Can someone tell me what I'm doing wrong? Can't get any good results with a GTX-1080 @ 1920 x 1080.

itsFrancisss
2 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
If you search these forums, ppl were saying their 1080's were getting ~120 fps... at 1440p on "mostly ultra" settings.
Even more ludicrous: claims of 4k with, "just a few tweaked settings."
So how is it that I've never hit 144 and even struggle to maintain 70-100 at 1080p, on LOW/MEDIUM ?

Build:
Ryzen 5 1600 oc'd to 3.75ghz
16 GB of Corsair RAM oc'd to 2660mhz
EVGA GTX-1080, stock.
Samsung 840 EVO 500 GB

Monitor: Asus VG248 144hz  
Windows, and mobo/chipset AMD drivers are all up to date.

In game I have FFR off, dx11 selected, gpu restriction off and frame limit capped to 144 (although I riva turner and user config to 90 for stable frametimes).
CPU does get just a smidge bottle-necky but for the most part everything sits near 40-50% utilization. 

Any and all input is greatly valued. Thank you kind sirs I look forward to my humbling.


Comments

  • DirtyApe777
    13 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I had the same issue. GTX 1080 8GB, 16GB RAM, 7280HK @4Ghz, 512GB Nvme SSD, Acer XB720HU @1440p
    I maintain around 80 to 90 FPS depending on the situation and map. Some maps are performance hogs and some are kinder.
    I was having performance issues as well. Used Nvidia optimal settings on high with a couple thins on ultra, FFR off, DX11, GPU restriction off, frame limit capped at 120. My monitor is a 144hz monitor but there's no difference between 120 and 144 visually so I keep the cap at 120 to avoid issues.
    Before I made these changes, I was stuttering and getting 50 FPS. It was terrible and almost unplayable. I'd lose almost every fire fight because it would stutter.
    After making the changes the game plays as smooth as butter and I'm seeing 80 to 90 FPS even on the most demanding of maps. My GPU is OCd and so is my CPU. GTX1080 with a 110Mhz OC on core and 185Mhz OC on Vram according to dragon center.
    Not sure if this helps or gives you any ideas.

    Also, turn off Vsync and Origin In-game. Those 2 helped quite a bit as well.
  • Major_Pungspark
    1389 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    If you search these forums, ppl were saying their 1080's were getting ~120 fps... at 1440p on "mostly ultra" settings.
    Even more ludicrous: claims of 4k with, "just a few tweaked settings."
    So how is it that I've never hit 144 and even struggle to maintain 70-100 at 1080p, on LOW/MEDIUM ?

    Build:
    Ryzen 5 1600 oc'd to 3.75ghz
    16 GB of Corsair RAM oc'd to 2660mhz
    EVGA GTX-1080, stock.
    Samsung 840 EVO 500 GB

    Monitor: Asus VG248 144hz  
    Windows, and mobo/chipset AMD drivers are all up to date.

    In game I have FFR off, dx11 selected, gpu restriction off and frame limit capped to 144 (although I riva turner and user config to 90 for stable frametimes).
    CPU does get just a smidge bottle-necky but for the most part everything sits near 40-50% utilization. 

    Any and all input is greatly valued. Thank you kind sirs I look forward to my humbling.


    Well, you are probably cpu limited. Bf V is VERY cpu intensive and you will probably get the same framerate with a high/ultra mix
  • Lahoo_Eckbert
    1233 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    If you search these forums, ppl were saying their 1080's were getting ~120 fps... at 1440p on "mostly ultra" settings.
    Even more ludicrous: claims of 4k with, "just a few tweaked settings."
    So how is it that I've never hit 144 and even struggle to maintain 70-100 at 1080p, on LOW/MEDIUM ?

    Build:
    Ryzen 5 1600 oc'd to 3.75ghz
    16 GB of Corsair RAM oc'd to 2660mhz
    EVGA GTX-1080, stock.
    Samsung 840 EVO 500 GB

    Monitor: Asus VG248 144hz  
    Windows, and mobo/chipset AMD drivers are all up to date.

    In game I have FFR off, dx11 selected, gpu restriction off and frame limit capped to 144 (although I riva turner and user config to 90 for stable frametimes).
    CPU does get just a smidge bottle-necky but for the most part everything sits near 40-50% utilization. 

    Any and all input is greatly valued. Thank you kind sirs I look forward to my humbling.


    Your GPU is fine, but you are limited by your CPU I'd say.

    Have you tried turning on FFR or using dx 12 ?
    What were your results like ? 

  • CSO7777
    1077 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    If you search these forums, ppl were saying their 1080's were getting ~120 fps... at 1440p on "mostly ultra" settings.
    Even more ludicrous: claims of 4k with, "just a few tweaked settings."
    So how is it that I've never hit 144 and even struggle to maintain 70-100 at 1080p, on LOW/MEDIUM ?

    Build:
    Ryzen 5 1600 oc'd to 3.75ghz
    16 GB of Corsair RAM oc'd to 2660mhz
    EVGA GTX-1080, stock.
    Samsung 840 EVO 500 GB

    Monitor: Asus VG248 144hz  
    Windows, and mobo/chipset AMD drivers are all up to date.

    In game I have FFR off, dx11 selected, gpu restriction off and frame limit capped to 144 (although I riva turner and user config to 90 for stable frametimes).
    CPU does get just a smidge bottle-necky but for the most part everything sits near 40-50% utilization. 

    Any and all input is greatly valued. Thank you kind sirs I look forward to my humbling.


    I have a Ryzen 2700X and a GTX1080. I get 110-120 FPS on 'mostly low' to ultra settings (1440p) with DX12. I know my CPU is not as fast as an I7-9900K, but still, getting 120FPS on 'mostly ultra' seems like it's not really possible with that GPU at 1440p.
  • MrOC7
    14 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    If you search these forums, ppl were saying their 1080's were getting ~120 fps... at 1440p on "mostly ultra" settings.
    Even more ludicrous: claims of 4k with, "just a few tweaked settings."
    So how is it that I've never hit 144 and even struggle to maintain 70-100 at 1080p, on LOW/MEDIUM ?

    Build:
    Ryzen 5 1600 oc'd to 3.75ghz
    16 GB of Corsair RAM oc'd to 2660mhz
    EVGA GTX-1080, stock.
    Samsung 840 EVO 500 GB

    Monitor: Asus VG248 144hz  
    Windows, and mobo/chipset AMD drivers are all up to date.

    In game I have FFR off, dx11 selected, gpu restriction off and frame limit capped to 144 (although I riva turner and user config to 90 for stable frametimes).
    CPU does get just a smidge bottle-necky but for the most part everything sits near 40-50% utilization. 

    Any and all input is greatly valued. Thank you kind sirs I look forward to my humbling.


    Hey mate
    Looking at your specs it does seem like a bottleneck, 1070 gpu are more suited for 1080p, your gpu is simply not being stressed enough therefore its dragging your cpu,
    Which win 10 version are u running, is it 1903? Theres an update for 1903 that apparently benefits fps. Keep in mind as mentioned already certain maps always hit fps harder. I have a 1080ti running 1440p on a 4790k , no bottlenecks however i think its rotterdam with a full server of players can dip fps quite a bit.
  • TFBisquit
    1329 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 8
    The game has become heavier with the patches, op. Then the beta ran very good for most, and after release with full graphics, it was still smooth for many.
    But patches have made it worse.
    One thing though, a higher resolution takes the workload to the graphics card, and reliefs the cpu. So at 1440p you could have the same fps as on 1080p. Or even more.
    Dx11 does 95fps on my i9 9900k+gtx1080. FFR off. Dx12 does between 125 and 144fps. All at 1440p. Have it capped at 144 because of my monitor.
    Haven't tried 1080p since that looks awful on my 1440p monitor.
    So in retrospect, compared with my old i7 [email protected],5Ghz, I gained steady frames, and for dx11 a couple extra fps.
    Dx12 gave me some 25+ fps extra.
    It does feel faster now, no more lag from explosions. Artillery doesn't have any impact on my system or fps.
    I would say bfv needs just as much gpu as cpu.
    Texture quality and filtering at ultra, mesh ultra, the rest low. And no FFR ofcourse.
    -
    Try dx12, it will use more cpu, make things hotter, and give you more fps. The inputlag is minor compared to dx11.
    In fact, sometimes I feel dx11 is snappier, but the next day it feels lagged, switch to dx12 and now that feels snappier.
    Can't make up my mind that way lol.
    ps. with dx12 avx instructions are used on my end, so my clocks switch between the avx and non avx speed, I have avx -1 set in bios.
    Avx needs more vcore compared to non avx so if you're stable at non avx games, but meet the bare minimum for voltage, it could be the vcore gets too low, which results in stuttering, lag, and maybe even a crash, to desktop, or blue screen.
  • Jinko_itx
    685 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    this game requires a balanced computer ex: 2070 with a i7 8700 or equivalent, 2080 with a i7 9700k or equivalent, 2080 Ti i9 9900k or equivalent, Gtx 980 Ti with a i7 4790k or equivalent, its gotta be balanced otherwise you will always get massive stuttering.    
  • Nutcrusherr
    193 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Jinko_itx wrote: »
    this game requires a balanced computer ex: 2070 with a i7 8700 or equivalent, 2080 with a i7 9700k or equivalent, 2080 Ti i9 9900k or equivalent, Gtx 980 Ti with a i7 4790k or equivalent, its gotta be balanced otherwise you will always get massive stuttering.    

    I have an i7 6700k stock. 16gb of simple ddr3 1600mhz and a 1060 6gb and i dont have stuttering. Fps varies from 90 to 130.

    My new card rtx 2070 is coming today, i can only hope it gets better not worse lol.
  • Uwannah_Hydeen
    30 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    If you watch twitch.tv Battlefield streamers, you'll know who Mus1CK is.   Anyway, framerate is much more important to him than pretty graphics when playing multiplayer games.  Where detail doesn't sacrifice frames or visual clarity, or not to any noticeable extent, he's got some ultra settings in there.  Give them a go.







    Tony.

  • Major_Pungspark
    1389 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The most important thing is to not create a cpu bottleneck, if the cpu goes to 100% it will start to stutter, so if you don´t have really good cpu do not lower the gpu settings to much. You can also set a fps_max limit so that it never goes above say 90.
  • RudyMentally
    24 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Use MSI afterburner to identify the bottleneck. If your gpu is using 90+%, turn down gfx. If your cpu is at over 90%, you are cpu bound. Try running the gfx at 1024x768 with very low settings and 25% resolution scale to see how many fps your cpu can provide in a 64 player match on a heavy map like narvik or rotterdam. Do turn off vsync for this. If you get the same fps as with decent gfx, you are cpu bound for sure.
  • choppernNZ
    82 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I've a 980ti and 4930k @ 4.2ghz 6 core cpu and can maintain 100-120fps med/high settings at 1440p 120hz gysnc smooth game play for me I believe this game love more cores/threads
  • CSO7777
    1077 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    In reality bottlenecking is not a question of 'balance', but more a question of wasted resources. Using a 2080TI is still the fastest GPU on any given CPU, but you will not be able to fully utilize the GPU unless your CPU has enough power to do so.

    If the GPU usage in BFV is below 90%, the CPU is probably bottlenecking the GPU, and the GPU would giver higher FPS with a faster/more powerful CPU. In reality something else could be wrong, drivers, Windows, hardware etc.
  • MrChooch
    7 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    If you search these forums, ppl were saying their 1080's were getting ~120 fps... at 1440p on "mostly ultra" settings.
    Even more ludicrous: claims of 4k with, "just a few tweaked settings."
    So how is it that I've never hit 144 and even struggle to maintain 70-100 at 1080p, on LOW/MEDIUM ?

    Build:
    Ryzen 5 1600 oc'd to 3.75ghz
    16 GB of Corsair RAM oc'd to 2660mhz
    EVGA GTX-1080, stock.
    Samsung 840 EVO 500 GB

    Monitor: Asus VG248 144hz  
    Windows, and mobo/chipset AMD drivers are all up to date.

    In game I have FFR off, dx11 selected, gpu restriction off and frame limit capped to 144 (although I riva turner and user config to 90 for stable frametimes).
    CPU does get just a smidge bottle-necky but for the most part everything sits near 40-50% utilization. 

    Any and all input is greatly valued. Thank you kind sirs I look forward to my humbling.


    Your right about people getting 120fps with a 1080 gpu.  I have a 1080 overclocked (not buy much), CPU is i7 6700k stock, and 16gb ram (3,200), monitor 1440p.  On medium settings, I get 100 fps on the Rotterdam map but I get about 130 fps on all other maps, s.

    You need to do some testing to see what your hardware is doing in-game.  I use ASUS GPU Tweak 2 and turn on the OSD option that tells me temps, usage, clocks, FPS etc.  I think MSI afterburner does the same.
  • bigguyhawaii
    352 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 13
    I’m getting 130-190 FPS depending on map and what’s happening at the moment. I’m running ai5 9600k oc 4.7. 2 evga 980 Ftw oc core 65%,memory 35%. 16g ram @3000 on a 144h Gsync monitor. Everything low except both terrains in medium. Motion blur at 1% and intelligent standby list cleaner on.
  • StingX71
    812 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 15
    If you search these forums, ppl were saying their 1080's were getting ~120 fps... at 1440p on "mostly ultra" settings.
    Even more ludicrous: claims of 4k with, "just a few tweaked settings."
    So how is it that I've never hit 144 and even struggle to maintain 70-100 at 1080p, on LOW/MEDIUM ?

    Build:
    Ryzen 5 1600 oc'd to 3.75ghz
    16 GB of Corsair RAM oc'd to 2660mhz
    EVGA GTX-1080, stock.
    Samsung 840 EVO 500 GB

    Monitor: Asus VG248 144hz  
    Windows, and mobo/chipset AMD drivers are all up to date.

     In game I have FFR off, dx11 selected, gpu restriction off and frame limit capped to 144 (although I riva turner and user config to 90 for stable frametimes).
    CPU does get just a smidge bottle-necky but for the most part everything sits near 40-50% utilization. 

    Any and all input is greatly valued. Thank you kind sirs I look forward to my humbling.


    120fps at 1440P/Ultra is ambitious. If I don't have FFR, my FPS drops drastically. Spec's haven't changed below, get 100+/- mostly on low (TAA/Post Processing on High) settings and run 110% resolution upscaling. I find it helps with graphics clarity and keeps my cpu in check. I now have my cpu/gpu OC'd to 4.4/2Ghz respectively though. GPU should be at 95% +/- utilization, otherwise you're not getting best performance. 

    Here's a random video on Arras with MSI AB running so you can see how my hardware is behaving. Also running Shadowplay takes up 5+/- fps. 

    Running latest Windows version and Nvidia Drivers. 


Sign In or Register to comment.