|
I thought everyone says Nvidia's drivers are supposed to be better than ATI's, but I'm having so many CTDs with these latest drivers including 320.18 and 320.49 beta with my GTX 780 compared with my crossfired 6950's. Those had problems with micro stutter but at least I could play more games for more than 10 minute at a time. Anyone else having these issues?
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
Nope, works great. Bad card, maybe? Early adopters get revision one, usually, and validation can be a bit rushed. RMA? Edit: When you made the switch, did you make sure to run DriverFusion to clean every nook and cranny of the old driver setup? Little issues can be the result of crap from incompatible driver architectures hanging around. But apart from that, I'd say look for consistencies in your crashes. Are your temps high? Is it overclocked? Is it a factory overclock? Sometimes they gently caress up factory OCs... But in general the chip quality of 780s and Titans is kind of low, it is very rare to see an ASIC score above 80% on GTX 780s, my factory OC'd EVGA SC ACX model is 66.7% and in the 60%-70% range is much more common. For nVidia, even for a large chip, that is quite low. (Tahiti chips are generally much higher, incidentally, but it's not really apples to apples since we don't know what exactly validation is for each company). What we do know, in a sort of best guess, trust-Techpowerup kinda way, is that lower ASIC score correlates to needier and less giving chips. High ASIC for a chip correlates pretty nicely with lower voltages and higher clocks, low ASIC correlates in the opposite direction except under LN2 or other sub-zero super overclocking. In order to meet demand, it seems they're lowering the threshold for relative chip quality in consumer/prosumer cards (Titan counts here). It's one factor among many, I can't emphasize that enough! But it does mean that factory OCs might be less reliable in the first batch than normal, and the first batch of any cards generally has some hiccups they don't line out until a bit later. But if your card is at factory specifications and your power supply is not suspect and everything else is as it should be AND your driver situation is solid, I'd RMA the card for failing to work properly. Agreed fucked around with this message at 05:26 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 04:07
|
|
|
The 320 drivers are dogshit. Just do a google search for nvidia 320 crashes. I was getting hard locks and blue screens like mad until I went back to the 314 drivers. Apparently there is something screwed up with the phsyx driver that comes included. Hmm, just noticed they released a beta driver yesterday. Wonder if this one fixes the crashing. veedubfreak fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
SlayVus posted:Whats the best way to go about determining the performance difference between video cards that are several generations apart? Like an HD 7000 series and an HD 4000? They hardly use the same benchmarks any more and I would think you would need to rerun the older cards on the newer drivers to make sure that they were given a fair shot. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/550?vs=513 The performance difference between my 6970 and the old 4870 was significant and noticeable, so anything from the 7870 and up would have a similar impact unless you're running a tiny screen resolution. Whenever I'm upgrading, I generally just look at pixel/texture fillrate comparisons on GPUReview & upgrade to whatever card has roughly 2x the numbers in those fields. future ghost fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:51
|
|
|
veedubfreak posted:The 320 drivers are dogshit. Just do a google search for nvidia 320 crashes. I was getting hard locks and blue screens like mad until I went back to the 314 drivers. Apparently there is something screwed up with the phsyx driver that comes included. I think it's a bit of confirmation bias and self-selection - people with issues post about them, people who don't have problems say nothing, so it looks like more than it is. Maybe there's something up with the drivers, but I'm on the betas that were released yesterday and I can play anything for hours without issues. The only thing I've run into is that Far Cry 3 has an occasional shadow glitch. That's it, though, no issues with everything else I've played (from hyper-realistic modern DX11 games to older DX9 games on the UE3 engine - I'm playing through the Dead Space and Batman series games right now, as well as Crysis 3 and Far Cry 3, and Bioshock 2 and Infinite). I can also run FluidMark just fine on my dedicated PhysX card, and it will get the 650Ti (which, incidentally, I've overclocked quite a lot) up to mid-70% usage just for PhysX calculations without crashing or anything. Same for the benchmarks with Batman, Metro 2033. It clearly isn't an issue affecting everyone, so calling the drivers dogshit is a bit premature. I do think that the 314 drivers are comparatively fully mature, and the 320 drivers are experiencing some issues that are fairly run of the mill for launch drivers. I personally would tentatively be more inclined to point toward the new nVidia Experience application as a possible source of trouble, it has unusual access to games and I chose not to install it or the 3D drivers when updating from 314 to 320.18, and the same when moving to 320.49.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
Man, that 760 looks great. Maybe that means I can snag a second 670 on the cheap for SLI soon.  Real quick question: The 670 supports DX 11.1, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 19:23
|
|
|
KillHour posted:Real quick question: The 670 supports DX 11.1, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
Alereon posted:No, only nVidia's GK200 GPUs support DX11.1. That said, essentially all DX11.1 gaming capabilities will be usable on nVidia's DX11.0 cards, only non-gaming features are missing and preventing compliance. Do those missing features include the standardized 3D? Edit: Also, considering the 670 and 760 are basically the same hardware, what are the chances of being able to flash one to be the other?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
veedubfreak posted:The 320 drivers are dogshit. Just do a google search for nvidia 320 crashes. I was getting hard locks and blue screens like mad until I went back to the 314 drivers. Apparently there is something screwed up with the phsyx driver that comes included. The new beta has the first new version of physx in a while, I think. Unless the most recent WHQL also had one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 19:48
|
|
|
Agreed posted:I think it's a bit of confirmation bias and self-selection - people with issues post about them, people who don't have problems say nothing, so it looks like more than it is. Ya, I'm still pissed off that nvidia drivers won't let me use 2d surround because my monitors weren't all 3 bought on the same day, yet ATI drivers worked perfectly fine for them. Guess I'll give the new beta driver a go later today.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
Kinda wondering now if maybe I should offload my 10 day old vapor-x 7970 ge and maybe take up my buddy's offer of recruiting for his WoW guild in exchange for him going half on a 780. Though I'd rather slowly insert bamboo shoots under my fingernails than have anything to do with WoW again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
KillHour posted:Do those missing features include the standardized 3D?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
Ghostpilot posted:Kinda wondering now if maybe I should offload my 10 day old vapor-x 7970 ge and maybe take up my buddy's offer of recruiting for his WoW guild in exchange for him going half on a 780. Add up how many hours of your life will be wasted and how much damage to your liver the drinking from being a recruiter for a warcraft guild will do to you. Now, the deal doesn't seem that awesome anymore does it. Hell, you could probably mow a few lawns for the money for less stress.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
Ghostpilot posted:Kinda wondering now if maybe I should offload my 10 day old vapor-x 7970 ge and maybe take up my buddy's offer of recruiting for his WoW guild in exchange for him going half on a 780.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
KillHour posted:Edit: Also, considering the 670 and 760 are basically the same hardware, what are the chances of being able to flash one to be the other? There's no reason to do that. Edit your bios if you want the higher TDP, but the 760 has a weaker GPU than the 670.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 21:44
|
|
|
Ghostpilot posted:Kinda wondering now if maybe I should offload my 10 day old vapor-x 7970 ge and maybe take up my buddy's offer of recruiting for his WoW guild in exchange for him going half on a 780. Hang on there. That particular 7970 GHz is a pretty badass overclocker, isn't it? You're running single GPU, almost all of the stuttering is fixed now outside a handful of situations. And top-end Tahiti is still a powerful card with a GPU sporting more than 4 billion transistors. I would advise that you consider your usage scenarios carefully, and note that when it comes to overclocking the GTX 780 7.1 billion transistor beast, you're most likely going to get between a 200MHz and 300MHz on the core (and if you get a FANTASTIC one, maybe up to 370MHz, roughly, with 1241MHz being the apparent max turbo bin). Review units for the highest profile tech sites seem to magically all hit the top OC, no hand selection going on there no-sir! And then look at a comparison graph to see if you actually need the additional scenario-specific performance the GTX 780 provides. Some games run better on AMD cards, some on nVidia cards, but this one has enough brute force that if you look at one of the sleeker options a step down the ladder it closes the AMD vs. nVidia performance gap in the usually pro-AMD games  And also your time has to be worth more than recruiting for a WOW guild, if you do want to upgrade find a less soul-crushing way to pay for it. Agreed fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Jun 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
Agreed posted:Don't hate me for telling ya, but it turns out the ACX design scales down somewhat less well than one might hope. It's still hella better than reference cooling, but the noise levels can't match MSI or Gigabyte or Asus, and temps aren't quite as good either. It's the least effective of the four aftermarket coolers of note on the GTX 760. My 760 arrived today, and I'll be popping it in tonight.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
So I am buying a http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130771 used from someone online for $360 shipped. Is this a good deal?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 22:08
|
|
|
SlayVus posted:So I am buying a http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130771 used from someone online for $360 shipped. Is this a good deal?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 22:21
|
|
|
I asked this in the part picking thread--and I know this is not the place for it--but it will likely get buried. I am giving a kid my old PC and feel pretty lovely about not including the video card (an old 6870, still plays nearly everything). Is there any reason not to buy: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202008 I know NV stuff is nice but compute is not so great on 104 cards and I want to diddle with GPGPU. Also 3 GB of VRAM. Yes new stuff soon, but $310 AR for a 7970 with a good cooler. Salient to this thread: leaks of AMD parts speculated for September are floating about. I thought GCN 1.1 was canned but the specifications don't imply that they are GCN 2.0 chips. Are we assuming that GCN 2.0 is on 20 NM?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
SO I picked up Company of Heros 2 last night and played it for a short bit before my graphics card started making an annoying whining noise this seems to happen a few minutes after I start to play but only for that game. I Googled around and it seems to be a case of coil whining on my Radeon 7870 GHz edition, from what I have read it's harmless but annoying none the less. I understand it has to do with the voltage across the inductors changing at a high enough frequency to cause the core to vibrate and give off the sound. Some solutions are to turn down the voltage on the card but I'm wondering if you guys have any other suggestions or if I should bother RMA'ing the card.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 01:01
|
|
|
Alereon posted:A brand new GTX 770 (a better GTX 680) is $399.99 shipped. However, that's still a 2GB card, it's probably not very smart to spend more than $300 on a card with only 2GB of RAM, because you'll have an awesome fast high-end card that doesn't have enough memory to play new games with the settings turned up. I would think the smart choice would be to either buy a 4GB GTX 770 or a 2GB GTX 760. Well, if I can get close to what I want for my old cards then I figure the GTX 680 would actually cost me about $240-$260. After selling my old cards of course. Which puts it in the GTX 760 price range, but out performs it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 03:28
|
|
|
I'm having more and more trouble finding reasons not to upgrade to a 780, for almost no reason aside from that I want one. Now, I could justify it, but I have a 680, and it's not giving me any problems (and overclocks like a champ). I feel like my ego is going to win and my wallet is going to lose. e: should've read the new posts, ^^^ So I hear you want to buy a 680...
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 03:58
|
|
I EVER SPENT
|
InstantInfidel posted:I'm having more and more trouble finding reasons not to upgrade to a 780, for almost no reason aside from that I want one. Now, I could justify it, but I have a 680, and it's not giving me any problems (and overclocks like a champ). I feel like my ego is going to win and my wallet is going to lose. Be sensible! or not these things are loving awesome
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 04:05
|
|
|
With all these cards being sold, I could've gone from 6850 CF to 680 SLI for the same cost as swapping to a Prodigy and a single 680. Talk about overkill for 1920x1200
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 04:40
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:With all these cards being sold, I could've gone from 6850 CF to 680 SLI for the same cost as swapping to a Prodigy and a single 680. poo poo, I'm only on 1080p on a single monitor. Overkill is like  for me.Agreed posted:Be sensible! or not these things are loving awesome See, I just know that if I do this, it's a slippery slope to a custom waterblock setup for my CPU and GPU so I can get a no-noise and barely-stable overclock rig. e: I just checked and I'm a week past EVGA's step-up program. poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 05:25
|
|
|
Call and beg. Worst they can say is no.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 05:27
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:Call and beg. Worst they can say is no. Seriously, it's not like they don't want money. Worth a shot if you want the super high end graphics experience.  I'm on 1080p too, but I have a brain fever that causes me to buy graphics cards. Now if you'll excuse me I've got EVERY GAME TO MAX HAHA wooooooo 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
I'm in the market for a new graphics card to replace my aging Radeon 4850 512MB, I was probably going to upgrade to a Radeon 7870 but the new GTX 760 has made me rethink those plans. I might purchase a standard 2GB card or spend the 20 bucks for a 4GB card since memory usage is climbing in newer games/consoles and my 1920x1200 monitor is borderline. However, I also like quiet PCs and the 4GB eVGA model has the stock cooler which is noisier then the upgraded dual fans on the 2GB models. I like to keep my stuff for 3-4 years so a cheap upgrade for future proofing could be nice. So basically, is 2GB going to be a handicap for a GTX 760 in the near future?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 05:44
|
|
|
I would not say the 760 is a buff enough card that you should consider 4 GB of VRAM. It's close, maybe, but I'd consider the cutoff for that to be "a 770 driving a 2560x1440 monitor." There are, as yet, no games which need more VRAM with today's cards at 1080p or 1440p; buying more RAM is solely for the realm of multi-monitor setups and a hedge bet against the new console generation ballooning RAM requirements without changing shader/compute requirements very much.
Factory Factory fucked around with this message at 06:14 on Jun 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 06:12
|
|
|
Yeah, there are extremely few games which benefit from more than 2GB of VRAM and yet are not bottlenecked by your GPU. In fact, with some GPUs, the list is exactly one game, Skyrim Because the next gen consoles have a lot of memory (to be shared between system utilization and GPU utilization, mind) there's an assumption that PCs will need to have a lot of memory on their graphics cards or they'll get left behind. I personally am more agnostic on that question than some of us here, and want to wait to see how it actually pans out in use before saying "Yep, if you've got less than 3GB of VRAM you're hosed at 1080p and above." But at the same time, they've gotta use that memory for something, and big pretty textures plus nice antialiasing that isn't a huge compromise is a pretty cool way to use it. If RAGE had come out in the next generation of consoles, I imagine the final product's static texture quality would have been dramatically better, and the dynamic OpenGL megatexturing would have really shined instead of kind of flopped as a technology. Carmack has a habit of being ahead of his time in ways that cost his games wider adoption and his company/publisher(s) money. If Skyrim had shipped on next-gen consoles, the textures would almost certainly have been amazingly better, including the high-res texture pack for PC. Stuff like that seems almost self-evidently true. There are texture mods which don't kill the GPU but do eat up VRAM like it's going out of style. It will be down to how developers make use of the vastly improved resources at their disposal. The obvious choices are better textures, bigger environments, and better AA methods in terms of "what do we do with video memory in abundance" - but I look forward to less obvious things seeing daylight, too. 2GB is for today what 1GB was for Fermi. It's what you need if you're in the performance sector. Add more as you climb the performance ladder or find yourself needing to fill more pixels due to higher resolutions. One huge benefit of gaming at 1080p is that most of the bleeding edge features aren't performance killers at 1080p, and you can totally have your cake and eat it too with everything fancy turned up plus at least 4xMSAA or equivalent. Which looks better, in my subjective-rear end opinion, than 1600p with lower settings and no AA at all. No amount of pixels gets rid of jaggies entirely, it's just the nature of rendering, so that being said I'll take the best visual experience I can get that lets me keep all the options I want to max maxed, and raise the AA because I've got plenty of headroom in the framebuffer and on the GPU to do so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 06:42
|
|
|
I love Elder Scrolls/Bioshock games and both Skyrim and Bioshock Infinite are pushing close to 2GB even at 1080p. I haven't bought either yet because I would hate to play them on my 4850. It's the nextgen consoles memory capacity that is scaring me. The GPUs in XBOne and PS4 are nothing special these days compared to a GTX 760 but devs are talking about games at 1080p using 3+ GB video ram either because it provides a little performance boost or more frightening they aren't optimizing that much because the ram so plentiful on consoles. So what will quick console ports run like on PCs?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 07:18
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I played every Bioshock on a 6870 with 1 GB of ram. As long as shadow detail was dialed down (oddly) everything ran fine. I can't speak to Skyrim.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 07:24
|
|
|
My Bioshock Infinite experience with 6850 CF (1 GB effective VRAM) was fantastic. All that it turned down was the draw distance, everything else remained super beefed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 07:29
|
|
|
Wankie posted:I love Elder Scrolls/Bioshock games and both Skyrim and Bioshock Infinite are pushing close to 2GB even at 1080p. I haven't bought either yet because I would hate to play them on my 4850. It's the nextgen consoles memory capacity that is scaring me. The GPUs in XBOne and PS4 are nothing special these days compared to a GTX 760 but devs are talking about games at 1080p using 3+ GB video ram either because it provides a little performance boost or more frightening they aren't optimizing that much because the ram so plentiful on consoles. So what will quick console ports run like on PCs? This is an unanswerable question. They exist as far as the public is concerned entirely in a liminal state, waiting to become available. We haven't yet seen what the first, perhaps rushed, perhaps not rushed console ports will look like. The fact that they're programming for x86 on both consoles is good, as is the fact that there's nothing inherently fancy about Jaguar cores - they have the normal complement of modern instruction sets, so solid multi-core CPUs should be able to take good advantage of multi-threaded games coming off of console hardware. The GPU question, we can only speculate and it's fairly wild and baseless so let's not, eh? If a dev out and out says that they "aren't optimizing that much" then they're stupid, and if that leads to a lovely port then that's even more stupid. That hasn't generally been the case (if you're willing to use a controller for some games and don't mind a non-optimal PC user interface, anyway) - and when it has been, the devs have been called to task for producing crap. We're not going to stand here and let lazy developers piss down our legs and tell us it's raining. But there's no reason to suspect that such will be the norm at all. Current gen PC games with advanced graphics are around where we can expect many next-gen console titles to be. There's always the console "known platform" optimization boost, after some time and some tricks become more widespread there will be superior performance within the platform ecosystem and not counting PCs at all just because every single XBone and PS4 is the same, so they don't have to worry about careful optimizations (aka well-worked engine hacks) not working on unknown system configurations. Still, that benefit isn't nearly at the level EA's president would have you believe. Those are some lazy bastards when it comes to porting, especially with their racing titles. Nothing the engines are doing are inherently limited to console hardware in the least bit, it's just more profitable to keep them console proprietary and not spend time porting them to PC, because PC gamers who are also racing game fans will still buy the console version to scratch the itch and EA wins. EA is reviled for this, not praised. Anyway... Give it time and questions will be answered. Agreed fucked around with this message at 08:01 on Jun 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 07:57
|
|
|
I have a CRT monitor in my setup which is VGA only. 7770 to Mini Displayport-VGA cable. I can mess with resolutions/refresh rates up to 1280x1024 but no higher than that. I've tried registry hacking but can't get the VGA resolution to go any higher. I can mess with my monitors on Displayport or DVI though. Is it just not possible to force VGA resolutions? OS X knows my CRT can handle 1600x1200 and sets it to that my default, but as soon as I boot into Windows there is no way that seems to make forcing a higher resolution work. I've tried a few of the custom resolution tools out there too but nothing seems to work. I would understand if the card refused to put out VGA higher than 1280x1024 on both OSes but I feel like there must be a way to force 1600x1200 since OS X does it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 08:46
|
|
|
Can someone compare a gtx 570 and the 760 for me? I try to at least be able to play the newest released console/PC games on PC because they look so much better, especially at the end of the a consoles life like we are seeing with the PS3 right now. Tomb Raider and Borderlands 2 have been a joy, those two games plus Defiance have been the bulk of my play time lately. I just want to make it to the point that the PS4 has a decent library of games before I jump the PC ship back to console for a couple of years. Do you all think the 760 would be good for around 1-2 years? I keep seeing reference to an upgrade thread but Im not sure where that is, if this needs to go there just point me in the way and Ill post it over there
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 09:12
|
|
|
It's hard to say at the moment. Even though there is the issue of unified memory that Agreed was talking about a couple of posts above, when the consoles first come out they will probably still be developing games for the PS3/360 as well as the newer ones and rather than making multiple different versions (that cost a lot of money) they might have similar looking games that run at <30fps on the older consoles and 60fps on the newer ones. No-one can say how long they will do this before dropping the PS3 and 360 completely. Typically how long a GPU lasts is down to how much you can tolerate lower or unsmooth framerates but with the new consoles coming out, no one can really say how long anything will last through 2014.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 09:32
|
|
|
loudog999 posted:Can someone compare a gtx 570 and the 760 for me? Sure, here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 09:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
Thanks, this was what I was looking for. Not a huge jump but at that price I cant say no. Will get getting one soon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2013 09:41
|
|