Can anyone explain this to me please. GPU Question.

[cpubound]

OK so using MSFS as its all i play currently. Run at 30fps because happy with that in a flight sim and only 1080p, again happy with that as its all i know.
The query here is about core clock and prefer maximum performance and how little I found my system really needs....

Worked out that capping 30fps in game, AND nvidia frame cap at 30fps and using Optimal or adaptive power pretty much locks mhz to 1200 and goes up if i hit a city.... keeps temps at about 60c on GPU CPU 55c.
That was HIGH preset.

So then i tried ULTRA for the sake of it....

Still smooth and mhz still at 1200 over Scottish highlands....

All of that and GPU pulling 1200mhz??! And not much usage?

Don't get it? Goes against everything i've heard.

Here is the stats: MSI afterburner.

RTX 2070 use 62%
GPU TEMP 58c
vram 4717
mem clock 7001
core clock 1200mhz
fan 48%
power 66%
cpu ryzen 5 3600 use 17%
cpu temp 55c
cpu core clock 3525 (locked no boost)
ram 8x2 8000
GPU VOLTS 0.706v

So that is no 'prefer max performance' on GPU, no boost on CPU.

0.706 volts only ? On ULTRA on MSFS?

To be clear this is a game that looks like this.

 

[2stains]

In MSFS if you uncap your FPS I'm sure you will see higher GPU load and higher clocks from the GPU also.

 

[cpubound]

In MSFS if you uncap your FPS I'm sure you will see higher GPU load and higher clocks from the GPU also.

Yes, i do, but if i run 30 frame cap with prefer max performance on nvidia it uses full power when it needs nowhere near that, all the time, in fact hardly ever.
I was always told to use prefer max performance.

 

[RasmusP]

Well you're playing in 1080p at 30 fps.
The performance of new hardware didn't get that much more, while consoles and a lot of users switched to 4k and still wanted 60 fps. Or players were fine with 1080p but wanted 120 fps and more.
This meant that the demands of the games couldn't become that much higher, since it already got 4x as much just from the resolution change. Or 2-3x as much from the crave for higher fps.

And you're playing at half the frame rate with the "old" resolution. Of course you don't need much GPU power then.

About prefer maximum performance in the Nvidia driver:
The issue isn't that your fps suffer. The issue is that your frametimes can suffer.
When I tried automobilista 1 for the first time, my gtx 1070 was only running at 800 MHz. Power was left at Nvidia default (adaptive back then I think).
3D mode started at 1500 MHz and boost clock was 2000 MHz.

My GPU load was only about 40% at 800 MHz and I had about 90 fps but about 4x per second, there was an ugly stutter going on.
Switched the frametime graph from afterburner on and I could see very uneven frametimes with a few spikes per second.

Put the GPU to "prefer max performance", clock locked at 1500 or more and the frametimes showed a butter smooth line like they should.

So depending on your GPU, the game, the load, driver version etc, having your GPU throttle down when not needing full power can work brilliantly.
But you can also get really ugly microstuttering due to it.

Hope that clears things up?