The benchmark you posted from Superposition is in fact in line with what you should be expecting with your parts. Sorry this isn't what you want to hear but it's what's happening in your system. Even if they did populate all 16 cores available on your system, their low clock speed and low instructions executed per clock cycle in comparison to what modern CPUs can handle will still leave it far behind. Your CPU instructions per clock are your real enemy here and compounded by them at a very low clock speed you are not going to see very good gains in gaming related tasks. They are going to be run on 2-6 cores at most that will be doing the heavy lifting. Games and game benchmarks are not going to fully populate 16 cores with tasks. What task manager is showing you is only how many cores are doing something that is all. Which it is, your CPUs instructions per clock cycle are far and away below what a modern CPU can handle. Just because task manager doesn't show your CPU being at 100% does not mean that your system isn't heavily bottlenecked. Wouldn't a slow/inadequate CPU be at 100% if it couldn't keep up with the video card? Thanks in advance, Rob I've never seen my CPU utilization go over maybe 5%. I've run Task Manager while running the performance benchmark programs. Ramseyrt Hello, I've seen two comments so far on the performance of my CPU. Couple that with the fact that they are at 2.4Ghz and the fact that multi CPU systems historically do not perform in games or game benchmarks very well and I'd say you have the perfect storm of an underperforming system.
They are Sandy Bridge 32nm dies which debuted in 2011 and the server variants in 2012. The Xeon CPus in your system are quite frankly ancient.
Is there anything else I should be looking at? Thanks! Rob The CPU is barely used, less than 10% at any time during the test. I reran the Passmark 3D Mark test again, this time with the Task Manager running so I could watch the CPU utilization values. The application did display the same 1920/4001 values during the test. I reran the Passmark 3D Mark test with the Afterburner application running in the background. I also performed the EVGA Precision X1 VF Curve Tuner Test which showed the same 1920Mhz CPU and 4001Mhz memory values. I just completed the MSI Afterburner Overclocking Scanner test and it shows my GPU clock running at 1920Mhz and a memory clock running at 4001Mhz. The Passmark score I'm getting for the CPU test is 14,000+.
The energy consumption of the GeForce GTX 1660 Super amounts to 125 watts and therefore 5 Watt higher than the GTX 1060 or GTX 1660 Ti.Ramseyrt Hello, My Dell Precision T5600 has two Xeon E5-2665 CPUs.
#GTX 1660 SUPER BENCHMARK PASSMARK FULL#
Therefore, it is most suited for demanding games of 2019 in full HD resolution and maximum detail settings, or QHD at slightly reduced settings. Other notable features include Adaptive Shading, unified cache, DisplayPort 1.4, HDMI 2.0b, HDR, Simultaneous Multi-Projection (SMP) as well as H.265 encoding and decoding (PlayReady 3.0).Īt Full HD resolution, the GeForce GTX 1660 Super performance lies between a GeForce GTX 1660 / GTX 1060 and a GTX 1660 Ti / 1070. These operations can now be carried out simultaneously. Nevertheless, there are some architectural improvements when it comes to floating point and integer performance. However, the GeForce GTX 1660 does not offer the latest features such as DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling) and Real Time Ray Tracing. The TU116 chip and other Turing-based GPUs are produced using the 12-nm manufacturing process. The GTX 1660 Super is based on the TU116 chip with 1,408 shader units, 48 ROPs, 88 TMUs and a 192-bit-wide memory bus (GDDR6 clocked at 7 GHz, effectively 14 GHz, bandwidth: up to 336 GB/s). The Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super is a powerful, mid-tier, Turing-based, desktop GPU.
0 kommentar(er)
