|
When using this resource, please read FragKrag's opening post. The Tech Support forum regulars have helped create countless of desktop systems without any compensation. The least you can do is provide all of the information required for them to help you properly. |
On August 10 2013 17:58 skyR wrote:
Are you sure you bought Windows 7 lol? Because I'm pretty sure Professional doesn't support multiple languages. The store you bought from sure seems shady... first the RAM, now this?
Small update on this because I just got the Win7 from the store I ordered. Took them a day after I called them asking what's up.
The key worked perfectly fine (it was pretty much just the sticker and a DVD) and the DVD that came with it lists as a "DELL Reinstallation DVD" and it actually lists ALL the language versions downloadable online.
Considering all that for 20€ (+9€ shipping wtf) I'm pretty damn happy about it. Huge recommendation for anyone from Germany who needs an OS.
@Cyro: I'll try to hit you up in like 10h or so, even 34 uncore @ 1.27V wasn't stable. T_T
|
United Kingdom20333 Posts
Thought it'd come easier if you could pass a bit of linpack @1.23vcore, just gotta put in some time and stress testing with a good approach
|
|
|
|
|
On August 16 2013 21:34 Gumbi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 01:05 TheMooseHeed wrote:
Well even though my warrenty was up HIS were still nice enough to send me a 7770 after my 6870 broke. I mean its quite a bit worse but my 6870 was always way more then I needed.
Lets me save a little more to get a good upgrade this time at least. woot That was very nice of them. I don't think the 7770 is too far behind the 6870 performance-wise?
According to benchmarks its around 20% worse in some areas and 50% worse in others. It uses 50% less power though
|
|
|
United Kingdom20333 Posts
Does anyone know what's up with nvidia wrecking amd cards at high end in sc2? I mean i've seen some results with multiple people being, 2, even 3x faster sometimes, with them GPU limited on a high end 7k card (7970, stock and oc'd 7950)
A little worrying because i keep running into pics like this:
![[image loading]](http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GeForce_GTX_770_WindForce_OC/images/sc2_1920_1200.gif)
Seems i can wreck the game with my 770, with like >200fps in all cases early game 1v1*, high 300's with some races, spawn positions and maps, while i see people reporting the low 100's and being gpu limited at times later into the game where i never would be, to the point of my gtx260 aparantly matching a modern high end amd card
*full extreme settings ofc
Il talk to Gumbi more but the weird performance is extremely concerning because the gap is so large
|
Yep, every AMD card has a harder time running SC2, especially with antialiasing on. Basically, Blizzard and nVidia are engaged in a state of mutual sponsorship so the game is very well optimized for nVidia cards. It's the typical "the way it's meant to be played" BS.
That said, the bottleneck for SC2 is generally the CPU. It doesn't require a monster GPU to run well even on Ultra. As long as you have a good CPU (and to a lesser extent good RAM size/speed), AMD cards will be able to run it fine and remain stable.
Also, SLI/CrossFire isn't really supported. Most people have reasonable results with it, but everyone still recommends a single powerful GPU over two weaker SLI'd GPUs.
|
United Kingdom20333 Posts
|
Just built my computer. Just wanted to thank this forum (skyR and Cyro in particular) for all the help. Everything seems to be running fast as hell. The thing that makes me happiest is seeing my GPU temps idle ~30 C instead of the 60+ I was often getting with my XFX 6970. The case was really easy to build with -- even for someone with no experience building alone before. Once I get my CPU cooler installed, I'll probably be back here to get some help regarding OCing my CPU.
This forum is an incredible resource and, for better or worse, has been the only excuse for me to login to TL to post in the past year.
|
Shouldn't be all that surprising. AMD did it as well with Valve if I recall correctly. Both companies look for advantages where they can.
|
Oh, it definitely happens across the board -- for instance, Lara Croft and AMD were in bed together until release, and while NVIDIA eventually fixed the performance issues post-release this practice has been industry standard for a while now. NVIDIA has been the worst at this for years (The Way It's Meant To Be Played), but recently AMD has been scoring big with mutual sponsorship deals on a ton of big recent releases such as Lara Croft.
I'm just annoyed that it's becoming a bit more prevalent.
|
United Kingdom20333 Posts
I've never seen it account for one card performing >2x as well as another on a 4 year old game mainstream game though, and if so, why wasn't it documented?
|
On August 18 2013 07:04 Cyro wrote:
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
Syntax error
Ready
|
United Kingdom20333 Posts
It's pretty shockingly terrible performance, i had no idea sc2 engine was this bad, aside from it giving me massive problems with streaming when other games don't, i guess that explains some things
|
Do you have any sources for the Blizzard/nVidia thing? I mean, there is no "The way it's meant to be played" logo on SC2. And as Cyro said, it doesn't/wouldn't explain the 2 - 3 times faster performance. If anything, it's AMD being crippled as opposed to nVidia being special if you know what I mean. The performance gap is terrifying.
It's somehwhat annoying, as I end up being GPU limited below 60 FPS in some fights, as low as 47 FPS I have been GPU limited I think. (Haswell @ 4.6ghz btw).
|
Can you guys share a link to the replay(s) you are using to test this and describe how you go about testing (on what to put the camera and stuff).
|
Looking at GameGPU's HoTS numbers, it shouldn't be too surprising Cyro haha:
http://gamegpu.ru/rts-/-strategii/starcraft-ii-heart-of-the-swarm-test-gpu.html
From personal experience, my 580 was never really sufficient for 1440P as it was. I never tracked VRAM usage, but looks like it was approaching 1.5GB too, which isn't good either. If there's any credit to AMD's efforts, their mid-range stuff (like the 7950) came with a sizeable 3GB frame buffer. Ridiculous that you need to either pay an extra $100 on nVidia's side (4GB 770/680) or you go even higher to the 780 to get it.
|
United Kingdom20333 Posts
When we played before i pretty consistently had a ton more FPS everywhere aside from minimums by a massive margin (maybe 1.75-3x?)
Fraps benchmark, go ahead if you want and try a specific replay, camera, time etc, select 1 building (so player selections don't come up) and note settings etc including reduce mouse lag, i don't have anything in particular to test with right now, just did some runs on a few random replays before
|
United Kingdom20333 Posts
On August 18 2013 11:37 mav451 wrote:Looking at GameGPU's HoTS numbers, it shouldn't be too surprising Cyro haha: http://gamegpu.ru/rts-/-strategii/starcraft-ii-heart-of-the-swarm-test-gpu.html From personal experience, my 580 was never really sufficient for 1440P as it was. I never tracked VRAM usage, but looks like it was approaching 1.5GB too, which isn't good either. If there's any credit to AMD's efforts, their mid-range stuff (like the 7950) came with a sizeable 3GB frame buffer. Ridiculous that you need to either pay an extra $100 on nVidia's side (4GB 770/680) or you go even higher to the 780 to get it.
Are they aware that they did all of their testing on singleplayer campaign which behaves completely differently to multiplayer in terms of performance? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
. What would be a similar card around the same price range. Or should I wait till it comes back on stock.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/O3unCKZ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4X2J4TA.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2QEeHdJ.png)
