Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
r0ck0
Sep 12, 2004
r0ck0s p0zt m0d3rn lyf

Why is my physics score higher? i7-4790k o/c to 4.7 with memory o/c to 2133mhz, I forgot what exactly I have my gigabyte 970 oc to something like 1550 core and 7.5ghz memory.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SlayVus
Jul 10, 2009


Grimey Drawer

Your physics score is a combination of CPU+GPU power. The GPU is doing some of the work, but it still relies of the CPU for processing as well. Some people with 1st and 2nd generation Core iX CPUs have slower physics scores than 3rd and 4th generation CPUs comparatively.


For example, this guy's 2500k that is not overclocked it dragging him down by 6k in the physics department.

DarthBlingBling
Apr 19, 2004

These were also dark times for gamers as we were shunned by others for being geeky or nerdy and computer games were seen as Childs play things, during these dark ages the whispers began circulating about a 3D space combat game called Elite

- CMDR Bald Man In A Box

SlayVus posted:

I actually have a 10,933 Fire Strike. My Graphics Score was ~13,000. If you threw an overclock on the the GPUs you should easily be able to increase your graphics score.

I did have an overclock. CPU was at 4.6GHz and the GPU was at at +130/+475. Seems to be the limit on stability unfortunately. Wasn't complaining about the score, personally thought it was quite good, not going to expect a 100% increase in graphics score because of the second card.

r0ck0
Sep 12, 2004
r0ck0s p0zt m0d3rn lyf

You guys know saying you have an overclock of +150 doesn't really say much. Since each brand has there own stock clocks the +150 could be the same as a +100 on another card.

Zero VGS
Aug 16, 2002
"It has gunfights and shit!"


Lipstick Apathy

Somehow I'd never seen this old 3DFX print ad before today, but it totally made my day:

DarthBlingBling
Apr 19, 2004

These were also dark times for gamers as we were shunned by others for being geeky or nerdy and computer games were seen as Childs play things, during these dark ages the whispers began circulating about a 3D space combat game called Elite

- CMDR Bald Man In A Box

Think it was 1400MHz boost at the time. No idea how people are getting close to 1.6GHz on the boost.

^^^^^ You'd think Nvidia would do something with the 3dfx brand

DarthBlingBling fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Nov 24, 2014

b0ner of doom
Mar 17, 2006


I had a Voodoo 2 and it was a good card cause I could actually play Quake 2 with sweet, crisp, glide acceleration and then brag to all my friends and other ignorants who were still dumb enough to playing in software mode lol

Roller Coast Guard
Aug 27, 2006

With this magnificent aircraft,
and my magnificent facial hair,
the British Empire will never fall!




If I'm contemplating a triple-screen setup and don't want to spend vast amounts of money, how much hassle is it to try and run it all through one GPU? I'm sure it's "possible", but generally am I better to just go straight to SLI with a couple of mid-range cards?

Twerk from Home
Jan 17, 2009

This avatar brought to you by the 'save our dead gay forums' foundation.


Helicon One posted:

If I'm contemplating a triple-screen setup and dont want to spend vast amounts of money, is it realistic to try and run it all through one GPU? I'm sure it's "possible", but is it worth the hassle and cash or am I better to just go straight to SLI with a couple of mid-range cards?

You want to do several displays merged together and game across 3? Your best bet is probably getting a pair of the Gigabyte 970s that have 3 Displayport on them and doing that.

For some reason, the mini-ITX one is $30 cheaper right now and not much slower. You can sell your 2nd Far Cry key to offset costs as well.

Zero VGS
Aug 16, 2002
"It has gunfights and shit!"


Lipstick Apathy

Helicon One posted:

If I'm contemplating a triple-screen setup and don't want to spend vast amounts of money, how much hassle is it to try and run it all through one GPU? I'm sure it's "possible", but generally am I better to just go straight to SLI with a couple of mid-range cards?

Depends on what kind of game you're trying to run on triple monitors. If you just wanna stretch something like Call of Duty, Diablo, or a flight sim across three 1080p monitors, I'm confident the Gigabyte 970 could handle that if you lowered the settings to medium.

Factory Factory
Mar 19, 2010

This is what
Arcane Velocity was like.


Don't go SLI until you've exhausted what a single card can do.

Also, there is no "hassle" running 3 screens off one GPU these days.

Swartz
Jul 28, 2005

by FactsAreUseless


Factory Factory posted:

Don't go SLI until you've exhausted what a single card can do.

Do you mind explaining this further?

I would like to get 2x GTX 970's with 8gb VRAM when they come out. I'm only on 1080p, but I'm a whore to graphics and I love using 4k DSR. I'm also someone that has to play everything on Ultra settings.

Is there any particular reason someone wouldn't want to use SLI?

Twerk from Home
Jan 17, 2009

This avatar brought to you by the 'save our dead gay forums' foundation.


Swartz posted:

Is there any particular reason someone wouldn't want to use SLI?

Historically, SLI was a gigantic pain in the rear end because of heat problems, frame pacing, driver issues, and games not supporting SLI at launch or sometimes at all. With the 970, heat problems are less than they have been before, frame pacing has gotten better, but sometimes games won't support SLI and you certainly won't be able to support things like TXAA that need information about the preceding frame.

2 8GB 970s to play at 1080 is insanity. If you're going to drop $800 on GPUs, you really should have a bigger monitor than that. I'm happily using a single 970 at 2560x1440 at drat near max graphics, an SLI is 4K or 3x2560x1440 multiscreen setup territory now.

mcbexx
Jul 4, 2004

British dentistry is
not on trial here!




Swartz posted:

Do you mind explaining this further?

I would like to get 2x GTX 970's with 8gb VRAM when they come out. I'm only on 1080p, but I'm a whore to graphics and I love using 4k DSR. I'm also someone that has to play everything on Ultra settings.

DSR doesn't impede your framerate that much.
For instance, I'm using 3840x2400 DSR in Battlefield 4 with all options cranked up and I am at 80-110 frames per second with the occasional dip into the 70s.

Thats on a 2500k@4.0 and a single MSI 970GTX at stock speeds.
If you're looking into 120-144Hz however...

Protocol7
Jul 26, 2012

Cyber Hellcat is not amused


mcbexx posted:

DSR doesn't impede your framerate that much.
For instance, I'm using 3840x2400 DSR in Battlefield 4 with all options cranked up and I am at 80-110 frames per second with the occasional dip into the 70s.

Thats on a 2500k@4.0 and a single MSI 970GTX at stock speeds.
If you're looking into 120-144Hz however...

The gently caress am I doing wrong? 2500k@4.2 with a EVGA 970 ACX and I don't get near 60 with BF4 maxed at 1080p.

BurritoJustice
Oct 9, 2012



I was skimming through the NVIDIA Drivers Release 343 PDF and found a fairly fundamental change that seems to have been glossed over.

"Release 343 Notes posted:

Surround - NVIDIA Control Panel
Added support for up to 5 displays

Seems like the five outputs on the 900 might be able to be used all at once? Its under surround so as gaming monitors as well even.

wargames
Mar 16, 2008

official yospos cat censor


BurritoJustice posted:

I was skimming through the NVIDIA Drivers Release 343 PDF and found a fairly fundamental change that seems to have been glossed over.


Seems like the five outputs on the 900 might be able to be used all at once? Its under surround so as gaming monitors as well even.

Time to test that 5 34 inch monitor setup.

Party Plane Jones
Jul 1, 2007

by Reene


Fun Shoe

wolrah posted:

EVGA 970SC fits just fine. It actually fits a bit better than other video cards I've had thanks to the side power connectors. The drive bay in front of the slot is still empty from two upgrades ago but could be used with a right-angle SATA plug.


(excuse my total lack of cable management, nothing runs hot so I really don't care)

How cool does the EVGA card run? (How is it that every 970 that comes out has coil whine somehow?)

Your cable routing is better than mine, I just stick the 15 cords I don't use under the 5 inch bays because I stupidly didn't buy the PSU with removable cords at the time. Having the 6 pin connectors on the side would probably help. I could fit in the MicroITX Gigabyte or the Zotac 970 into that slot since they're both barely cracking 7/8 inches in length come to think of it.

Party Plane Jones fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Nov 24, 2014

Fajita Fiesta
Dec 15, 2013




I need an upgrade

Factory Factory
Mar 19, 2010

This is what
Arcane Velocity was like.


BurritoJustice posted:

I was skimming through the NVIDIA Drivers Release 343 PDF and found a fairly fundamental change that seems to have been glossed over.


Seems like the five outputs on the 900 might be able to be used all at once? Its under surround so as gaming monitors as well even.

That'd be nice, but no. If you check the Surround Configurator Gizmomabob, it's a max of 4 screens per GPU, with 2-way SLI as a minimum for five screens.

However, if you have thin-bezel screens, you can now do a 4-display array on a single card (no accessory screen).

Bleh Maestro
Aug 30, 2003


Protocol7 posted:

The gently caress am I doing wrong? 2500k@4.2 with a EVGA 970 ACX and I don't get near 60 with BF4 maxed at 1080p.

What's the rest of your setup?

That definitely sounds wrong. You should be able to run BF4 up to 1440p at least with smooth 60fps.

BurritoJustice
Oct 9, 2012



Factory Factory posted:

That'd be nice, but no. If you check the Surround Configurator Gizmomabob, it's a max of 4 screens per GPU, with 2-way SLI as a minimum for five screens.

However, if you have thin-bezel screens, you can now do a 4-display array on a single card (no accessory screen).

That's disappointing but not entirely unexpected. This at least brings NVidia into parity with AMD as far as 5 screen surround gaming goes even if it does require two cards (no five screen setup would run that well off one card anyway).

td4guy
Jun 13, 2005

I always hated that guy.



Protocol7 posted:

The gently caress am I doing wrong? 2500k@4.2 with a EVGA 970 ACX and I don't get near 60 with BF4 maxed at 1080p.
You're getting worse performance than my GTX680. Unless you have AA turned up to something crazy high, then there's a problem here.

Doomay
Jan 15, 2008


edit: Please disregard. I am an idiot that can't read the OP.

Doomay fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Nov 25, 2014

Factory Factory
Mar 19, 2010

This is what
Arcane Velocity was like.


Literally the first line of the first post tells you that this is not the appropriate thread.

eggyolk
Nov 8, 2007




Fajita Fiesta posted:



I need an upgrade

Go little i3 2100T go!

Deuce
Jun 18, 2004
Mile High Club

Protocol7 posted:

The gently caress am I doing wrong? 2500k@4.2 with a EVGA 970 ACX and I don't get near 60 with BF4 maxed at 1080p.

Do you have DSR cranked up?

Is your 970 throttling?

Ak Gara
Jul 29, 2005

That's just the way he rolls.

Screw ya'all with your not crashing Firestrike.

SlayVus
Jul 10, 2009


Grimey Drawer

Ak Gara posted:

Screw ya'all with your not crashing Firestrike.

The demo crashes on my GPUS overclock, but the bench marks run just fine. I have an OC of 1550~ core clock boost at a considerably low 61c. MSI GTX 970 Golden Edition. Under the same test environment as HardOcp, my GPU runs 10c cooler than the standard MSI 4G Gaming.

Though my mother board is having problems. I'm getting constant USB on my wifi. Plus, I started getting static on my hdmi from the GTX 970 connected to my TV. Then I'm getting serious audio Desync in video when my CPU hits 80% usage (4790k).

DarthBlingBling
Apr 19, 2004

These were also dark times for gamers as we were shunned by others for being geeky or nerdy and computer games were seen as Childs play things, during these dark ages the whispers began circulating about a 3D space combat game called Elite

- CMDR Bald Man In A Box



OK went back and tweaked a little. CPU at 4.7 and GPU at 8GHz mem and 1442MHz core (boosted). If I get a water cooler could maybe could push the CPU but I think that's my limit.

How are people determining their boost clocks? To me getting close to 1.6GHz seems unrealistic and I know Valley reports the core clock incorrectly.

HalloKitty
Sep 30, 2005

Adjust the bass and let the Alpine blast


DarthBlingBling posted:

If I get a water cooler could maybe could push the CPU but I think that's my limit.

I don't think water would achieve much now, I'd say 4.7GHz for Haswell is absolutely outstanding.

For comparison, I get around 7K in Fire Strike with a 2500K @ 4.4GHz and a 7950 Boost overclocked.

That said, I dropped the clocks back to stock on the 7950 because I couldn't get the card to idle properly (the voltage stayed at 1.25 all the time), and apparently nobody on here has seen that problem before.

vvv Ah, I see, yeah, beefier cooling needed to make that reasonable every day.

HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 12:30 on Nov 25, 2014

DarthBlingBling
Apr 19, 2004

These were also dark times for gamers as we were shunned by others for being geeky or nerdy and computer games were seen as Childs play things, during these dark ages the whispers began circulating about a 3D space combat game called Elite

- CMDR Bald Man In A Box

HalloKitty posted:

I don't think water would achieve much now, I'd say 4.7GHz for Haswell is absolutely outstanding.

For comparison, I get around 7K in Fire Strike with a 2500K @ 4.4GHz and a 7950 Boost overclocked.

That said, I dropped the clocks back to stock on the 7950 because I couldn't get the card to idle properly (the voltage stayed at 1.25 all the time), and apparently nobody on here has seen that problem before.

God knows if my 4.7 is stable, it's stable enough to run Firestrike long enough, but temps are touching 100C for prime and the physics parts of 3D Mark. Day to day I run it at 4.4.

Aphex-
Jan 29, 2006



Dinosaur Gum

So from reading the last 15 or so pages of the thread I've gathered that the general consensus for nice smooth 1440p gaming at just about max graphics would be to get a 970?

I've got a 770 at the moment and it's absolutely lovely on 1080p but since getting a 1440p monitor I do have to turn down some options and with games like The Witcher and GTA coming up I'd like to really get the most out of them. I mean, I could technically afford a 980 but would I get significantly more out of it? This would be with an OC'ed 3570k.

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


NaDy posted:

So from reading the last 15 or so pages of the thread I've gathered that the general consensus for nice smooth 1440p gaming at just about max graphics would be to get a 970?

I've got a 770 at the moment and it's absolutely lovely on 1080p but since getting a 1440p monitor I do have to turn down some options and with games like The Witcher and GTA coming up I'd like to really get the most out of them. I mean, I could technically afford a 980 but would I get significantly more out of it? This would be with an OC'ed 3570k.

Yes, a 970 is ideal for most people. The extra performance of a 980 isn't enough to justify the extra cost - if a 970 isn't enough, a pair of them in SLi would likely give you much better performance:dollar although there are the usual SLi tradeoffs.

Aphex-
Jan 29, 2006



Dinosaur Gum

My motherboard (P8Z77-V LX) doesn't support SLI, only crossfire unfortunately. I'll most likely go with one 970, I don't necessarily need to shoot for constant 60fps all the time so it seems like my best bet.

Protocol7
Jul 26, 2012

Cyber Hellcat is not amused


Bleh Maestro posted:

What's the rest of your setup?

That definitely sounds wrong. You should be able to run BF4 up to 1440p at least with smooth 60fps.

GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 rev 1.3 mobo, 16GB Kingston RAM (don't know the timings off my head but it's decent ram), and the game is on a 1TB WD Black.

I have been having issues all over Windows so I think when I cloned onto my new SSD (Intel 330) that something went awry and now my Windows is hosed.

RyceCube
Dec 22, 2003


I want to purchase a 970 using my Amazon.ca gift certificate money.

My options are:

MSI Blue version ($389):
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B00...&pf_rd_i=915398

MSI Red ($437):
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B00...=A19N3NI8X4F24J

EVGA ACX 2.0 ($399)
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B00...&pf_rd_i=915398

Gigabyte ($463)
http://www.amazon.ca/GEFORCE-GTX970...ds=gigabyte+970

There's also a zotac one on NCIX for like $360 but then I can't use my Amazon money (I wouldn't hate to save it for something else, though).

Noise and cooling efficiency is important to me. I heard the EVGA ones don't sit properly on the heatsink but I'm not sure if it was fixed yet since that seemed to be a report on the launch ones. So far, the MSI Red seems like the best price/performance but just wanted to get some opinions from the thread.

Hace
Feb 13, 2012

<<Mobius 1, Engage.>>


Protocol7 posted:

The gently caress am I doing wrong? 2500k@4.2 with a EVGA 970 ACX and I don't get near 60 with BF4 maxed at 1080p.

You don't have resolution scale cranked up to 200%, do you?

craig588
Nov 19, 2005

by Nyc_Tattoo


The EVGA ones don't have a significant problem with the heatsink, the heat pipe placement has very little effect on how well it cools. It's the mainly fan design that results in them being louder and cooling worse than other models.

I'd recommend a Gigabyte or Asus model because those 2 seem to have the fewest problems. I'm not sure how much stock Amazon.ca usually gets, but if you keep checking you should be able to find a model sold by Amazon and not a 3rd party seller which will be significantly cheaper and get you the better return policy of Amazon.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

RyceCube
Dec 22, 2003


craig588 posted:

The EVGA ones don't have a significant problem with the heatsink, the heat pipe placement has very little effect on how well it cools. It's the mainly fan design that results in them being louder and cooling worse than other models.

I'd recommend a Gigabyte or Asus model because those 2 seem to have the fewest problems. I'm not sure how much stock Amazon.ca usually gets, but if you keep checking you should be able to find a model sold by Amazon and not a 3rd party seller which will be significantly cheaper and get you the better return policy of Amazon.

The Gigabyte model is $450 on NCIX which seems like the lowest price we'll probably get. Things cost a bit more here than in the states. I think stock is fairly low as NCIX is sold out on the MSI's, so I might just pay a tiny bit more and get it now on Amazon.ca if there are no issues with the red one that are notable. I got the Amazon.ca money for free, so taking a tiny hit to me isn't a big deal as if I tried to sell the gift card, I would lose a bit anyway.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply