|
Pixel pushing requires ROPs (render output unit/raster operations pipeline, devices that convert geometry and textures into pixels), and the R9-290X is the current leader there (as the recent "next generation" card until the next major refresh). It has 64 ROPS vs. a 780 Ti's 48 or the 32 of a 770 or R9-280X/7970. The only rumor mill for Maxwell right now is 64 ROPs on the 780-equivalent SKU and 40 on the next step down. Unless those ROPs are clocked differently than Kepler's ROPs, pixel fill should be similar between an "880" and a 290X. This means similar bottlenecking at 4K, though other bottlenecks (memory bandwidth, shader throughput, etc.) may apply as well and cause differences between the Red and Green cards. But keep in mind, I got this figure from a forum thread quoting a rumor about a leak, and it also says that GM100 will have 6144 CUDA cores - a more-than-doubling of the already outrageously large GK110 in the 780 Ti. Take these figures with a HUGE grain of salt.
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 13:38 |
|
|
KakerMix posted:Finding out that NOTHING on the market can really drive a game at 7680x1440 (and have trouble with just 2560x1440 at all) is just kinda sad. With 4k monitors VRAM limits actually start to count for something. Veedubfreak gets good FPS on his 7680x1440 setup, so I have no idea what you're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 06:55
|
|
|
deimos posted:Veedubfreak gets good FPS on his 7680x1440 setup, so I have no idea what you're talking about. FPS sure, but the gimmick of having more FOV and a weird super-stretched kind-of peripheral way to display a game isn't worth the downgrade in visual "oomph" that it costs. I don't know what games he plays, and maybe I have a problem with visual bling in the games I play. Maybe I need two more cards (and the window air conditioning unit to displace the heat that they'd dump into my room because GODDAMN does my system dump a lot of heat already) but I'd rather approach 60 FPS on a single screen with all the bells and whistles vs. maybe-30 with a bunch of eye candy turned off/down. Like was said earlier as well, team green's surround is kind of a pain in the rear end in just usability. If you SLI, then you must run in an SLI mode if you want the benefit, which means a single monitor (with any other monitors being turned off) or a surround setup. This introduces a lot of compromises into the equation that makes a (again, I only know NVIDIA's multi-monitor stuff) SLI'd surround setup beyond what a lot of people would put up with. This is all going to become moot anyway because once there is a consumer-version of the Rift out multi-monitor gaming for an immersive experience is dead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 08:00
|
|
|
You'd figure Nvidia would quickly move into licensing the gsync tech to make AMD back off on pushing for the standard change that freesync requires. Like others have said, I applaud Nvidia for coming up with the tech, but it's a sunken cost. If changing the standard is whats best and easiest for consumers then that's where we'll end up eventually.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 08:26
|
|
|
Purgatory Glory posted:You'd figure Nvidia would quickly move into licensing the gsync tech to make AMD back off on pushing for the standard change that freesync requires. Like others have said, I applaud Nvidia for coming up with the tech, but it's a sunken cost. If changing the standard is whats best and easiest for consumers then that's where we'll end up eventually. It's also really expensive and if monitor companies can get away with it they won't want to increase component costs any more than they have to Replacing an ASIC with a better version is far cheaper than having an expensive fpga daughter board
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 09:07
|
|
|
KakerMix posted:I don't suppose we have any real information BUT do we have any indication of the next-generation of cards coming from AMD/NVIDIA in regards to pixel pushing power? We haven't heard anything yet, as far as I know, and if we did, it could potentially kill the sales of current cards, so I don't think you'll hear much for a while.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 09:51
|
|
|
KakerMix posted:FPS sure, but the gimmick of having more FOV and a weird super-stretched kind-of peripheral way to display a game isn't worth the downgrade in visual "oomph" that it costs. I don't know what games he plays, and maybe I have a problem with visual bling in the games I play. Maybe I need two more cards (and the window air conditioning unit to displace the heat that they'd dump into my room because GODDAMN does my system dump a lot of heat already) but I'd rather approach 60 FPS on a single screen with all the bells and whistles vs. maybe-30 with a bunch of eye candy turned off/down. 7680x1440 is also ~30% more pixels than 4K, veedub said (IIRC) that he gets respectable FPS (sub 60 but still) with bling turned on on dual 290Xs. So extrapolating a bit 4K@60FPS does not seem out of the question. The problem he mentioned was running out of memory, but again, he's running >4K resolutions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
Am I doing something wrong or is a 780 really not enough to have a smooth framerate in Borderlands 2 with PhysX on high? I was kinda excited for it until I noticed battles lagged massively. I put it down to medium and it was better, but firefights were a bit choppy. Now its on low and I haven't looked back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Endymion FRS MK1 posted:Am I doing something wrong or is a 780 really not enough to have a smooth framerate in Borderlands 2 with PhysX on high? I was kinda excited for it until I noticed battles lagged massively. I put it down to medium and it was better, but firefights were a bit choppy. Now its on low and I haven't looked back. There's a reason I keep a dedicated PhysX coprocessor and it's basically all Bs. Borderlands and Batmans. It seems like the problem has more to do with how the SMXes juggle the workload than actually just having enough processor power to do it all, but that's a surface read tbh - I don't actually understand SMXes and I think the list of people who really, properly get them is very small. SMs make more sense, but this Kepler stuff is... way out there. So I don't want to say it's DEFINITELY a workload scheduling thing or whatever, but qualitatively I can say that my gaming experience is vastly better if I use my 650Ti to do all the PhysX processing vs. running the same stuff but with my 780Ti handling both PhysX and rendering. It works okay on Low-Medium, but on High it goes to poo poo, especially minimum framerates (which is why I think it must be a workload juggling issue, some thing that forces it to do THIS then THAT in an inefficient way - PhysX is a light CUDA workload, and going from shaders to CUDA quickly seems difficult in the instance of PhysX).
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
Endymion FRS MK1 posted:Am I doing something wrong or is a 780 really not enough to have a smooth framerate in Borderlands 2 with PhysX on high? I was kinda excited for it until I noticed battles lagged massively. I put it down to medium and it was better, but firefights were a bit choppy. Now its on low and I haven't looked back. My 670 that I use as a dedicated PhysX processor spikes to around 50% utilization during heavy firefights with PhysX on high, so I think it's pretty intense in terms of processing power required.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Agreed posted:There's a reason I keep a dedicated PhysX coprocessor and it's basically all Bs. Borderlands and Batmans. Funny, I was just cranking the PhysX last night for Bureau https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJClNPiyOYQ It's nice to have something productive for old 460's to do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Agreed posted:There's a reason I keep a dedicated PhysX coprocessor and it's basically all Bs. Borderlands and Batmans. It seems like the problem has more to do with how the SMXes juggle the workload than actually just having enough processor power to do it all, but that's a surface read tbh - I don't actually understand SMXes and I think the list of people who really, properly get them is very small. SMs make more sense, but this Kepler stuff is... way out there. So I don't want to say it's DEFINITELY a workload scheduling thing or whatever, but qualitatively I can say that my gaming experience is vastly better if I use my 650Ti to do all the PhysX processing vs. running the same stuff but with my 780Ti handling both PhysX and rendering. It works okay on Low-Medium, but on High it goes to poo poo, especially minimum framerates (which is why I think it must be a workload juggling issue, some thing that forces it to do THIS then THAT in an inefficient way - PhysX is a light CUDA workload, and going from shaders to CUDA quickly seems difficult in the instance of PhysX). I'd agree, if really does feel like the pipeline gets very heavily saturated when set to high. Could just be bad coding on the games part or it could be like you said a scheduling issue where the PhysX stuff take absolute priority. Could also be that the PhysX computations just end up "hogging" a good part of the GPU. I only really notice the slow down in Borderlands 2 when there's a lot of blood. I'm not even sure if the blood has any fancy fluid computations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:Funny, I was just cranking the PhysX last night for Bureau https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJClNPiyOYQ Ooh, me too  I've been playing that one lately and it has a really nice PhysX implementation, and I personally feel like the game is really nice, though there are some pernicious graphics glitches (Reflections Off, Shadows Medium seems to fix most of the issues with the lighting model though) and the development was a disaster the end product is a lot of fun in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
Random tangent; did you get a Superclocked model, Agreed? How was it on the overclocking?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Endymion FRS MK1 posted:Am I doing something wrong or is a 780 really not enough to have a smooth framerate in Borderlands 2 with PhysX on high? I was kinda excited for it until I noticed battles lagged massively. I put it down to medium and it was better, but firefights were a bit choppy. Now its on low and I haven't looked back. Are you running above 1080 or expecting above 60fps? I ask because I have a 780 at the moment and its smooth with everything jacked up to maximum in BL2. Now BF4 is another story...
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:Funny, I was just cranking the PhysX last night for Bureau https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJClNPiyOYQ I thought benchmarks showed dedicated physX cards actually slowed the machine down vs just using one card.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:I thought benchmarks showed dedicated physX cards actually slowed the machine down vs just using one card. I've used a lot of benchmarks for PhysX and this has never, ever been the case. Metro 2033, Metro Last Light, some of the dedicated PhysX benches available - never in any case does one card outperform card + dedicated coprocessor. El Scotch posted:Random tangent; did you get a Superclocked model, Agreed? How was it on the overclocking? I did get the EVGA SC ACX model, and its overclocking performance has been fantastic. Nails 1250MHz in even very demanding games without any artifacts at all. Memory overclock is less dramatic, running it at 1860MHz base clock (so +220) and I could probably go higher but it isn't memory bandwidth limited to begin with from what I can tell so I'd rather it use its TDP for the core clock, since it actually does take advantage of >99% power draw and regularly hangs out between 103% and 106%, the max draw, when running at 1250MHz in games. My model, with +75mV, can get to and maybe a bit above 1.21V from the factory. I like the SC ACX units because they have, for the Kepler generation, anyway, had higher factory BIOS voltage limitations and more aggressive coarse-grained boost behavior, making it easier to get higher clocks with them with less effort and no need to dick around in the BIOS. Agreed fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
Byolante posted:Are you running above 1080 or expecting above 60fps? I ask because I have a 780 at the moment and its smooth with everything jacked up to maximum in BL2. Now BF4 is another story... Running at 1080, I like 60fps. BF4 is a dream, using post AA instead of MSAA.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
Yeah, also have the ACX SC 780 ti from EVGA and I am really impressed with the cooling. The thing idles at 30 c in case with normal air flow and under load seems to hang out around 60. That's with me just throwing on + 50/100 GPU/MEM mhz too as a starting overclock.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
Incredulous Dylan posted:Yeah, also have the ACX SC 780 ti from EVGA and I am really impressed with the cooling. The thing idles at 30 c in case with normal air flow and under load seems to hang out around 60. That's with me just throwing on + 50/100 GPU/MEM mhz too as a starting overclock. I've taken some fairly odd measures (three 200mm fans, one 140mm fan, negative presasure and picking fans for specific jobs in specific areas) but it has resulted in my GPUs both idling at whatever the room temperature is. Same for motherboard components, and the CPU just gets a bit hotter - right now my GPUs are at 22ºC, my CPU is at 26ºC. Very capable cooler on the ACX, it was The Best when the GTX 780 launched and I can only imagine how nice the Asus unit that took the crown must be for it to outdo "it idles at room temperature and doesn't get past 45-50ºC under full load in games."
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
deimos posted:7680x1440 is also ~30% more pixels than 4K, veedub said (IIRC) that he gets respectable FPS (sub 60 but still) with bling turned on on dual 290Xs. So extrapolating a bit 4K@60FPS does not seem out of the question. The problem he mentioned was running out of memory, but again, he's running >4K resolutions. I'm able to run pretty much everything maxxed out with decent enough framerate for my liking. I finally downloaded BF4 so I'll get some numbers as to what that plays at maybe tonight. Fraps still the best way to monitor framerates? I honestly never really care what my framerate is as long as there is no hitching, which so far, no games have had. As far as the extra resolution, having the ability to see to your sides is a HUGE improvement. I'm by no means a competitive level player, I play for fun, but being able to see someone sneak up from the side is amazing. Not to mention the level of immersion you get from basically having your entire vision taken up by the game. Someone tell newegg to stop loving with the prices of the 290, I need a third one and I'm not paying 129 bucks over msrp for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
veedubfreak posted:Fraps still the best way to monitor framerates? Entering "perfoverlay.drawfps true" in console will show FPS in game, but won't log it. Also, pm me. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:Also, pm me. Traitor!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:Entering "perfoverlay.drawfps true" in console will show FPS in game, but won't log it. I'm too poor from buying equipment to have plat QQ
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
And by traitor I mean sell me the one you don't sell veedub you crazy diamond.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
veedubfreak posted:290, I need a third one Jesus H Christ, I hope you live somewhere chilly, or your AC bill in the summer is going to be through the roof! But what a glorious machine..
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
deimos posted:And by traitor I mean sell me the one you don't sell veedub you crazy diamond. Then PM me. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Jesus H Christ, I hope you live somewhere chilly, or your AC bill in the summer is going to be through the roof! I'm in Denver, it has been cold as poo poo as long as I've had this machine running. PM sent, I've been needing plat anyway. veedubfreak fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Jesus H Christ, I hope you live somewhere chilly, or your AC bill in the summer is going to be through the roof! I suggest you look through his post history in this thread, he had to build a new monstrosity because his overclocks were about to boil the water in his loop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
deimos posted:I suggest you look through his post history in this thread, he had to build a new monstrosity because his overclocks were about to boil the water in his loop. Nah water temps were fine, but I had to actually turn the fans up fairly high, higher than I wanted to at least. Right now I'm basically running passive cooling about 90% of the time. The fans kick on for about 30 seconds every 10 minutes when the water hits 30c. I need to tear it down though because I was lazy and didn't flush the new radiators. It really seems like my cpu block is gummed up and causing way more restriction that it should.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Can you setup an AMD card with a Nvidia as Physx still? I can only find forum threads on how to do it in Windows 7 and they are dated a while back so I'm not sure if it's something you can do with Windows 8 or with new PhysX stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
CrazyB posted:Can you setup an AMD card with a Nvidia as Physx still? I can only find forum threads on how to do it in Windows 7 and they are dated a while back so I'm not sure if it's something you can do with Windows 8 or with new PhysX stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
CrazyB posted:Can you setup an AMD card with a Nvidia as Physx still? I can only find forum threads on how to do it in Windows 7 and they are dated a while back so I'm not sure if it's something you can do with Windows 8 or with new PhysX stuff. Alereon posted:nVidia blocks this from working so its a pain in the rear end, but here's how you can hack the drivers to get it working if you want to put forth the effort. This was when I was running an HD 4870 X2(Dual GPU card), but I have used Hybrid PhysX before and it worked. Some games require messing with the PhysX files to get it to work. Aka deleting one file and maybe replacing another file with a modified one, but it worked. I did a few YT videos of it back in the day when it was a major thing and Nvidia wasn't trying to actively block it with developer help. More games are not being able to be played with Hybrid PhysX because Nvidia is actively pushing developers to block it, which means there is no file workaround. It's hard coded into the game. For instance, the new Batman single player game won't start PhysX however the multiplayer will start PhysX. Here is a list of games that DON'T work ARMA 3 Assasins Creed IV Batman: Arkham Origins Star Citizen Star Trek Star Trek: D-A-C CellFactor: Combat Training Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt CellFactor: Revolution City of Villains Call of Duty: Ghosts Hawken The Great Kulu Mortal Combat Complite Edition Warframe Warmonger - Operation: Downtown Destruction Velvet Assassin The Secret World
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Never done this, but would there be any practical gain having a 780 with my old 580 installed for physx? If it matters I have an Asus Sabertooth P67 mobo and Corsair 750w psu.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
It's gonna embarass him for me to say this, but Agreed had that setup for a bit. It does indeed help, like any PhysX co-processor does, but it's a power hog even at idle. He switched out the 580 for a 650 Ti or something and there was no performance difference along with a major reduction in power overhead. Same motherboard, too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Endymion FRS MK1 posted:Am I doing something wrong or is a 780 really not enough to have a smooth framerate in Borderlands 2 with PhysX on high? I was kinda excited for it until I noticed battles lagged massively. I put it down to medium and it was better, but firefights were a bit choppy. Now its on low and I haven't looked back. This surprises me. I play borderlands 2 at 1440p with everything maxed and I've never noticed frame rate issues, despite only having a gtx680. maybe you're just really really sensitive to frame rate drops? I can't really notice them unless the fps goes below 30. also I've only ever played solo, maybe it makes a bigger difference in multiplayer?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
The Lord Bude posted:This surprises me. I play borderlands 2 at 1440p with everything maxed and I've never noticed frame rate issues, despite only having a gtx680. CPU wouldn't have anything to do with it would it? It's an i5-4570. GPU doesn't seem to be throttling either, HWiNFO says 992mhz @ 84C.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Endymion FRS MK1 posted:CPU wouldn't have anything to do with it would it? It's an i5-4570. GPU doesn't seem to be throttling either, HWiNFO says 992mhz @ 84C. I doubt it. I have an old phenom IIx6. If anything my CPU should be holding me back significantly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 06:10
|
|
|
The Lord Bude posted:I doubt it. I have an old phenom IIx6. If anything my CPU should be holding me back significantly. You should upgrade to an 8350. I hear they're basically an i6. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 13:38 |
|
|
El Scotch posted:You should upgrade to an 8350. I hear they're basically an i6. Do I look like a Travis to you?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2014 07:43
|
|