with decade. In 10 years, 16GB will still be all that you NEED. And even if for some reason(I've still yet to care for this reason) you want to throw in another 8GB of RAM into your PC in 2025 and beyond. If you haven't created the amount of money it takes to do that in 2025, I have no words to describe that situation

This is your guesstimate. The truth is the consumer space is shifting drastically. We are seeing much higher core counts which allows for greater multi-tasking and this is going to cause shifts on the gaming side of things as well. So I don't expect it to be a decade. I actually suspect in 2-3 years we will be seeing games that are taking advantage of the new features released in the last year or so. So more Dx12 games, games that are extremely hyper-threaded and more 4k and higher resolution textures. All of this will be things that can go in to ram to reduce loading time for items. Things are going to get bigger fast as we see more and more extreme resolution pushes.

 

29 minutes ago, A Random Dude said:

windows certainly can

Windows 10 will actually try to keep your ram usage at about 50% at all times when not gaming. Which allows you to access items much more quickly and it enhances the user experience. Then you have VM's (Virtual Machines since you didn't know what it meant earlier). You might think these aren't important or used that often, but the truth is they are seeing much more use than they use to. If you are in the tech field at all you will use them at the very least in school for certain courses. Then you have multi-tasking (which you don't put much stock in either apparently). Then you have people who do video editing or 3d Modeling/creation.

29 minutes ago, A Random Dude said:

Where on earth did you hear this nonsense?

When I say Vram I mean Video Ram, not Virtual Ram. After doing a little more digging it looks like this isn't really the case anymore. I think I read an article on this about a year or two ago and figured it was still the case for these cards, but apparently lots of optimizations and driver updates have fixed high ram usage.

 

So how it was working at the time was it would keep almost equal amounts of information in ram so it could quickly send this to the GPU instead of just taking the system ram mostly out of the equation. Now though it works in the opposite fashion. So if you had say a 3gb card you would have much higher ram usage than a 11gb card. Wish I could find the date all of this flipped

 

29 minutes ago, A Random Dude said:

Definitely. And you nailed it on the head with what I feel they should do. This is just from my experience with 16GB of RAM gaming. The stutter free gaming I get from every single game I play is all I ever need. I have yet to even upgrade my i5. Foolish is upgrading to a 4.0-5.0 GHz CPU just for a few dozen fps. And the downside of 24GB over 16GB of RAM is that all that RAM will go to waste for a very longgggg time. Just my opinion. Take it with a grain of salt if you wish. Forget about it even.

You are entitled to your opinion. Just remember it is yours and don't try to push for other people to have that same opinion. If someone already has 24gb of ram suggesting they pull 8gb of it isn't exactly logical. Now if they were purchasing you would have an argument.

[AngryBeaver]

29 minutes ago, A Random Dude said:

Does it ever hit 13GB? 14GB? 15GB? Do you ever feel like paying $75.00 for an extra 8GB just for Cities Skylines?

FYI. I can buy a 16gb set of DDR3000 ram for $99. Your pricing seems off to me.