Jump to content

Gtx780 Ti, Poor Performance


48 replies to this topic

#41 P e n u m b r a

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nocturnal
  • The Nocturnal
  • 273 posts
  • LocationUnited Kingdom

Posted 14 November 2013 - 02:29 AM

cant be right ive got 160fps on 780ti 5ghz 4470k haswell at 1920x1080 ultra settings

#42 Durant Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 3,877 posts
  • LocationClose enough to poke you with a stick.

Posted 14 November 2013 - 02:36 AM

If you really have a 4470K at 5GHz with a 780 TI GPU and only playing at 1080p resolution, that would explain the high FPS you are getting. The extra 1.1GHz of CPU horsepower is the difference.

#43 Tolkien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 14 November 2013 - 02:38 AM

View PostDurant Carlyle, on 14 November 2013 - 02:27 AM, said:

This should only affect laptops, or pre-built desktop systems that have truly atrocious cooling setups. Tolkien had one of those two.

On desktops it is very easy to increase the speed of your fans to keep the system cool while still having full Turbo Boost performance. Giving away free performance by disabling Turbo Boost while easy alternatives exist is just plain stupid.


FYI it was a laptop in my case, but I have heard of it happening on desktops more than once, and not just badly built ones. Over time the heatsink can get a layer of very fine dust/particulate that will not blow off. Cigarette smoke can also deposit and ruin heatsinks - compressed air doesn't get this off.

I'm advising the OP to try this since he's already in a performance nightmare and there's no cost to him trying it. The free performance you're talking about is nice, but it's not actually free - it does cause some people problems even when they use their machines as labeled.

#44 P e n u m b r a

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nocturnal
  • The Nocturnal
  • 273 posts
  • LocationUnited Kingdom

Posted 14 November 2013 - 03:00 AM

Quote

If you really have a 4470K at 5GHz with a 780 TI GPU and only playing at 1080p resolution, that would explain the high FPS you are getting. The extra 1.1GHz of CPU horsepower is the difference.


Should prob down his res and up the processor then? im using a Asus VG278HE 27" TRUE 144hz for gaming and a Asus' PQ321Q Ultra HD for work and media ive always been more about frame rate than looks in games

I think the TI is a bit of an extreme component for the regular gamer and probably a waste unless the rest of the system is on par.

Edited by Le0yo, 14 November 2013 - 03:05 AM.


#45 Gargoth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 216 posts
  • LocationCoastal Finland

Posted 14 November 2013 - 05:38 AM

View PostEd Steele, on 13 November 2013 - 11:08 PM, said:


Get a better CPU.

that 2600k, is a decent cpu, with right cooling, it has HUGE overclocking potential, no need to upgrade there.
upgrade CPU cooling, and OC the living **** out of that processor :ph34r:

edit also OP, update your drivers, and set a unigine or 3D mark rolling on loop with highest details you can choose, let it run for couple of hours and monitor your heat, or if the card crashes.

there might a fault in the product as well.

and if the system crashes, please tell us the BSOD error code, or any error code that is given.

Edited by Gargoth, 14 November 2013 - 05:40 AM.


#46 ArmageddonKnight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 710 posts

Posted 14 November 2013 - 06:50 AM

Personaly i find Unigne Valley the best at producing high temps on a GPU since it keeps a constant load on ur GPU unlike a bench run or demo run of 3dmark, which has loading points between each scene.

Ofcourse u could also just run some game bencmarks like Metro LL.

Also FYI. A single 780ti can still NOT average 60 fps on ALL games at 1080p, therefor it is not overkill.
Try getting a single 780 or 780ti or 290x to average 60fps+ in Crysis 3 at 1080p with Max settings and 8x or even 4x MSAA.
Then think about Star Citizen, that game is goign ot be the new "but can it play XXXX" when it is released, even at 1080p its going to absolutly hammer FPS on any single GPU card. Even the current hanger module demo is brutal.

Edited by ArmageddonKnight, 14 November 2013 - 06:50 AM.


#47 Catamount

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
  • 3,305 posts
  • LocationBoone, NC

Posted 14 November 2013 - 09:01 AM

My 7970OC gets down into the low 20s in the Star Citizen hangar module at 1080P and the highest settings, so yes, that game is brutal. Even at 1080p, I'm going to buy a second 7970 or a 280x for Crossfire. So no single GPU is overkill at 1080p in general.

With that said, MWO in particular is CPU bound; I think that's what Durant was saying. At 1080p, even a 7870 or a 660TI is more than capable of playing this game at max settings at 1080P.

Edited by Catamount, 14 November 2013 - 09:03 AM.


#48 Mordynak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 374 posts
  • LocationThe United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Posted 09 December 2013 - 01:00 PM

Ive been wondering about the **** poor performance in the game for a long time. Always just figured it was poorly optimised.

I can play most of the games I own maxxed out. Including Crysis 2. Find it odd that a game made in the same engine, with much better visuals, performs twice as well as MWO which looks.. a bit naff tbh.

#49 Goose

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 3,463 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationThat flattop, up the well, overhead

Posted 09 December 2013 - 05:24 PM

Most games only have one set of hit points per shootable object …

I would suggest addressing the issue yourself, as there are resources to be had on the subject …





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users