5090 usage and resolution.

[Jay140]

So been using my new pc but noticed my 5090 is only hitting 30% usage with my CPU sitting at 9% still getting solid frame rates but think something odd is going on here. My monitor is not great and I’m in the process of upgrading but can’t decide on resolution. Would 4k be the best option for the 5090 or would 1440p in either ultra wide or normal aspect be better? 

[Hinjima]

4 minutes ago, Jay140 said:

So been using my new pc but noticed my 5090 is only hitting 30% usage with my CPU sitting at 9% still getting solid frame rates but think something odd is going on here. My monitor is not great and I’m in the process of upgrading but can’t decide on resolution. Would 4k be the best option for the 5090 or would 1440p in either ultra wide or normal aspect be better? 

What is your CPU? Or the rest of the system?

What games is this happening in? All of them?

What monitoring software are you using?

[Jay140]

1 minute ago, Hinjima said:

What is your CPU? Or the rest of the system?

What games is this happening in? All of them?

What monitoring software are you using?

9950X3D

64gb DDR5 6400mhz

4TB Gen 5 M.2

 

It’s happening in all games I’ve tried, Genshin Impact, Cities Skylines and Rocket League. I haven’t tried anything more demanding yet.

 

I think my monitor is a big issue and is going to be upgraded once I decide on resolution. I’m using a weird 16:10 monitor currently as my ultrawide bit the dust. 

[jaslion]

7 minutes ago, Jay140 said:

9950X3D

64gb DDR5 6400mhz

4TB Gen 5 M.2

 

It’s happening in all games I’ve tried, Genshin Impact, Cities Skylines and Rocket League. I haven’t tried anything more demanding yet.

 

I think my monitor is a big issue and is going to be upgraded once I decide on resolution. I’m using a weird 16:10 monitor currently as my ultrawide bit the dust. 

These are 3 games that run fine 9n integrated graphics. Of course your 5090 is gonna do like fuckall :p.

 

Id just get a nice 1440p screen and tide that5090 out for like 7 years

[Jay140]

2 minutes ago, jaslion said:

These are 3 games that run fine 9n integrated graphics. Of course your 5090 is gonna do like fuckall :p.

 

Id just get a nice 1440p screen and tide that5090 out for like 7 years

I’m just a little surprised it doesn’t push fps much higher and work itself harder the fans barely span up whilst playing these games. I’m looking at a few different monitors. There’s a 1600p 38” IPS HDR 600 ultrawide, a 34” 1440p QD-Oled ultrawide or a 4k QD Oled panel.  

[SorryBella]

2 hours ago, Jay140 said:

I’m just a little surprised it doesn’t push fps much higher and work itself harder the fans barely span up whilst playing these games.

Engine limit, not all games are going to shoot out to 100% unless if they have to, especially if youre already at near max perceivable FPS. Genshin in particular is very locked down in framerate limits, even though its a Unity title that can scale infinitely to the hardware if its allowed to. 

[jaslion]

11 hours ago, Jay140 said:

I’m just a little surprised it doesn’t push fps much higher and work itself harder the fans barely span up whilst playing these games. I’m looking at a few different monitors. There’s a 1600p 38” IPS HDR 600 ultrawide, a 34” 1440p QD-Oled ultrawide or a 4k QD Oled panel.  

You are experiencing the limit of the game engine/programming. SImply put the devs didn't optimize so far that you can run their games at like 500fps+ because they deem that a edgecase not woth the quite big monetary input. There's also other reasons but basically pc too good for games which is great to have. Try a recent AAA game and well it's gonna go 100% with ease.

 

Also your cpu will never be used much. Mostly because you have so many threads. Most modern AAA games push up to 12 threads and thats about it you have 32 so yeah its never going to get fully used. You can look at a per core view that gives a MUCH better representation of use as you'll see some cores used heavily whilst other do nothing.

[jaslion]

This is also why I advocate for a NICE like 27 inch 1440p screen. 16:9 or 16:10 at 144hz+. It works in every game (no ultrawide black border bs), is EASY to run with your gpu meaning it can game TOP END for YEARS wheras at 4k just look at the 4090 2 years in and it's native high refresh 4k promise is already not possible without DLSS and other trickery because games are just not optimized enough for this. The rare well optimized game runs FANTASTIC on hardware this strong but well those are rare.

[xg32]

16 hours ago, Jay140 said:

9950X3D

64gb DDR5 6400mhz

4TB Gen 5 M.2

 

It’s happening in all games I’ve tried, Genshin Impact, Cities Skylines and Rocket League. I haven’t tried anything more demanding yet.

 

I think my monitor is a big issue and is going to be upgraded once I decide on resolution. I’m using a weird 16:10 monitor currently as my ultrawide bit the dust. 

i consider the 5090 to be the first 4k/120 card in all games but dlss quality might still have to be used. 

 

for uw you either like it or you don't, qd-oled should be the go to if you decide to go that route, would not bother with the 38inch ips (those are some big pixels)

 

The engine and cpu bottleneck is bigger on some games with the 5090, which is why i actually recommend a 4k screen, which will high pixel density while having more options, and 120->240fps frame gen can easily be forced.

[Jay140]

4 hours ago, xg32 said:

i consider the 5090 to be the first 4k/120 card in all games but dlss quality might still have to be used. 

 

for uw you either like it or you don't, qd-oled should be the go to if you decide to go that route, would not bother with the 38inch ips (those are some big pixels)

 

The engine and cpu bottleneck is bigger on some games with the 5090, which is why i actually recommend a 4k screen, which will high pixel density while having more options, and 120->240fps frame gen can easily be forced.

Any views on whether DP2.1 is worth going for over a monitor with DP1.4a? 

[xg32]

1 hour ago, Jay140 said:

Any views on whether DP2.1 is worth going for over a monitor with DP1.4a? 

dp2.1 is better than 1.4a dsc in my personal experience only.

 

1.4a dsc...works, but i'd say 99% of the time vs hdmi 2.1 and dp2.1 when dsc is not used. 

 

the screen wakes up and detects slower, once in awhile i get a screen flash for no reason at all, don't think it's my cable either since it's club3d and amazon (tried both)

 

it's not the main deciding factor when choosing the monitor tho

[Jay140]

1 hour ago, xg32 said:

dp2.1 is better than 1.4a dsc in my personal experience only.

 

1.4a dsc...works, but i'd say 99% of the time vs hdmi 2.1 and dp2.1 when dsc is not used. 

 

the screen wakes up and detects slower, once in awhile i get a screen flash for no reason at all, don't think it's my cable either since it's club3d and amazon (tried both)

 

it's not the main deciding factor when choosing the monitor tho

All the other specs are the same other than an extra 8w usb C charging on the newer model. It’s between the MSI 321URX-W and the 322URX. My setup is a white and grey theme which is why I was looking at the white MSI screen but the lack of DP2.1 for not much saving is a bit disappointing, I can’t see anything to suggest MSI will be releasing it with DP2.1 anytime soon either. 

[xg32]

5 minutes ago, Jay140 said:

All the other specs are the same other than an extra 8w usb C charging on the newer model. It’s between the MSI 321URX-W and the 322URX. My setup is a white and grey theme which is why I was looking at the white MSI screen but the lack of DP2.1 for not much saving is a bit disappointing, I can’t see anything to suggest MSI will be releasing it with DP2.1 anytime soon either. 

Coming from a picture quality pov, black borders SHOULD work better with qd-oled, not every1's bordered by it. I'm positive i dont notice the borders at night anymore while i'm probably gonna see some of it if it was anything other than white, and you get dp2.1 with the black model too so win/win. It's up to you to decide how much the theme matters to you.