RTX 3070 - Watch Dogs Legion, only 30fps?

[warlock257]

Just got an RTX 3070, but not blown away by the performance boost I got over my GTX 1080, especially in Watch Dogs Legion. When most of the settings are cranked to full, I get around 25fps, but even when when I turn it way down, I only get around 40fps. The settings changed makes very small differences, even RTX on vs off. My system is:

i5 8400 (2.8 ghz)

16 gb ram

gigabyte z370 MB

RTX 3070

 

My CPU is only 2 generations old, it wouldn't bottleneck it, would it?

Any suggestions are appreciated.

[eeeee1]

I would blame your cpu. 2 generations old, not even overclockable. 

[MorganO]

try setting DLSS to performance see if that helps

[GoodEnough]

Just now, eeeee1 said:

I would blame your cpu. 2 generations old, not even overclockable. 

his cpu is somewhere between a ryzen 5 2600 and a ryzen 5 3600

so its really not that bad of a cpu.

[AndreiArgeanu]

2 minutes ago, GoodEnough said:

his cpu is somewhere between a ryzen 5 2600 and a ryzen 5 3600

so its really not that bad of a cpu.

you can't compare clock speeds from different architectures, 4ghz on intel isn't the same 4ghz on AMD.

[xg32]

11 minutes ago, warlock257 said:

.

the cpu might bottleneck it slightly but it's just mainly RTX being demanding.

[superfantastic]

Upgrade to an i7 cpu is what I would do next.

[AndreiArgeanu]

It's most likely your CPU. This game is really CPU intensive in some scenarios for some reason.

[eeeee1]

Just now, GoodEnough said:

his cpu is somewhere between a ryzen 5 2600 and a ryzen 5 3600

so its really not that bad of a cpu.

ok. so less threads, a boost clock only .1 ghz over the 2600 and .2 under the 3600, less overall cache (how this helps and how these differ idk), and no overclocking.

 

[GoodEnough]

Just now, AndreiArgeanu said:

you can't compare clock speeds from different architectures, 4ghz on intel isn't the same 4ghz on AMD.

a lot of which is the difference of ipc between the two, that and it doesnt have hyperthreading, but still its only 5% slower than the recommended cpu for that game (i think)

[GoodEnough]

Just now, eeeee1 said:

ok. so less threads, a boost clock only .1 ghz over the 2600 and .2 under the 3600, less overall cache (how this helps and how these differ idk), and no overclocking.

i really want to give the cpu the benefit of the doubt since i used to use a old i5 3470, that thing really could handle games well for its age.

[eeeee1]

Just now, GoodEnough said:

i really want to give the cpu the benefit of the doubt since i used to use a old i5 3470, that thing really could handle games well for its age.

my goodenough friend, there is no benefit to be given. especially since the AMD CPU comes with a stock cooler as well and is unlocked. 

[GoodEnough]

Just now, eeeee1 said:

my goodenough friend, there is no benefit to be given. especially since the AMD CPU comes with a stock cooler as well and is unlocked. 

yeah i can say that my r5 2600 that i got for $120 awhile back has definitely treated me better than that 3470, not having hyperthreading just doesnt really cut it anymore.. 

[warlock257]

Yeah, I think Legion is particularly CPU heavy. Some of the benchmarks were showing 100% CPU usage.
I can run Control at 75fps, with full setting, RTX on. Doom Eternal at 100+ at ultra settings.

 

Considering buying a Intel Core i7-9700F while still on sale, which is about as high as my motherboard supports, aside from an i9

 

[warlock257]

Follow up...

I picked up a i9 9900K for cyber Monday, and WOW did it work. My frame went to up 75fps, with Very High settings.