95 replies to this topic

[Sybreed]

Goose, on 05 December 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

Don't rush it: Climb. Don't pick a big, impressive number and roll the dice …

hehe I'm not silly, don't worry. It's just that that guy had so many steps in order to overclock his processor... if I recall, on my BIOS there was a section solely for overclocking and seemed to make everything easier, I'll check that out as soon as I get my new fan

[Sybreed]

Goose, on 05 December 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

Don't rush it: Climb. Don't pick a big, impressive number and roll the dice …

my biggest question right now is "how do you figure the voltage number? How do I know what voltage is the correct one and if I'm even supposed to increase it? I don't read anything about this anywhere other than just "well, increase your voltage little by little"

Right now it's at 1.25 I think, I think I have enough room to twinker with this.

[Egomane]

Sybreed, on 06 December 2013 - 05:17 PM, said:

my biggest question right now is "how do you figure the voltage number? How do I know what voltage is the correct one and if I'm even supposed to increase it?

Simple... You don't know until you tried it!

Overclocking is a trial and error process.
A - You start with increasing the multiplier a step.
B - You then test the system for stability.
A1 - If the system is stable, you increase the multiplier another step.
A2 - If the system isn't stable, you increase the voltage a step.
B - You then test the system for stability.
You repeat A1 or A2 and B until you find the highest value you can achieve on the multiplier
C - You then increase the base clock speed a bit
B
A1 or A2

You can also start with the clock speed.

As I said, you shouldn't go above 1.35 V if you can avoid it and you need to keep an eye on your heat as well. It's a tedious process and it can take the most of a day to find a setting you are satisfied with.

It can even be, that you'll need to lower the multiplier below it's base value, in favor of a higher clock speed, to get an optimized result. Trial and error, really!

[Sybreed]

Egomane, on 07 December 2013 - 02:56 AM, said:

Simple... You don't know until you tried it!

Overclocking is a trial and error process.
A - You start with increasing the multiplier a step.
B - You then test the system for stability.
A1 - If the system is stable, you increase the multiplier another step.
A2 - If the system isn't stable, you increase the voltage a step.
B - You then test the system for stability.
You repeat A1 or A2 and B until you find the highest value you can achieve on the multiplier
C - You then increase the base clock speed a bit
B
A1 or A2

You can also start with the clock speed.

As I said, you shouldn't go above 1.35 V if you can avoid it and you need to keep an eye on your heat as well. It's a tedious process and it can take the most of a day to find a setting you are satisfied with.

It can even be, that you'll need to lower the multiplier below it's base value, in favor of a higher clock speed, to get an optimized result. Trial and error, really!

Thanks mate! I got my new fan installed yesterday, but as you suggested, I'm waiting a few days before overclocking it. The technician did install the fan on the "no noise" settings which annoys me a bit... I probably won't be able to go full overclocking, but right now my CPU is stable at 55-58 degres using prime95 stress tests.

[Sybreed]

Just did a small test... increased CPU to 3.8ghz and did not touch voltage... so far, temps are steady at 68-73 degrees, I feel like I won't be able to go overboard with this!

I won't dare go at 4.2 ghz if the temperatures are already that high.

Funny thing though, playing MWO, my performances barely increased, but my CPU load never went over 50% and temps never got over 55 degrees. Hmmm....

Edited by Sybreed, 07 December 2013 - 10:57 AM.

[Goose]

The "CPU Usage" in TaskMan has been just about information free once we had more then two cores in a CPU: I've got a bunch of graphs where one core is in the 90s', two more are pushing 60, two more are in the 20s, and the "overall" number is ~25%.

One really does need the combo of FRAPS-HWiNFO64-GenericLogViewer to figure out whoms' on First, whats' on Second, etc., etc., etc., drek, etc. …

[Iron Riding Cowboy]

Henchman 24, on 29 November 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

As stated above, the extra two cores in that X58 based system really do not help this game, or many others for that matter. If your board has the ability...locking two off while overclocking will help some of the CPU bottleneck.

Your other problem is you bought the 780, which can only deliver it's extra performance benefits via PCIe v3.0 and the wider bandwidth it supports. The 580 when overclcoked(not sure which model you have) can easily saturate PCIe v2.0/2.1 and limit how much you get from it, nevermind the 780.

Even though it was awesome for it's time, your chipset is what's holding you back in this area.

This all said, thinking this game is optimized for well, anything....is a stretch. Chosen LOD methods they use are generally enough to keep a card swapping back and forth to the cache by just moving your cockpit up/down a little in certain circumstances(crappy shaders).

I have a gtx760 with various driver sets so far, and with all of them, I get shaders both in and out of cockpit either flickering or outright disappearing based on elevation values. I'm sick of reporting it, I've done that to the point now where I don't even care anymore. I wish they'd take that "Optimized for nVidia" {Scrap} feces clean out of the game, because it's a joke at this point.

I'm hoping DX11 helps, but considering their prowess with 10+ year old DX9 tech...I'm not holding my breath.

EDIT: {Scrap} - seriously? It's not a vulgarity...it's a man's name Thomas C r a p p e r...so glad you know the difference.

No you are wrong about the PCI e 2.0 vs 3.0 on the GTX 780 yes you can get better performance with the PCI 3 3.0 but only %3 - 5 ..... thats only like 3 fps...

http://www.hardocp.c.../2#.UqT-ZOLTr6c
http://www.hardwarec...-review-25.html
http://www.tomshardw...ignificant.html

[Sybreed]

Iron Riding Cowboy, on 08 December 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

No you are wrong about the PCI e 2.0 vs 3.0 on the GTX 780 yes you can get better performance with the PCI 3 3.0 but only %3 - 5 ..... thats only like 3 fps...

http://www.hardocp.c.../2#.UqT-ZOLTr6c
http://www.hardwarec...-review-25.html
http://www.tomshardw...ignificant.html

Thanks. I think the PCI 3.0 thing will start to show in a few years when programs and hardware really start using all its power. For now, the difference is negligible, and by the time it becomes noticeable, it'll be the time for me to get a brand new computer and I'll just keep the TI and go SLI with another one

Goose, on 08 December 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

The "CPU Usage" in TaskMan has been just about information free once we had more then two cores in a CPU: I've got a bunch of graphs where one core is in the 90s', two more are pushing 60, two more are in the 20s, and the "overall" number is ~25%.

One really does need the combo of FRAPS-HWiNFO64-GenericLogViewer to figure out whoms' on First, whats' on Second, etc., etc., etc., drek, etc. …

Yeah, coretemp doesn't give much precise info on this matter. What do you think of the temperatures? You think I could try reaching for 4.2 ghz?

Edited by Sybreed, 09 December 2013 - 06:31 PM.

[Durant Carlyle]

I wouldn't worry about temps until your in-game maximum temps get to the 75°C mark. You're 20°C short of that, so you still have lots of room under the temp ceiling.

[Quinn Allard]

Im sorry, youre using this poorly coded game as a benchmark? Lol thats rich. You wasted your money pal unless you start playing alot of other graphically intense games.

[Flapdrol]

For the best overclock you have to adjust the voltage, you said you didn't touch it, but you can also lower it.

Many chips overclock fine on slightly below stock voltage.

Anyway, did you already disable the turbo? It's very hard to properly test for stability with it on.

[tvaughanx]

Smokeyjedi, on 28 November 2013 - 08:03 PM, said:

I hope you have aftermarket cooling, unlocked CPU, and cheap KW/H $ for juice. time to OC and stretch the legs of that cpu bottleneck.

lol he should oc is card at gtx 780 to run this game better the game is broke he does not have a bottle neck i have a 6990 and have major issues with this game all though i can run crysis 3 1080p 96fps 8x aa and 16af ultra settings so just lol at this game and its crappy graphics.

Sybreed, on 06 December 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

hehe I'm not silly, don't worry. It's just that that guy had so many steps in order to overclock his processor... if I recall, on my BIOS there was a section solely for overclocking and seemed to make everything easier, I'll check that out as soon as I get my new fan

Do not over clock your card the game engine is **** its not your fault don't risk burning out a 500$+ card for this.

[Sybreed]

Quinn Allard, on 16 December 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

Im sorry, youre using this poorly coded game as a benchmark? Lol thats rich. You wasted your money pal unless you start playing alot of other graphically intense games.

Yes, didn't you read my other posts? I didn't waste my money but you're wasting my time

[Grrzoot]

how's it going sy.

so i jumped back in because i went and got a new vid card myself, a radeon r9 290x and even with my old I7 i saw a jump from 30fps low-50 norm to 60fps low 90+ high at 5760x1080 and didnt touch the mobo or processor.

I am wondering, how big is your power supply a titan is supposed to be faster than the 290x (well it better be for another 300 bucks) and maybe your video card is starving for juice?

thanks

[Quinn Allard]

Sybreed, on 17 December 2013 - 07:17 AM, said:

Yes, didn't you read my other posts? I didn't waste my money but you're wasting my time

I like wasting things that have no value to me, like your time.

[Sybreed]

Quinn Allard, on 17 December 2013 - 11:50 AM, said:

I like wasting things that have no value to me, like your time.

Still. Read the damn posts and you wouldn't look like an ***. An impolite one at that.