Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

Question

Rebuilt PC but results are worse

Apr 4, 2015 1:31PM PDT

So I just recently rebuilt my PC after having some difficulties with my hard drive forcing me to format then giving me a "reason" to buy new parts. I purchased my PC sometime early 2013, lasting me a decent time. After the hard drive broke I decided to purchase new parts. Once I finished putting everything together, the first game I tested my "New" PC was on Counter Strike Global Offensive. I was expecting at least 200-400 Frames but just came out to be 100-200,
( don't get me wrong that's decent frames but just doesn't feel the same ). After fixing some settings I managed to get CSGO running good. But I wasn't satisfied, I then tested it on H1Z1 and It was just terrible, 50-90 frames at Max. It just doesn't make sense. If anyone has any answers or suggestions please let me know. My "Old PC" and "New PC" is as follows.

I understand I didn't change every part but just key components.
<div>
* = Parts that stayed the same

Old- Asus P8H77-I Motherboard
Intel i7 2600 CPU
Nvidia Geforce GTX 780 3GB GPU*
16GB DDR3 Ram*
Windows 7 64 bit

New- GA-Z97X-UD7 TH Motherboard
Intel i7 4790k CPU
Nvidia Geforce GTX 780 3GB* GPU
16GB DDR3 Ram*
Windows 8.1 64 bit


I even checked the frames I would get on Minecraft just for fun and uh... 90-100 Frames... ***?

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Answer
I am curious,
Apr 4, 2015 3:18PM PDT

did it improve at all? Just hope you were not expecting the performance to double.

- Collapse -
(NT) My mistake. Ignore this.
Apr 4, 2015 3:22PM PDT
- Collapse -
Answer
What good are those extra frames?
Apr 5, 2015 2:32AM PDT

Most displays only run at 60 so going beyond that is like spinning the tires on a car. Good for show but not going to improve your quarter mile times.
bob

- Collapse -
Answer
Here's why the CPU change didn't help.
Apr 5, 2015 2:34AM PDT

"Our tests demonstrate fairly little difference between a $225 LGA 1155 Core i5-2500K and a $1000 LGA 2011 Core i7-3960X, even when three-way graphics card configurations are involved. It turns out that memory bandwidth and PCIe throughput don't hold back the performance of existing Sandy Bridge-based machines. "
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-4.html

- Collapse -
The outcome was worse
Apr 5, 2015 2:37AM PDT

Well the outcome was worse, instead of performing the same or even a bit better, it came out worse

- Collapse -
Any change can do that.
Apr 5, 2015 2:43AM PDT

Since you are producing frame rates double or more than the display this is again, spinning tires. Some gamers don't get this for a few years, many get it the very first round.

Some drivers take a bit hit on some high settings and this moves around with driver versions. Your newer gamer/builder won't know this. To catch up you hit the discussion board on the game in question for discussions about low framerates on high settings. Too often I read about reducing the AA setting.

As this has more to do with the GPU and its driver the CPU change won't help.
Bob

- Collapse -
(NT) So this can be fixed on its own?
Apr 5, 2015 3:25AM PDT
- Collapse -
No.
Apr 5, 2015 4:13AM PDT

Why is that? The client often won't accept changing settings. You give them time to learn about driver versions, that issue of going over what the display can run at and well, other factors. For this sort of client you can only give them time to catch up.
Bob