i7-7700k + gtx 1080ti poor performance
Hello!Faced with the landings FPS in some games, I decided to watch the tests of this interaction in games on Youtube. To my surprise the results in tests were significantly superior to my system. The short of it (more in profile)
i7-7700k Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1080ti, 16 gb RAM, Win 10 Pro x64 (license), PS 750W, play in 1920x1080.
Will try to be brief about the essence of the problem:
It all started with the fact that in Crysis 3 after entering the liberty dome FPS drop from stable 60 to 30-40. In order to find the answer to this topic: http://forums.playground.ru/crysis_3/tech/crysis_3_gtx1080ti_35_fps_nuzhna_pomosch-953044/
In this thread people are actively shared with me tests of similar systems in various games. In one of these tests (video) demonstirovalos third Witcher, where I have noticed 100-110 FPS in Novigrad. In turn, I in Novigrad have 75-80 FPS max, on the same (highest possible) settings. The game license.
Surprised such a difference I decided to Google other available to me at the moment games. It came to DA: Inqusition. I stumbled on a video with a completely identical system: to make it easier on everyone I will say that the average FPS in this video 110-130 frames on maximum settings in full HD. I have certainly never been, and now more.
Deciding that business in curve Windows (with win 10, I faced for the first time after I updated the computer) I think the only solution may be to attempt a clean install of the system. Reset the system, and freewheeling only at the moment all the same Dragon Age Inquisition (currently swinging parallel to the third Witcher).
According to the results of reinstalling Windows... nichrome has not changed.
Actual screenshot from OED MSI Afterburner - as it is. Settings ultra, anti-aliasing and so on, all on high, in General above nowhere - as well as in the test on Youtube.
Spoiler
As you can see, loading the GPU to 99%, then Fpsu to grow nowhere else. What is the reason for the difference of my performance with the performance of the exact same system in the tests - for me it remains a mystery exactly why we are asking for your help.
From the following: Paying attention in the OED on line LIM1: Voltage. Googled in the Internet there is absolutely no information on this subject, but over the hill a little was found. Does this crap that supposedly the card has reached the limit of consumption on voltage and performance to grow nowhere else (and this limit is not associated with PD, this is what that dick knows what limit, at least I know enough). Foreign recommendation is simple - using MSI Afterburner to raise the Core Voltage by 10-20%. Made for 10, not helped, has not changed anything. Even thought the FPS dropped a couple units. The above increase was not, I am afraid that this may be something to burn in overlocking understand more than a monkey.
In General, friends, I need your help, what's the matter don't know. Why is the performance so low, although it may be higher? (judging by the tests so well above).
fatallezzz wrote:
and drive the system that way - as she can.
Here is burnt. :)
True, but the conclusion is not true. Even high-end systems, i9, issue the following load:
There is no 99% GPU, and can not be. This is complete nonsense. And this nonsense is everywhere, trying to lift the core frequency, or, as wrote the above to put more resolution. Any system, by default, is exposed on the parameter quality. To translate the maximum performance possible system settings and video card to overclock no need. System settings at any time can be brought back to factory settings, but the acceleration is already there. Where now going to take the factory BIOS for the video card, the big question.
And all for what, because of the fact that the terms are written this nonsense about 99%, and a million fps. Than do it, it's their problem, by default, the hardware doesn't work. You ruined a video card, say thank you to you and the comrades you listened to about 99%.
fatallezzz
There's one comedian tells the story the download at 99%, that it can not be. HILARIOUS TYPE. Looks like it's Locke with a new account. The more rigid a person. Do not even know the performance per core, not to mention the settings that load the processor and graphics card.
Here is my screen, hairworks and smoothing, which are not particularly profit. GTX 1080 + 4790k gives 130-140 frames. And with it generates 80 frames.
Screen
PS And smoothing there is not much cut. The consumption was not more than 80%. Even higher, the comedian throws a crap about power consumption.
Sort it out in software and graphics settings. Maybe even mods which are on schedule?
Your 1080TI 30% more powerful, ie You will Have where, Yes, about 170 frames.
VOVAN WOLF
YouTube millions of videos with a normal load of CPU and GPU, this is also Locke comedians and rigid personality?
In short guys I was able to determine the cause
In General, promonitoriv GPU-Z I noticed the features on PCI-Express where near burned a question mark. It was written that the card supports PCI-E x16 v3.0 and works in a PCI-E x1 v1.1!!!
I ran a couple of games to load and watch the figure change. The maximum that managed to change under load on the PCI-E x1 v2,0
Then I decided to peridot card in the second PCI-E slot on the motherboard (I have them 3 pieces x16, x8, x4). Put in x8.
After startup, the system immediately identified the driver, but after 5 minutes found the map. GPU-Z showed that the card supports PCI-E x16 v3.0 and works in PCI-E x8 v 3.0.
BUT THAT BITCH MOST IMPORTANTLY, FPS IN ALL GAMES THEN INCREASED BY 40-50%!!!!
Dragon Age inquisicion, where issued 55-60 FPS showed 85-94!!!
Now I'm interested in only one thing: does this setting programmatically? Why is the MAIN PCI-E Board is not working correctly? I am sure that PCI-E x16 v 3.0. the performance will be EVEN HIGHER!
http://forum.ykt.ru/viewmsg.jsp?id=17996874 here was a man faced with the same problem, I read some solutions and it turned out that he bought a new motherboard because he said that on the current what is the problem with a bochenko.
If my motherboard too, school with the barrels, that it is necessary to shove in service. But I want to understand whether this is a hardware problem is? All the same, or the settings of the PCI-E somewhere can be adjusted?
Gera95
Show it to me, and I'll break all Your arguments. Sorry, You don't understand numbers, I told you - GO LEARN, sort it out for themselves.
But no, You keep the crap and disadvantages to collect. Where are these millions? My guess is that now the video will be uninteresting i9 and gtx 1080TI in Your flawed Fallout 4.
fatallezzz
SERIOUSLY? You put a graphics card in a PCI-E X4? Hmm, give in.
1) the Difference between v2.0 and 3.0 - a CAT laugh. Second, understand the versions of PCI-E and speed / difference.
VOVAN WOLF wrote:
in PCI-E X4
read learn, in x8.
In short, the Witcher 3 card in PCI-E x8 v3.0. In the forest on the ultra figures 95-105 FPS! It would be if properly PCI-E x16 v 3.0? Would be the difference? The manual recommends to insert nutplate owned in PCI-E x16
VOVAN WOLF
VOVAN WOLF wrote:
They are all version 3.0. When it is necessary to be 3.0. In simple reduced. I have the same.
Nothing is reduced in normal operation with factory default frequencies.
Gera95
The only thing I said is a complete and UTTER UNEDUCATED ..... Scarce brains. This is awesome! i9 7900X - in your mind.
1) NAFIG I NEED IT
2) Started with GTA 5, TWO video cards, 100% load graphics card. It would end up in FPS and performance on the core. Have 7700k performance per core is more than 5%. Total capacity i9 7900X ONLY IN the AMOUNT of MORE, it NAFIG not needed, so the game makes NO sense to take something better than the 7700k or a good choice NOW 8700k.
Comparison
/>
No, I such nonsense do not suffer. TEACH ALREADY, and that affects where the numbers came from the CPU and the video card, and FPS in the end:
VOVAN WOLF
If you think that PCI-E x16 and x8 1080ti do not matter, then you here
Here's a comparison in 4K for Sli of course, but nevertheless if in 4K the difference is 10-15 FPS, then excuse me in full HD the difference will be in all 30. Without Sli, respectively gain about 20 FPS (if you take the functionality of SLI somewhere in the 60%)
Gera95
fatallezzz
I told THAT IN SIMPLE. I changed, he noticed.
Changing this value:
height=488.98477157360406 />
fatallezzz wrote:
FEE STOOD IN THE VERY TOP SLOT
I really thought You were stuck in third, he's EXACTLY the SAME:
Spoiler
fatallezzz wrote:
If you put another 1080 in a x8 connector that doesn't mean it's right.
I have at the top is
fatallezzz wrote:
And I get that x16 fee is defined as x1
Here is the problem. Yeah, what's with the drivers on the PCI bus?
fatallezzz
Again, twenty-five! It matters only for those of iron. For the average user, home of the gamer - NO. Because the difference between x8 and x16 is reduced to an insignificant figure, especially with a SINGLE card. There SLI, there is the value, NOT here.
On X8 I did not say. He put in X8 and X16 FOR ONE card the difference is ZERO. Or still NEGLIGIBLE.
Good looking horse iron and SLI, there is a difference, on a more mundane glands no.
fatallezzz
The frequency is raised, the money back will not return.
For standard need a 600W PSU, maybe after the dispersal of power is not enough. Can be Mat.fee, but this is unlikely if resets means it's working.
fatallezzz
By the way, a bunch of video with a difference, there is an i7 5960X. In SLI will increase because the i7 5960X has a maximum number of PCI Express lanes is 40!
Channel PCI Express (PCIe) consists of two pairs of signaling channels, one for receiving and another for transmitting data, and this channel is the basic module of the PCIe bus. The number of PCI Express lanes is the total number of channels supported by the processor.
You have the same 7700k - only 16 channels. Or, IF you divide 8+8.
Of course, collecting iron SLI gtx 1080TI increase will be from the i7 5960X and it x16+x16 more visible.
The guys that have SLI x8+x8, nothing to lose, the MAJORITY of them. Himself bother with this, I had SLI. There were two gtx 670, it's like one 980 now. In the Witcher on max with hair was 40-45 frames. As much and left when I threw them out and replaced with a 980.
fatallezzz wrote:
excuse me in full HD the difference will be in all 30
Ie this WILL NOT happen. He was compared. For a long time stood in the second slot.
It is nonsense, for then the loss from SLI FullHD will be more guys, but no one says nothing.
Gera95
Well I understand Your solved and the load on the processor and graphics card, what settings and to influence. I hope so, because they held up the stupidity that You have thrown me.
The GPU Z screenshot above, everything changes, compare
Gera95 wrote:
The frequency of raised
I didn't disperse, the system operates in the rod mode
Gera95 wrote:
money back will not return
and I'm not going the money for the video card to return, the problem is the motherboard and its PCI-E x16, it already became evident.
Gera95 wrote:
For standard need a 600W PSU, maybe after the dispersal of power is not enough
There is no acceleration. I have a 750W PSU.
Gera95 wrote:
Can be Mat.fee
And it's already clear that it's her. The question of what to do with it. To carry in service and change fee, or is it a software problem? Of course, I can sit and play from PCI-E X8, but easy will not do. When you give big money for the system, I would like to make it work at 100%, not X8/X16.
VOVAN WOLF wrote:
Ie this WILL NOT happen.
And how much FPS is lost if the GTX 1080ti installed in PCI-E x8 instead of her PCI-e X16?
fatallezzz wrote:
There is no acceleration. I have a 750W PSU.
The base frequency of your graphics card - 1481 MHz, you 1519.
fatallezzz wrote:
And it's already clear that it's her.
Not a fact. The BIOS was updated?
fatallezzz
Think for yourself, I even about these numbers and do not want to think, already passed by himself.
Spoiler
Spoiler
Titan X run the cards at x8 was about 2-5% slower than when using x16.
In all tests we have tested with GRID showed a decrease in performance by 5% when working on x8 compared to x16.
You even do not have to think of this card on these INSIGNIFICANT percentage. For You run are not performance tyres, And maximum FPS, vertical sync. You have nothing to lose, well, there is no frame 110 and frame 108. Makes all the difference.
Gera95
He 1080ti Gygabyte GeForce GTX GAMING OC, this graphics card Turbocheetah - 1657, the Minimum frequency of the chip - 1480.
Now LEARN what TURBOCHEETAH and how it works. You see, and FINALLY learn where all those numbers. Gradually, little by little. (turboboost to help).
I do flies before 1950, although the specifications of turbo in 1847.
As before, the turbo frequency means the average frequency of the GPU for a certain set of games and other 3D tasks used in Nvidia, but the real frequency may be higher — it depends on 3D loads and conditions (temperature, energy consumption, etc.)
That's what the DLC in SLI-e, because the high temperature reduces this figure. Frequency may vary.
Now this definition will LEARN. A little bit more intelligent of steel, you feel like a rose?
But the most interesting question - AT WHAT HERE ACCELERATION? How to determine the will in the service, if they have it in stock will work, and the profile of acceleration will stay HOME.
You are wonderful people, very weird. I like talking with himself, only 16 years old when I started with this garbage, it's the same nonsense talked. However, the choice of iron, I've had better.
John Mullins
How can you say that the Titan Z the most powerful graphics card today, inferior to it only 1080ti. Her for four years. All your modern some for a year or two (if not SLI). You can imagine what will happen to your tops after four or five years? Yes, even if you take the Titan XP Titan V. Likely to be in the garbage) I was able to set any permissions. What then! I now can easily almost all games resolution is set to 4k and more, while your tops are unable at this time to keep the resolution of 8k at a comfortable fps (even 4k and keep only SLI-s), and will not be able of all favorite to keep 4k in four years. If you conduct the analysis, at the moment, all your super tops, as the gtx 770-780 for its time in terms of performance – that is, for a year, and then again and again to change some. These Titans for four years. I was wondering when our time will be something like the Titan Z, that is, that he tore 1080ti in two years and ahead of all the playing time, as in my case! The same Titan v performance worse than two 1080! My single Titan in performance, as four gtx 770 in stock. It turns out two overclocked Titan Z, as 8 is not overclocked gtx 770!
For example, VIDOS.
I Titans Z will change when I see what came out of the video card (talking about SLI), which put them I can put ANY resolution that would last for four or five years and that they will at least give 60 fps. When I put your vidyahi, at the time they are all super-duper demanding games at 4k resolution issued at least 80-90 fps.
These your 1080ti some problems. And then heated strongly, and the acceleration is badly kept, and the fps is a smaller issue than expected, and the frequency dancing like crazy, and settings in games underestimate (and the hair off, and then smoothing the turn off for the FULL HD RESOLUTION, CARL!)))) In rzhaka!) Who is to say today's super expensive, supposedly top, and the people buying it, playing games on a resolution of a hundred years ago, because in 4k it is complete drained. And only if you put two of these cards, you will have the result on the face. Blah, 2018, and vidyahu all there is to permissions 4-8k even very demanding games were given a minimum of 60 fps, whereas mine and at the time and date are kept perfectly in almost all games of huge resolution with a comfortable fps. And you continue to think that the Titan Z is two 780 of black, two multi chip shit is no sense from them that the drivers for them are no longer made and that they are everywhere and anywhere merge your two favorite 780ti. Can once again check out VIDOS, ololo esperiance where your 1080 Ti would have sonals!))))