Question about the connection between CPU, GPU (VRAM) and RAM usage

[kirnale]

Hello guys!

I have bought a new GPU lately and I could see a few changes to GPU usage. But there is something strange that surprised me. While I initially thought a brand new GPU would reduce my overall GPU usage (in %), which it does, I could also see a less usage of my CPU, a lot less actually. I was thinking because my old GPU have low VRAM, but someone told me it does not affect the CPU that way. I initially though the additional load would go to the CPU/RAM und thus overload the CPU usage. But I can't confirm it technically.

The game I played was Dragon Quest 11.

On a GTX 770 2gb I had 100% usage of both CPU and GPU on the lowest settings.

On a GTX 1070 8 gb I had a usage of 40-50% on both CPU and GPU on the highest settings.

Can someone explain why I have less CPU usage with a stronger GPU? The only thing that changed was my GPU. I have confirmed there was nothing running in the background.

Edit:

FPS are:

GTX 770: 40-60 at best

GTX 1070: 60-120~

Depending on the location. 

 

Current PC setup:

CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 - 71%
GPU: Nvidia GTX 1070 - 100.1%
SSD: Samsung 840 Evo 250GB - 657.5%
HDD: WD Green 1TB (2011) - 50.5%
HDD: Samsung HD200HJ 200GB - 48.3%
RAM: Kingston 9905403-149.A00LF 0215 CMX4GX3M1A1333C9 9905403-149.A00LF KHX1866C10D3/4G 16GB - 61.8%
MBD: Asrock Z87 Pro3

[TH3R34P3R]

1 minute ago, kirnale said:

Hello guys!

I have bought a new GPU lately and I could see a few changes to GPU usage. But there is something strange that surprised me. While I initially thought a brand new GPU would reduce my overall GPU usage (in %), which it does, I could also see a less usage of my CPU, a lot less actually. I was thinking because my old GPU have low VRAM, but someone told me it does not affect the CPU that way. I initially though the additional load would go to the CPU/RAM und thus overload the CPU usage. But I can't confirm it technically.

The game I played was Dragon Quest 11.

On a GTX 770 2gb I had 100% usage of both CPU and GPU on the lowest settings.

On a GTX 1070 8 gb I had a usage of 40-50% on both CPU and GPU on the highest settings.

Can someone explain why I have less CPU usage with a stronger GPU? The only thing that changed was my GPU. I have confirmed there was nothing running in the background.

 

Current PC setup:

CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 - 71%
GPU: Nvidia GTX 1070 - 100.1%
SSD: Samsung 840 Evo 250GB - 657.5%
HDD: WD Green 1TB (2011) - 50.5%
HDD: Samsung HD200HJ 200GB - 48.3%
RAM: Kingston 9905403-149.A00LF 0215 CMX4GX3M1A1333C9 9905403-149.A00LF KHX1866C10D3/4G 16GB - 61.8%
MBD: Asrock Z87 Pro3

so, it could be from the fact that the GPU is doing a lot more than it used to, allowing for some work to be taken off of the CPU. Also, when you crank up graphics, it takes work off of the CPU and dedicates that work to the GPU. 

 

It works like the same way for me, where I use 100% of my CPU when playing overwatch at 100% render. when i take it to 200% render, cpu drops to 60%. Gpu, well... the 2080ti speaks for itself at 1080p LOL it doesnt go above like 15%. 

[Brooksie359]

Not having to go and transfer information as often does help reduce the load on the CPU but it shouldn't have a massive effect. 

[schwellmo92]

What are the frame rates between the two setups?

[KarathKasun]

Higher FPS = higher CPU load overall.

 

Also, UB is pretty shit.  I can get 10% or larger deltas from run to run.

[Brooksie359]

1 minute ago, TH3R34P3R said:

so, it could be from the fact that the GPU is doing a lot more than it used to, allowing for some work to be taken off of the CPU. Also, when you crank up graphics, it takes work off of the CPU and dedicates that work to the GPU. 

 

It works like the same way for me, where I use 100% of my CPU when playing overwatch at 100% render. when i take it to 200% render, cpu drops to 60%. Gpu, well... the 2080ti speaks for itself at 1080p LOL it doesnt go above like 15%. 

You hit the 300 fps frame cap at 200% render scale with 15% usage? That seems very hard to believe tbh. 

[kirnale]

FPS are:

GTX 770: 40-60 at best

GTX 1070: 60-120~

Depending on the location.

[TH3R34P3R]

1 minute ago, Brooksie359 said:

You hit the 300 fps frame cap at 200% render scale with 15% usage? That seems very hard to believe tbh. 

actually, no. i hit 150. for some reason the GPU will NOT give me more for the power it has the ability to give. I can give screenshots when i get home today if you wanna see. 

 

at 150% render, i hit 200-300, legit depending on what the computer wants to do. 

[mariushm]

It can be various reasons.

 

The video game may have used more than 2 GB of video memory, so the game engine was busy more often swapping data between video card memory and ram.

 

Also, the GTX 770 is an older card and it could be the game defaulted on a DirectX9 or 10 renderer instead of DirectX 11, because some DirectX 11 features could have been too gpu intensive on that older card. Maybe the game engine was also busy taking higher quality textures and always resizing them to lower sizes to fit into lower quality presets, to squeeze more stuff in 2 GB of video card memory.

With the newer card, the game may run with different rendering paths, maybe different texture sizes, maybe the driver for the GTX 1xxx series has more multithreaded stuff, maybe the game can use some DirectX 11 features for more parallel processing...

 

[TH3R34P3R]

1 minute ago, kirnale said:

FPS are:

GTX 770: 40-60 at best

GTX 1070: 60-120~

Depending on the location.

What is the max fps that the game lets you reach? like does the game have a built in frame cap? (like world of warships? which for some reason caps some users at 75fps)

[Brooksie359]

1 minute ago, TH3R34P3R said:

actually, no. i hit 150. for some reason the GPU will NOT give me more for the power it has the ability to give. I can give screenshots when i get home today if you wanna see. 

What software are you using to measure usage? It could be an error.

[TH3R34P3R]

Just now, Brooksie359 said:

What software are you using to measure usage? It could be an error.

task manager. 

[KarathKasun]

3 minutes ago, mariushm said:

It can be various reasons.

 

The video game may have used more than 2 GB of video memory, so the game engine was busy more often swapping data between video card memory and ram.

 

Also, the GTX 770 is an older card and it could be the game defaulted on a DirectX9 or 10 renderer instead of DirectX 11, because some DirectX 11 features could have been too gpu intensive on that older card. Maybe the game engine was also busy taking higher quality textures and always resizing them to lower sizes to fit into lower quality presets, to squeeze more stuff in 2 GB of video card memory.

With the newer card, the game may run with different rendering paths, maybe different texture sizes, maybe the driver for the GTX 1xxx series has more multithreaded stuff, maybe the game can use some DirectX 11 features for more parallel processing...

 

600/700 series are full DX11 cards.

 

Its more likely that CPU usage was due to texture swapping like your first guess.  It could also be due to the Kepler shader compiler/command dispatcher in the driver being more CPU intensive.

[Settlerteo]

8 minutes ago, kirnale said:

Hello guys!

 

That's strange indeed. When i changed my gpu, my cpu usage went from 60-70 to 100% while new gpu's usage won't surpass 30%. But you had 100% cpu usage with the old gpu whereas i didn't in my case, so there might be a chance that your new cpu is relieving some stress off from your cpu.

[Crunchy Dragon]

1 minute ago, mariushm said:

GTX 770 is an older card and it could be the game defaulted on a DirectX9 or 10 renderer instead of DirectX 11, because some DirectX 11 features could have been too gpu intensive on that older card.

My GTX 780 runs Dx11 without any problems, I'd assume the problem with the GTX 770 was that it was a somewhat weak card to begin with, but 2GB of VRAM really isn't that much.

[Brooksie359]

Just now, TH3R34P3R said:

task manager. 

Task manager is garbage and has consistently given much lower GPU utilization than a proper software like msi afterburner from my experience. 

[kirnale]

2 minutes ago, TH3R34P3R said:

What is the max fps that the game lets you reach? like does the game have a built in frame cap? (like world of warships? which for some reason caps some users at 75fps)

I believe the game could go higher than the FPS I've reached, but I don't know if it have a cap.

[TH3R34P3R]

Just now, Brooksie359 said:

Task manager is garbage and has consistently given much lower GPU utilization than a proper software like msi afterburner from my experience. 

MSI afterburner will NOT install on my pc. it says that it can't find the download location. I love tech and all, but it really doesn't like me. I haven't had a properly working pc with minimal solvable bugs in over 2 years

[KarathKasun]

1 minute ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

My GTX 780 runs Dx11 without any problems, I'd assume the problem with the GTX 770 was that it was a somewhat weak card to begin with, but 2GB of VRAM really isn't that much.

This mostly.  Ive got the same GPU chip in the form of a GTX 670, but it has 4gb of VRAM, and it outperforms pretty much any 2gb 680/770 in newer games.

[Brooksie359]

1 minute ago, TH3R34P3R said:

MSI afterburner will NOT install on my pc. it says that it can't find the download location. I love tech and all, but it really doesn't like me. I haven't had a properly working pc with minimal solvable bugs in over 2 years

You ran the installer that was inside the folder with all of the software files?

[TH3R34P3R]

2 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

You ran the installer that was inside the folder with all of the software files?

yep. it just says the download location can't be found. 

[KarathKasun]

1 minute ago, TH3R34P3R said:

yep. it just says the download location can't be found. 

Sounds like you have fubar'd filesystem permissions.

[Brooksie359]

1 minute ago, TH3R34P3R said:

yep. it just says the download location can't be found. 

Then I would get evga precision x1 then. 

[TH3R34P3R]

Just now, Brooksie359 said:

Then I would get evga precision x1 then. 

Use that for GPU overclock. where in that can i see gpu usage?

 

[Brooksie359]

Just now, TH3R34P3R said:

Use that for GPU overclock. where in that can i see gpu usage?

 

I know precision xoc has that feature so I am pretty sure x1 does as well of i am remembering correctly. I only used x1 for a short period of time so I can't quite remember where but I am pretty sure I remember using it to monitor my GPU usage and power when trying to diagnose my card. I had heard that x1 allowed you to increase the power limit more so than msi afterburner which is why I was using it because I had thought the issue was the card wasn't getting enough power and causing games to crash but it was simply a bad card.