Terrible Gtx 970 Experience With Mwo.
#1
Posted 29 November 2014 - 08:41 AM
#2
Posted 29 November 2014 - 10:03 AM
#3
Posted 29 November 2014 - 10:04 AM
Jesus DIED for me, on 29 November 2014 - 08:41 AM, said:
Let me guess you went from DX-9 to DX-11 and CRANKED everything to the max, including PARTICLES.
#1. Turn Particles down to LOW.
Now, please post your MWO ingmae Video SETTINGS.
With MWO don't expect to plug in a new GPU and get 140 FPS maxed out, it's never gonna happen.
MWO is not optimized very well, it's tough on a CPU.
EDIT: I went from a GTX 560 ti to a GTC 680 sig 2, and noticed a large improvement in most games, but in MWO the increase wasn't as extreme.
Ran a Phenom II x6 1100t clocked on water to 4.2 and had zero issue with MWO when I had the GTX 560 ti, but I turned particles to low and tweaked the other settings a bit.
I think you may have cranked settings a bit too far.
DOUBLE EDIT: 3.2GHZ is not quite good enough for MWO on a Phenom II chip.
Edited by Odins Fist, 29 November 2014 - 10:10 AM.
#4
Posted 29 November 2014 - 10:14 AM
Without even reading, I can tell you that GPU does next to nothing for MWO. You'd have known this if you did a quick search on the forums.
Just turn Particles and Efffects to low and Shadow to Medium. You can leave the rest on very high on a GTX970. I push between 45-110 FPS on my i5-3570K with GTX970 on those settings.
If you upgraded your GFX card just for MWO, I'm sorry to tell you but you should have upgraded your CPU instead.
#5
Posted 29 November 2014 - 10:23 AM
I run it fine on my GTX660 TI with a i5-3570K, but for the upcoming titles like GTA V I want more power. I thought that MWO would run better with a better GPU, because that would be logical. Silly me
Currently I have around 90-100 fps and it drops down to 40-50 if the action starts so I cant really complain.
#6
Posted 29 November 2014 - 10:52 AM
Wrathful Scythe, on 29 November 2014 - 10:23 AM, said:
I run it fine on my GTX660 TI with a i5-3570K, but for the upcoming titles like GTA V I want more power. I thought that MWO would run better with a better GPU, because that would be logical. Silly me
Currently I have around 90-100 fps and it drops down to 40-50 if the action starts so I cant really complain.
U should see good results. U have a good cpu i imagine oc a bit? Remember tho particles are hell on almost anything
#7
Posted 29 November 2014 - 10:54 AM
Aznpersuasion89, on 29 November 2014 - 10:03 AM, said:
Odins Fist, on 29 November 2014 - 10:04 AM, said:
#1. Turn Particles down to LOW.
Now, please post your MWO ingmae Video SETTINGS.
With MWO don't expect to plug in a new GPU and get 140 FPS maxed out, it's never gonna happen.
MWO is not optimized very well, it's tough on a CPU.
EDIT: I went from a GTX 560 ti to a GTC 680 sig 2, and noticed a large improvement in most games, but in MWO the increase wasn't as extreme.
Ran a Phenom II x6 1100t clocked on water to 4.2 and had zero issue with MWO when I had the GTX 560 ti, but I turned particles to low and tweaked the other settings a bit.
I think you may have cranked settings a bit too far.
DOUBLE EDIT: 3.2GHZ is not quite good enough for MWO on a Phenom II chip.
knightsljx, on 29 November 2014 - 10:14 AM, said:
Without even reading, I can tell you that GPU does next to nothing for MWO. You'd have known this if you did a quick search on the forums.
Just turn Particles and Efffects to low and Shadow to Medium. You can leave the rest on very high on a GTX970. I push between 45-110 FPS on my i5-3570K with GTX970 on those settings.
If you upgraded your GFX card just for MWO, I'm sorry to tell you but you should have upgraded your CPU instead.
Wrathful Scythe, on 29 November 2014 - 10:23 AM, said:
I run it fine on my GTX660 TI with a i5-3570K, but for the upcoming titles like GTA V I want more power. I thought that MWO would run better with a better GPU, because that would be logical. Silly me
Currently I have around 90-100 fps and it drops down to 40-50 if the action starts so I cant really complain.
Looks like earlier NVidia video cards were better optimized? That's my guess. Yeah, if it weren't for the limited edition, I would have waited for the spring of 2015 to buy a Maxwell 20nm part but I 'just had to have' this particular card. I am kinda sorry that I bought it. Skyrim is kind of low too, for some reason--lower than I expected. I've read people saying that Cryengine is cpu bound but 6 core @3.4 should have been enough.. it's unreasonable to think otherwise. Remember, I am running every video setting in mwo on low (switching to dx9 did not help me). Buying new motherboard (and possibly cpu too) is too much for me at this point in time. Strange thing is that my GTX 465 faired better at mwo and gave me consistent 52 fps on low settings.
#8
Posted 29 November 2014 - 11:02 AM
#9
Posted 29 November 2014 - 11:17 AM
Deathsiege, on 29 November 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:
Yes, no problem for asking, but, I do have a good 850W silver efficiency Pro power supply from Corsair and it's rated at 70+ amps on a single rail. It's not an SLI setup and NVidia limits these new video cards with a power limiter in order to prevent trouble from crazy overclocks.
#10
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:00 PM
However overclocking the CPU from 3.2 GHz to a solid 4.5 GHz fixed the problems and the FPS is now a stable 60.
4.5 GHz overclock seems to be a system requirement for this game.
Absolutly try to overclock the CPU if your core voltage and temperature permit.
Im sure that will fix your problems if you can get it stable.
#11
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:04 PM
Wrathful Scythe, on 29 November 2014 - 10:23 AM, said:
I run it fine on my GTX660 TI with a i5-3570K, but for the upcoming titles like GTA V I want more power. I thought that MWO would run better with a better GPU, because that would be logical. Silly me
Currently I have around 90-100 fps and it drops down to 40-50 if the action starts so I cant really complain.
your K series processor should run just fine at 4.5 GHz and than it will crank out a solid 60-120 fps with the GTX 970 at 2560x1440, just keep in mind the Vcore and the temperature.
as I said, this game is all about the overclock...
pure speed on the cpu and the gpu will work miracles
Edited by Therrinian, 29 November 2014 - 02:05 PM.
#12
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:08 PM
Therrinian, on 29 November 2014 - 02:00 PM, said:
However overclocking the CPU from 3.2 GHz to a solid 4.5 GHz fixed the problems and the FPS is now a stable 60.
4.5 GHz overclock seems to be a system requirement for this game.
Absolutly try to overclock the CPU if your core voltage and temperature permit.
Im sure that will fix your problems if you can get it stable.
WOW WOW WOW This is incredible. I thank you very much for this info. I was concerned that my video card is bad somehow but only in 3D area of the hardware--I am glad that's not the case. Whew. Now, about 4.5GHz being a requirement! lolz Ok. Seeing how things are going, my system must be outdated and here I thought 3.4GHz is ok... maybe it is but for 'normal' games. Thanks for sharing your experience--that helped me a lot and now I see that I am not the only one who run into this problem. Let's hope NVidia comes out with a fix to this in drivers or BIOS maybe.
#13
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:19 PM
#14
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:28 PM
#15
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:36 PM
Cmdr Killian, on 29 November 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:
PhoenixNMGLB, on 29 November 2014 - 02:28 PM, said:
#16
Posted 29 November 2014 - 03:35 PM
For most games you need to get a better graphics card to improve performance, however with some CPU bound games a good CPU is more important and this game is one of them.
#17
Posted 29 November 2014 - 03:42 PM
PV Phoenix, on 29 November 2014 - 03:35 PM, said:
For most games you need to get a better graphics card to improve performance, however with some CPU bound games a good CPU is more important and this game is one of them.
Thanks for the input. I was jittery about this purchase of GTX 970 and was concerned that it was a defective gpu once I run into this problem in mwo. Apparently I need new motherboard.. that's my guess where the culprit is, first of all, since it's 890FX and not the later 990FX, and the cpu is kinda oldish too, although it's a kicker in other programs and games. It's possible that I would have to upgrade my cpu too eventually once I get to it. Upgrading both cpu and motherboard is not in my plans right now but at least I know now what needs to be done.
Edited by Jesus DIED for me, 29 November 2014 - 03:42 PM.
#18
Posted 29 November 2014 - 04:54 PM
When I ran my Phenom II x6 1100t a Stock clocks I absolutely saw a difference between 3.3 and 4.2 GHZ.
On a newer Intel chip 3.2 GHZ is no problem.
Edited by Odins Fist, 29 November 2014 - 04:55 PM.
#19
Posted 29 November 2014 - 04:58 PM
Odins Fist, on 29 November 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:
When I ran my Phenom II x6 1100t a Stock clocks I absolutely saw a difference between 3.3 and 4.2 GHZ.
On a newer Intel chip 3.2 GHZ is no problem.
Cool. I am overclocking mine further as we speak, testing it currently at 3.6GHz using FurMark burnin software. Will have to check mwo performance after that's done. Thanks for the input.
#20
Posted 29 November 2014 - 09:27 PM
Jesus DIED for me, on 29 November 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:
Thanks for the input. I was jittery about this purchase of GTX 970 and was concerned that it was a defective gpu once I run into this problem in mwo.
Far as I'm aware the only big defect I'm aware of with 970's is that a lot of them are shipping with coil whine but still run great. I got lucky as mine doesn't whine and max's out everything. Think I read somewhere that EVGA's cheapest model has some issues though so if you have one of those it might be worth your time to look it up.
But for the most part, a GTX 970 is great for gaming in general, but not so by itself for unoptimized games like MWO. Indeed getting a new CPU is your main option for increasing performance (or overclocking if you can, this helps lots if you can do it)... Or PGI decides to optimize the game. The former is your best best though, latter will probably never happen.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users