Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread - Page 478
Forum Index > Tech Support |
When using this resource, please read the 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. | ||
DarthPunk
Australia10857 Posts
| ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20297 Posts
Set fan curve too when playing with GPU. You can do it in MSI afterburner, you just have to enable it right and then set it. You can make a curve, or just set minimum fan at 40c, maximum fan at ~77c with hysteresis 8c. | ||
DarthPunk
Australia10857 Posts
On April 14 2015 21:42 Cyro wrote: I updated last post a little~ Set fan curve too when playing with GPU. You can do it in MSI afterburner, you just have to enable it right and then set it. You can make a curve, or just set minimum fan at 40c, maximum fan at ~77c with hysteresis 8c. ok. | ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20297 Posts
| ||
DarthPunk
Australia10857 Posts
On April 14 2015 21:52 Cyro wrote: You can use a less steep curve but many of the gpu boost 2.0 GPU's just throttle all the way to the base clock if they're hitting 80c (and 80c temp for a small fraction of a second might only read ~78 on msi afterburner or gpu-z) which can be terrible. In some cases, it can mean losing a huge percentage of your GPU performance - reference 970's are 1050mhz base, but can somewhat regularly do 1550. That 500mhz loss is huge :D Yeah. That seems awesome but I just set the profile and that fan is LOUD. Got it running in furmark and it was bouncing around 1496 - 1509 mhz before it crashed 3 minutes in. This is at stock Voltage. Maybe i'll start bumping it up. Just set it to +6mV and it seems better. | ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20297 Posts
On April 14 2015 21:54 DarthPunk wrote: Yeah. That seems awesome but I just set the profile and that fan is LOUD. Got it running in furmark and it was bouncing around 1496 - 1509 mhz before it crashed 3 minutes in. This is at stock Voltage. Maybe i'll start bumping it up. Just set it to +6mV and it seemes better. You shouldn't be running Furmark for any reason. +6mv won't do anything, it might trigger a voltage bump but the volts can only go up by +25mv. If i set anything from ~+13mv to +87mv, i get exactly the same behavior because of where the stock voltage is and the voltage cap. You should either leave it at +0mv or just max out the slider, after verifying that it caps correctly (99.9% sure it should) 6 years ago furmark was dangerous but useful if you knew what you were doing and had a GPU with overpowered cooling and overbuilt+cooled VRM's (most 970's don't qualify there). Now however it's simply useless for any reason. | ||
DarthPunk
Australia10857 Posts
On April 14 2015 21:56 Cyro wrote: You shouldn't be running Furmark for any reason. +6mv won't do anything, it might trigger a voltage bump but the volts can only go up by +25mv. If i set anything from ~+13mv to +87mv, i get exactly the same behavior because of where the stock voltage is and the voltage cap. You should either leave it at +0mv or just max out the slider, after verifying that it caps correctly (99.9% sure it should) 6 years ago furmark was dangerous but useful if you knew what you were doing and had a GPU with overpowered cooling and overbuilt+cooled VRM's (most 970's don't qualify there). Now however it's simply useless for any reason. Oh the default test button launches some evga furmark variant which is why I was using it. Should I just run Heaven Valley as a test then? OK. so I think I got the hang of it. Currently running at 1505 mhz at stock voltage on valley. and Bumping in increments of 5. Once I crash I'll take it down a few notches, and play some Dying Light or something for a few hours and see how it goes. Thanks again for your help. | ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20297 Posts
On April 14 2015 22:01 DarthPunk wrote: Oh the default test button launches some evga furmark variant which is why I was using it. Should I just run Heaven Valley as a test then? OK. so I think I got the hang of it. Currently running at 1505 mhz at stock voltage on valley. and Bumping in increments of 5. Once I crash I'll take it down a few notches, and play some Dying Light or something for a few hours and see how it goes. Thanks again for your help. Heaven is one test, Valley is another ![]() they work, but are not very hard to pass. Many games crash on lower overclocks. I've been using WoW recently because at 200% render scale it seems to be extremely power intensive, it has no problem using 30-40 watts more on sensor than some other games do at 100% GPU load | ||
hariooo
Canada2830 Posts
On April 14 2015 04:29 Cyro wrote: You should get the 4690k. I do not know of dota 2, but sc2 and csgo will be CPU bound whenever you're dropping near those framerates with even a 960 (which is like, 1.65x weaker than 970) Even if you had a situation where you could get a CPU with HT and more encoding performance, game streaming performance hits are wonky and the CPU that simply runs the game the fastest in the first place (this can be a fast dual core for some games, or an oc'd 4690k instead of i7 etc) is generally what you want for the highest ingame FPS while streaming. In this case though, 4690k + OC is not only faster for running the games, but also has more encoding performance because the clock speed gap is big enough. It's the obvious choice. Also NVENC should be good for you (on the nvidia GPU's). A few button-clicks away in OBS and configured properly, the upgraded NVENC on newer maxwell GPU's is actually very good. You're basically just trading off some encoding quality for zero CPU load(*1) and often more importantly - no real performance hit(*2) *1 - all encoding done with NVENC on the GPU, it's an additional encoder so the GPU performance itself is also unaffected *2 - you need a consistent benchmark to even show a performance hit in many situations and you can't feel that it's there, even if CPU encoding with OBS, Xsplit or similar programs can make games feel weirdly laggy at times just wanted to say that dota 2 is pretty cpu bound. that doesn't mean you can't get more avg framerate with a better graphics card but minimum framerate is bound a lot by your CPU (especially if you're streaming or doing anything else in the background). just create a lobby with cheats, turn wtf mode on and cast a bunch of meteors with invoker and you'll see worst case min fps scenarios for your setup. even for people maintaining 144hz 90% of the time you're probably hitting 60fps at least, even on the best CPU's. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States23274 Posts
I'll probably get an x60 series (they seem to be the best value to me), so if it's a couple months before I get it, should I just wait X more months for the next series or just get one when I can to bump up my settings for stuff like GTAV? (I have a GTX 560 Ti 448 at the moment). The other issue is my HDMI cable got kicked out a long time ago so the port is unreliable and I'd like to play on my TV. So that is one reason I'm tempted to make a purchase sooner, rather than when I would get the most time of having the best 'x60' series available. I have an old ASRock P67 EXTREME4 GEN3 LGA 1155 Intel P67 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard if that matters also. Opinions/info is appreciated. | ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20297 Posts
If you want to buy before then, the 970 is actually pretty much the 560ti equivalent of current gen and the 290 is its AMD rival for graphics performance | ||
GreenHorizons
United States23274 Posts
On April 15 2015 08:14 Cyro wrote: Some time next year we should get new process (~14-16nm instead of 28nm which has been used for over 3 years) as well as HBM on mainstream GPU's AFAIK~ (stacked memory for much higher capacity and bandwidth) If you want to buy before then, the 970 is actually pretty much the 560ti equivalent of current gen and the 290 is its AMD rival for graphics performance Exactly the info I was looking for. Glad I asked. I have a display port on my card. With an adapter or whatever, I should be able to use it essentially like an hdmi right? (old tv doesn't have a display port) | ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20297 Posts
| ||
Disregard
China10252 Posts
edit: Must resist urge to splurge | ||
GreenHorizons
United States23274 Posts
On April 15 2015 09:48 Disregard wrote: I've not been up to date with SSD prices but $90 for a 250GB 850 EVO, what the hell. Only been about 2 years since I got my 120GB version and the price has dropped so drastically. edit: Must resist urge to splurge Yeah thought 120 would be enough for GTA V (say's it requires 60GB) turns out it actually needs 120ish for installation (or so I hear?) So thinking on getting an SSD before the graphics card. On that note there isn't a 28-14/16nm type tech switch on a similar horizon for SSD's right? | ||
Disregard
China10252 Posts
| ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20297 Posts
well, gta5 is not even running so hot atm. The very little data that i've seen has 980's at >1.5x more FPS than 290's and horrible frametime distribution all around (needing ~80-90fps to look nearly as solid as a smooth 60fps does) | ||
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
Disregard
China10252 Posts
| ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20297 Posts
On April 16 2015 02:54 darkness wrote: 65 gigabytes of disk... companies should really stop adding all kind of random shit and optimise instead. That's especially true for SSD owners even though storage space for hard disks is cheaper than ever. That's just the compressed size, i've heard it's way bigger :D It's a huge game with good texture qualities. 3GB VRAM isn't enough for 1080p, though it might be if you're not running any MSAA. | ||
| ||