99% GPU Usage 680?

[nadesicod25 1]

Hi guys I have a GTX 680 MSI Lightning and I am on multiplayer using the msi afterburner on display ingame and it says 99% usage when I'm on the ground and playing normally and when I look at the sky it goes around 50% usage...

Also on the server list it says 99% gpu usage aswell

My temp is stable at 56c and frames 45..

Ingame settings everything Ultra and view distance around 5.5k using the DEV build.

Specs

I7 920 OC 3.6GHZ

MSI 680 with 314.22 drivers

I am worried that i'll fry me GPU

Edited June 23, 2013 by nadesicod25

[RuecanOnRails 10]

You shouldn't be able to fry your GPU using stock clocks. If you have overclocked your GPU then you risk instability and eventual damage (very rare)

You should be fine, but if you're concerned try running Furmark to stress your GPU to see if it's fully stable under your current settings.

Running your GPU at full, is a good thing. It means the resources are being used. While they are likely not being used directly by the engine, you have some other option in your driver details turned on that is analyzing the scene and making visual improvements. That's whats using the extra bit of gpu power when looking at more complex scenes.

As for temps directly, I can't say what they run at normally for nvidia cards, but 56 is no where near high enough to burn out your card. You can always make a more aggressive fan profile to bring the temps down a bit if you choose.

[nadesicod25 1]

Yeah Ruecan

I was shocked at the usage because I hear people get around 50% and rest on the cpu and my gpu is not even overclocked..

[RuecanOnRails 10]

You just have an additional rendering option in your drivers turned on is all. I'm not sure what it is, perhaps a better but more intensive form of AA.

You can always try to change settings in your driver profile to see what does what, you might get a few more frames out of it. But if your fully using your gpu I'd suggest keep it at that unless you find you are lagging in game.

[tonschuh 3]

You shouldn't be able to fry your GPU using stock clocks. If you have overclocked your GPU then you risk instability and eventual damage (very rare)

You should be fine, but if you're concerned try running Furmark to stress your GPU to see if it's fully stable under your current settings.

Running your GPU at full, is a good thing. It means the resources are being used. While they are likely not being used directly by the engine, you have some other option in your driver details turned on that is analyzing the scene and making visual improvements. That's whats using the extra bit of gpu power when looking at more complex scenes.

As for temps directly, I can't say what they run at normally for nvidia cards, but 56 is no where near high enough to burn out your card. You can always make a more aggressive fan profile to bring the temps down a bit if you choose.

Stay away from Furmark, as it has killed just to many GPU's ! Every other Benchmark will do, like Unigine Heaven Benchmark v4.0.

:)

[Leon86 13]

A gpu should be able to run at 100% when gaming, you wont fry it.

[WalkerDown 1]

Btw that usage in A3 is "fake" ... try to run a old build and you'll notice a 40% usage but almost the same fps ...in fact for the rest of the "cycles" the GPU is doing basically nothing. That % things has been introduced because of user complaints: "my GPU is barely used..." .. so now they see 99% and they believes it's really fully used (while in fact it is not).

I did this test (same gfx settings, map, but slight different engine for obvious reason, online):

With core i7 950 @3.2ghz

- Old build (0.5.102) with a single GTX 570: 45 fps / usage: 55%;

- Old build (0.5.102) with a SLI GTX 570: 47 fps / usage: 55%;

- Old build (0.5.102) with a GTX 780: 50 fps / usage: 40%;

Then I run the current build (0.6.106) with a single GTX 570, then again SLI and then with a GTX 780 .. and guess what? I've got almost the same FPS, but the GPU usage went up to 90% in all those cases for no reason.

The CPU is barely used by 35% overall .. whenever a couple of core are used for about 60%, then for a definitive test i set it to 3.8ghz ... nothing changed: same FPS and low CPU usage, while the GPU remained at 90% but with no fps change.

I did not tested the BETA yet, i'll do when it'll be released on the stable branch.

Edited June 24, 2013 by WalkerDown

[RuecanOnRails 10]

Btw that usage in A3 is "fake" ... try to run a old build and you'll notice a 40% usage but almost the same fps ...in fact for the rest of the "cycles" the GPU is doing basically nothing. That % things has been introduced because of user complaints: "my GPU is barely used..." .. so now they see 99% and they believes it's really fully used (while in fact it is not).

I did this test (same gfx settings, map, but slight different engine for obvious reason, online):

With core i7 950 @3.2ghz

- Old build (0.5.102) with a single GTX 570: 45 fps / usage: 55%;

- Old build (0.5.102) with a SLI GTX 570: 47 fps / usage: 55%;

- Old build (0.5.102) with a GTX 780: 50 fps / usage: 40%;

Then I run the current build (0.6.106) with a single GTX 570, then again SLI and then with a GTX 780 .. and guess what? I've got almost the same FPS, but the GPU usage went up to 90% in all those cases for no reason.

The CPU is barely used by 35% overall .. whenever a couple of core are used for about 60%, then for a definitive test i set it to 3.8ghz ... nothing changed: same FPS and low CPU usage, while the GPU remained at 90% but with no fps change.

I did not tested the BETA yet, i'll do when it'll be released on the stable branch.

Actually you are wrong.

The game is still using the 50-75% based on computer performance and bottlenecks. The extra 25-50% in usage you see is not from Arma 3. Rather from your nvidia or amd drivers running different anti-aliasing algorithms, additional post processing, and image enhancements. It is not "fake" nor is it a scam being done by Arma 3.

You sir, are a horrible troll who does nothing but complain, slander, and try to start fights. None of your posts contribute to anything constructive; Please just leave.

[Rolling 1]

Actually you are wrong.

The game is still using the 50-75% based on computer performance and bottlenecks. The extra 25-50% in usage you see is not from Arma 3. Rather from your nvidia or amd drivers running different anti-aliasing algorithms, additional post processing, and image enhancements. It is not "fake" nor is it a scam being done by Arma 3.

You sir, are a horrible troll who does nothing but complain, slander, and try to start fights. None of your posts contribute to anything constructive; Please just leave.

You are the one who started slander, he simply posted what his performance was, and what he believed was the cause of it. Calling out people as trolls isn't constructive either, so maybe you should leave and calm down a bit.

Now, back on topic ArmA 3 has always used 100% of my GPU, as well as many other games, and I'm going on two years with this card. Running at 100% is completely normal, and you should always try to get the most out of your GPU (on stock clocks).

[RuecanOnRails 10]

You are the one who started slander, he simply posted what his performance was, and what he believed was the cause of it. Calling out people as trolls isn't constructive either, so maybe you should leave and calm down a bit.

Now, back on topic ArmA 3 has always used 100% of my GPU, as well as many other games, and I'm going on two years with this card. Running at 100% is completely normal, and you should always try to get the most out of your GPU (on stock clocks).

Sorry, I'm sure it looked bad right here out of context... However over the past 4 months, he literally has done nothing but complain for the sake of complaining. If you go through his previous posts via profile you will find all his rants, reported posts, and insane theories on Arma. I'm just getting tired of seeing his posts show up being off topic and add nothing to the thread.

Yeah, I've always found ways to bring my GPU up to 99/100% usage while gaming even when it's not possible to do so in the game engine. Going through driver settings you can allocate extra resources to further enhancements that the engine just isn't calling for.

*With that, I'm done posting in this thread as unless the Original Author posts more questions, this issue is solved in my books.

[simon1279 51]

I have been far from these kind of disussion but now i would like to say: i really don't understand your obsessions on GPU usage, if your game runs smooth without stutter, at a good graphic where's the proble, arma 2 ran on my PC from a hd4850, hd 4890, hd 5870, hd5870 crossfire, nvidia gtx560 Ti 2 gb vram SLI, and now on a gainward GTX680 4gb vram phantom 2, and in arma 2 the fps with the same graphic settings (at max) from the single 5870 to the 680 are the same, and i've played it every night with my clan from its release, but believe me i've never seen before an obsession about fps in arma 2, i really don't understand you guys, because if the game runs fine stutter free where's the problem? enjoy the game not the fps, i have around 32 fps on my 680, in arma 2, 22 - 30 fps, but i've never seen a stutter and my game runs very smooth with everything maxed out

[WalkerDown 1]

Actually you are wrong.

Unless MSI Afterburner is trolling me.. then I'm not.

You sir, are a horrible troll

You sir should read the forum rules (notice: I'm replying to this message only because of the original message, trying to ignore your personal attack). /reported

[sultanofswing 10]

Sorry, I'm sure it looked bad right here out of context... However over the past 4 months, he literally has done nothing but complain for the sake of complaining. If you go through his previous posts via profile you will find all his rants, reported posts, and insane theories on Arma. I'm just getting tired of seeing his posts show up being off topic and add nothing to the thread.

Yeah, I've always found ways to bring my GPU up to 99/100% usage while gaming even when it's not possible to do so in the game engine. Going through driver settings you can allocate extra resources to further enhancements that the engine just isn't calling for.

*With that, I'm done posting in this thread as unless the Original Author posts more questions, this issue is solved in my books.

I agree, GPU usage can easily be changed by driver settings or in game AA/AF settings.

[WalkerDown 1]

I have been far from these kind of disussion but now i would like to say: i really don't understand your obsessions on GPU usage

Most of the complaints (at least from me), are not directly linked to the "usage", but because of the very poor FPS overall.. it's 2013, I've a 780 and a 3.8ghz CPU .. why I can't have some stable 60 fps in this game? At no resolution (I've a 1600p monitor... but I've tried to lower the resolution down to 1080p with no difference). Then there's really something wrong here... the game is noticeable jerky for me, i'm not used to play with this low fps. I would accept this situation if I've had a very poor PC.. but I'm using a "fair" setup. I hope it will run good for the release, but honestly my hope isn't so high.