Titan (X)
#1
Posted 11 April 2015 - 04:41 PM
I just became one.
#2
Posted 11 April 2015 - 06:24 PM
#3
Posted 12 April 2015 - 02:27 PM
#4
Posted 12 April 2015 - 04:39 PM
Bill Lumbar, on 12 April 2015 - 02:27 PM, said:
Now don't laugh.
AMD FX-8350 @ 4720mhz
G.Skill DDR3 1866 2x4gb @ 2052 9-9-9
Crucial M4 256gb SSD x2 (Non-raid)
Windows 8.1 64-bit Pro
My monitor is a Samsung U28D UHD 60hz, I attempt to play everything at native resolution (3840x2160) While the 980 could mostly handle that. A few things would cap the Vram out.
So I got the Titan.
As for FPS.
On my GTX680 4gb, the FPS were steady @ 1080p, 1200p, and 1440p and roughly 40 @ 2160p
On my GTX980 4gb, the FPS were improved 2160p nearly averaging 60, but depending on what I would do, could incur the wrath of the 4gb frame buffer (even in MWO)
Having just received my Titan X yesterday I am just starting to play with it, but I can immediately see the difference in performance once I push up to, and beyond 4096mb of video memory usage.
4gb is NOT enough for UHD, and let no one convince you otherwise.
#5
Posted 12 April 2015 - 05:04 PM
2048 map shadows
Just on caustic valley @ 2160p I can load up 5259mb of Vram and still get a playable 30fps, where with the 980 I would Vram cap and get a slide show.
#6
Posted 12 April 2015 - 05:07 PM
Lordred, on 12 April 2015 - 04:39 PM, said:
Now don't laugh.
AMD FX-8350 @ 4720mhz
G.Skill DDR3 1866 2x4gb @ 2052 9-9-9
Crucial M4 256gb SSD x2 (Non-raid)
Windows 8.1 64-bit Pro
My monitor is a Samsung U28D UHD 60hz, I attempt to play everything at native resolution (3840x2160) While the 980 could mostly handle that. A few things would cap the Vram out.
So I got the Titan.
As for FPS.
On my GTX680 4gb, the FPS were steady @ 1080p, 1200p, and 1440p and roughly 40 @ 2160p
On my GTX980 4gb, the FPS were improved 2160p nearly averaging 60, but depending on what I would do, could incur the wrath of the 4gb frame buffer (even in MWO)
Having just received my Titan X yesterday I am just starting to play with it, but I can immediately see the difference in performance once I push up to, and beyond 4096mb of video memory usage.
4gb is NOT enough for UHD, and let no one convince you otherwise.
Nice.... this is interesting indeed. Why would I laugh at you man? I can only assume you are refering to your AMD FX-8350? lol. I just came off running the FX-8350 and switched over to the darkside. I loved my FX chip had no issues with it in this game and 1440P on my new 32" benQ.
Holy hell man, you are playing on a 4K monitor right? I can understand maybe a 980 having some issues gaming on a 4K monitor...but at what point does a enough become enough? I am mean serously, $550+ dollar graphic card should be plently to play a game and not feel like you need to drop more on another card. I swear.... this game and even with the improvments being made on otimazations, I would say we are not there yet PGI.
Lordred, on 12 April 2015 - 05:04 PM, said:
2048 map shadows
Just on caustic valley @ 2160p I can load up 5259mb of Vram and still get a playable 30fps, where with the 980 I would Vram cap and get a slide show.
pretty!
What are your in game settings at?
#7
Posted 12 April 2015 - 05:12 PM
Bill Lumbar, on 12 April 2015 - 05:07 PM, said:
What are your in game settings at?
Very High +
sys_maxfps=65 cl_fov=70 gp_option_ShowCockpitGlass=0 r_HDRGrainAmount=0.0 r_DepthOfField=0 r_TexAtlasSize=2048 r_MSAA_samples=8 r_TexMinAnisotropy=16 r_TexMaxAnisotropy=16 e_ShadowsMaxTexRes=2048 r_HDRVignetting=1 r_Sharpening=10 r_SSAO=1
#8
Posted 12 April 2015 - 05:36 PM
Edited by Durant Carlyle, 12 April 2015 - 05:37 PM.
#9
Posted 12 April 2015 - 06:18 PM
Durant Carlyle, on 12 April 2015 - 05:36 PM, said:
I could already go 2x playable with the 980, however MSAA does give a level of clarity that DSR cannot.
I will be experimenting with it though, that it for sure.
#10
Posted 12 April 2015 - 06:30 PM
Lordred, on 11 April 2015 - 04:41 PM, said:
I just became one.
I dont know
since I'm not planning on going 4k just yet, and I'm not going for MFAA
mmm
I'm going to wait a few months for a GTX980ti
personally I'm more interested in going X99 and NVMe with a M2 SSD
Lordred, on 12 April 2015 - 05:04 PM, said:
2048 map shadows
Just on caustic valley @ 2160p I can load up 5259mb of Vram and still get a playable 30fps, where with the 980 I would Vram cap and get a slide show.
ever tried MFAA instead?
#12
Posted 12 April 2015 - 07:02 PM
Lordred, on 12 April 2015 - 06:55 PM, said:
I find it not working with MWO
too bad
I found it working once, but disregarded since I got problems in Windows 10 running a custom refresh rate on my LCD that way
and the UI doesn't scale well
Edited by Peter2k, 12 April 2015 - 07:06 PM.
#13
Posted 12 April 2015 - 08:32 PM
#14
Posted 12 April 2015 - 08:59 PM
#15
Posted 13 April 2015 - 03:36 PM
Edited by Flapdrol, 13 April 2015 - 03:37 PM.
#16
Posted 14 April 2015 - 07:31 AM
Flapdrol, on 13 April 2015 - 03:36 PM, said:
I play 4K no AA (which on some things the 980 could not do well enough)
but I do use high amounts of AA for the screenshot thread. http://mwomercs.com/...eenshot-thread/
#17
Posted 09 June 2015 - 09:57 AM
I am running Z87 with I4770 K(i think?)
16 gigs and SSD HD
not sure if comp specs matter
#18
Posted 09 June 2015 - 10:16 AM
#19
Posted 09 June 2015 - 10:27 AM
#20
Posted 09 June 2015 - 04:30 PM
Quintt, on 09 June 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:
And I have enjoyed my Titan X. The upcoming AMD will not have 12gb of memory, I am not worried.
Woopass, on 09 June 2015 - 09:57 AM, said:
I am running Z87 with I4770 K(i think?)
16 gigs and SSD HD
not sure if comp specs matter
Resolution, + hardware configuration.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users