70% GPU usage in The Witcher 3 (sli)

[PCGamerDR]

After watching the video it is CPU bottle-necked but you shouldn't worry about it too much, you got so much GPU horsepower lol, i get average 50% CPU usage with an a10-6800k paired with a single r9 290. The only game that has been a CPU bottleneck for me is goddamn AC Unity with 90%+ CPU usage and about 60% GPU :").

Edit: Just for pure casualty what are your ram speeds?

 

[cadaveca]

alright, I just finished filming the MSI AB monitoring, I'll do the same with GPU-Z with the log file
I'll EDIT this post to include the link to the video and the log file.

LOG files uploaded
EDIT 2:

here's the video where you can see my CPU usage, ram usage, PAGE file usage etc.
At the start of the video I'm in the menu loading the game so of course wait a few seconds for the GPUs and CPU to start getting their load.

In case you wonder:
The Stats monitored in MSI AB are as follows:
CPU temp/CPU usage
GPU 1 temo/CLOCK/GPU1 usage/GPU1 power/GPU1 memory usage
FPS
RAM usage
PAGEFILE usage
GPU1 memory/memory clock
GPU 2 memory/memory clock
CPU1 temp/CPU 1 usage
CPU2 temp/CPU 2 usagescore
CPU3 temp/CPU 3 usage
CPU4 temp/CPU 4 usage

@LightningJR
@cadaveca

CPU limit, so if you want to upgrade for a single title then please do. I guess at some point other apps will make use of the added cores. However, please don't think you CPU is inadequate... the real problem is the software, as evidenced by your firestrike score.

After watching the video it is CPU bottle-necked but you shouldn't worry about it too much, you got so much GPU horsepower lol, i get average 50% CPU usage with an a10-6800k paired with a single r9 290. The only game that has been a CPU bottleneck for me is goddamn AC Unity with 90%+ CPU usage and about 60% GPU :").

Edit: Just for pure casualty what are your ram speeds?

1600 7-8-7

 

[LightningJR]

CPU limit, so if you want to upgrade for a single title then please do. I guess at some point other apps will make use of the added cores. However, please don't think you CPU is inadequate... the real problem is the software, as evidenced by your firestrike score.



1600 7-8-7

Yes, his CPU is quite good, inadequate for those two games and maybe some other, yes, but for most games, no.

Real problem is software? I disagree, if anything the games that are doing this to him are properly coded to take advantage of CPU power. Coding a game and leaving the CPU as an afterthought is lazy. I applaud any developer who uses the CPU's potential to make their game better. 3DMark is synthetic and useless imo for anything other than comparing epeen.

 

[jonathan1107]

CPU limit, so if you want to upgrade for a single title then please do. I guess at some point other apps will make use of the added cores. However, please don't think you CPU is inadequate... the real problem is the software, as evidenced by your firestrike score.



1600 7-8-7

Thanks cadaveca, I had indeed mentionned my RAM speeds before.
Here's something interesting I found:

This guy has 2x gtx 980 ti in SLI and he's got the i7 4790k (same gen as my i5 4690k) and you can see he's getting just a little bit of bottlenecking as well. His CPU max usage hovers around 84-89% (which is better than my 100% lol) but yeah.

As for your last post cadaveca, indeed, I do agree with you that OPTIMIZATION plays a huge role in game performance we can get indeed. I do feel that this crysis 3 title is more of a game port (even with all the options) compared to the previous crysis titles. Crysis games have been known to have at the very least decent SLI scaling. Wheras Crysis 3 seems SUPER CPU intensive. Abnormally so (console porting signs lol)

I do feel you when you say "upgrade for one title". Indeed I don't feel a crazy huge urge to upgrade right away, but I do see that I could indeed use a more powerful CPU somewhere down the road. I'll just have to figure out what and when I want to upgrade.

My next 4 upgrades will probably be my Mobo/Cpu/Ram/SSD. Possibly the PSU too while I'm at it. We'll see.
I'm still gonna try and see if there are ways to improve my performance for those demanding titles. Maybe I'll upgrade to windows 10, maybe I'll buy some extra ram with higher speeds. like 3200mhz or something and maybe I'll find other tweaks.

I do recall a "timer tool" used to help alleviate the CPU bottleneck on crysis 3. I'll just have to find that little app on google. I don'T remember exactly how it worked but it apparantly gave a 20% fps boost or something

 

[LightningJR]

Thanks cadaveca, I had indeed mentionned my RAM speeds before.
Here's something interesting I found:

This guy has 2x gtx 980 ti in SLI and he's got the i7 4790k (same gen as my i5 4690k) and you can see he's getting just a little bit of bottlenecking as well. His CPU max usage hovers around 84-89% (which is better than my 100% lol) but yeah.

As for your last post cadaveca, indeed, I do agree with you that OPTIMIZATION plays a huge role in game performance we can get indeed. I do feel that this crysis 3 title is more of a game port (even with all the options) compared to the previous crysis titles. Crysis games have been known to have at the very least decent SLI scaling. Wheras Crysis 3 seems SUPER CPU intensive. Abnormally so (console porting signs lol)

I do feel you when you say "upgrade for one title". Indeed I don't feel a crazy huge urge to upgrade right away, but I do see that I could indeed use a more powerful CPU somewhere down the road. I'll just have to figure out what and when I want to upgrade.

My next 4 upgrades will probably be my Mobo/Cpu/Ram/SSD. Possibly the PSU too while I'm at it. We'll see.
I'm still gonna try and see if there are ways to improve my performance for those demanding titles. Maybe I'll upgrade to windows 10, maybe I'll buy some extra ram with higher speeds. like 3200mhz or something and maybe I'll find other tweaks.

I do recall a "timer tool" used to help alleviate the CPU bottleneck on crysis 3. I'll just have to find that little app on google. I don'T remember exactly how it worked but it apparantly gave a 20% fps boost or something

Do 4X DSR, that'll alleviate your CPU bottleneck

 

[cadaveca]

Yes, his CPU is quite good, inadequate for those two games and maybe some other, yes, but for most games, no.

Real problem is software? I disagree, if anything the games that are doing this to him are properly coded to take advantage of CPU power. Coding a game and leaving the CPU as an afterthought is lazy. I applaud any developer who uses the CPU's potential to make their game better. 3DMark is synthetic and useless imo for anything other than comparing epeen.

3DMark shows that his GPUs are working properly, so hardly useless.

CPU bottlenecks in games are caused by what? Draw calls? What DirectX 12 is purported to fix? So future titles, if coded properly in DX 12, won't need more CPU grunt to display the same sort of graphics. The more realistic option is to lower settings, not spend money on upgrades.

 

[PCGamerDR]

Thanks cadaveca, I had indeed mentionned my RAM speeds before.
Here's something interesting I found:

This guy has 2x gtx 980 ti in SLI and he's got the i7 4790k (same gen as my i5 4690k) and you can see he's getting just a little bit of bottlenecking as well. His CPU max usage hovers around 84-89% (which is better than my 100% lol) but yeah.

As for your last post cadaveca, indeed, I do agree with you that OPTIMIZATION plays a huge role in game performance we can get indeed. I do feel that this crysis 3 title is more of a game port (even with all the options) compared to the previous crysis titles. Crysis games have been known to have at the very least decent SLI scaling. Wheras Crysis 3 seems SUPER CPU intensive. Abnormally so (console porting signs lol)

I do feel you when you say "upgrade for one title". Indeed I don't feel a crazy huge urge to upgrade right away, but I do see that I could indeed use a more powerful CPU somewhere down the road. I'll just have to figure out what and when I want to upgrade.

My next 4 upgrades will probably be my Mobo/Cpu/Ram/SSD. Possibly the PSU too while I'm at it. We'll see.
I'm still gonna try and see if there are ways to improve my performance for those demanding titles. Maybe I'll upgrade to windows 10, maybe I'll buy some extra ram with higher speeds. like 3200mhz or something and maybe I'll find other tweaks.

I do recall a "timer tool" used to help alleviate the CPU bottleneck on crysis 3. I'll just have to find that little app on google. I don'T remember exactly how it worked but it apparantly gave a 20% fps boost or something

You could try using virtual resolution and see how the resolution increase fares too your FPS. you could get about the same FPS if a little bit less in a higher resolution :O!!! and increase the GPU usage that you want ;P.

 

[PCGamerDR]

3DMark shows that his GPUs are working properly, so hardly useless.

CPU bottlenecks in games are caused by what? Draw calls? What DirectX 12 is purported to fix? So future titles, if coded properly in DX 12, won't need more CPU grunt to display the same sort of graphics. The more realistic option is to lower settings, not spend money on upgrades.

My a10-6800k is waiting dx12 with it's arms wide open .

 

[jonathan1107]

If I were to keep my current mobo: http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produc...1&cm_re=msi_gaming_g45-_-13-130-771-_-Product
What's the best CPU I could get my hands on (say the 2 best cpu options)?
And what's the best RAM I could get to go with my mobo?

I know what yall think about my PSU and my HDDs. But what exactly would you change when it comes to my RAM and my CPU?
(in the context where I keep this current mobo... well unless you tell me I must absolutly change it)
which I'd hate to right now since ALL my cable management inside the case has been done and it took me a loooooooooong time lol.
That's what I hate about the idea of upgrading my PSU ... All the stuff I'm gonna have to go through just to remove the old PSU omg ... don't even wanna start thinking about it lol

 

[PCGamerDR]

If I were to keep my current mobo: http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produc...1&cm_re=msi_gaming_g45-_-13-130-771-_-Product
What's the best CPU I could get my hands on (say the 2 best cpu options)?
And what's the best RAM I could get to go with my mobo?

I know what yall think about my PSU and my HDDs. But what exactly would you change when it comes to my RAM and my CPU?
(in the context where I keep this current mobo... well unless you tell me I must absolutly change it)
which I'd hate to right now since ALL my cable management inside the case has been done and it took me a loooooooooong time lol.
That's what I hate about the idea of upgrading my PSU ... All the stuff I'm gonna have to go through just to remove the old PSU omg ... don't even wanna start thinking about it lol

i think the i7 4790k is the best for the socket/chipset

cpu:
http://ark.intel.com/products/80807
ram:
http://www.gskill.com/en/product/f3-3000c12d-8gtxdg

as your mobo can handle 3000mhz kits, it could be something like that.

 

[jonathan1107]

Here are 2 screenshots of my RAM at idle vs LOAD.

I don't know much about the whole PAGE file and swapping. For gaming, is it better to have a smaller page file size and LOTS of RAM? or it is it better to have no Page file at all with tons of ram?
or other?

 

[GreiverBlade]

for me the bottleneck is using SLI (optimization or eventually 1440p is not a res to use a SLI specially in 980Ti since one would be enough, eh?) ... no way a 4690K is a bottleneck (or a 6600K) i used SLI and CFX only once and then i always relied on a single strong GPU, lately 290 and 980


about the i5 is a midrange,
strange i always thought intel CPU to be:
Bottom of the bottom end: Atom
low end: Celeron and Pentium
Midrange : i3
lower top tier: i5
top tier: i7
Enthusiast grade top tier : 2011 i7

ergo for gaming the i5 is powerful enough for nearly anything and HT is not a big game changer (IF only gaming ofc!), aka: i7 are nearly useless unless real core type like the 2011 indeed tho for multigpu the later are more pertinent (if multigpu was pertinent unless 4K, if 4K was also pertinent, that is ... )


for 1440p i would not even need a 2nd 980 for my rig (i use a 1080p monitor but i mostly use DSR @ 1323p )

bottom line if you want a SLI setup go all the way and get a 4k screen and eventually a X99 setup (tho i suspect the 4690K would be totally fine)

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

I bet you'd reach 80%+ if you set it to 1080p.. with vsync off in nvcp as well

 

[LightningJR]

I bet you'd reach 80%+ if you set it to 1080p.. with vsync off in nvcp as well

Lowering resolution will only put more strain on the CPU making matters worse.

 

[trog100]

this thread is saving me some money i hope .. i currently have a 4970K at 4.6 with a couple of 970 cards in sli.. i get a tad under 18000 in firestike..

i have in mad moments been looking at replacing the two 970s with a pair of 980tis.. it would cost me over a grand (£1100-ish) to do this.. if my firestrike score only went up to 19000 i would be a bit p-ssed off..

its not what you need.. its what what you desire.. in my case i recon its just a feeling having as good as it "reasonably" gets.. when i get there i just use the machine and stop spending money.. sadly a pair of 980tis are still on my mind.. he he..

i never intend to "waste" money.. but then again i always do.. i never ever settle for what i start off with.. it always gets added to

trog

ps.. i am not even vaguely interested in 4k which makes me looking at two super cards in sli even dafter..

 

[Kanan]

I didn't read everything but here's my opinion:

The CPU is too slow. Best upgrade would be a i7 6700K, because quad core is where gaming is. 6 Cores with less IPC (Haswell compared to Skylake) aren't better than newer ones just released because the 6 cores aren't always used - perhaps in upcoming DX12 games, but not now. You could also lift that bottleneck when you increase resolution to 4K, but thats just an idea, I know you won't do it because 1440p is actually better suited for gaming. Just saying, your PC is too powerful for 1440p for most games but the most demanding ones that can use 2x 980 Ti SLI at 1440p at 100% usage, eg. Crysis 3 or BF4 maybe.

What is NOT your problem, to clear that up: 8 GB ram is still enough 98% of times. The PSU is more than enough, its even suited for QUAD SLI I think - so unless it's defective it's more than enough. Witcher isn't coded wrong or SLI profiles aren't too bad, just your setup is too imbalanced for that game on that resolution at least.

Again, if you want to maximize that system get a i7 6700K and even overclock it to the max (which should be about 4,7 to 5 GHz if you're lucky) to have maximum power and smallest bottleneck on CPU side. Alternative would be an i7 5820K if you are willing to bet on 6 (weaker) Cores. I wouldn't do that, though. Alternative 2: wait for Skylake-E and then switch to a Skylake-E with 6 cores. I think that would be the best idea, if you aren't in a hurry to have maximum performance.

btw your SSD is really small, get a bigger one, perhaps 512 GB Crucial or so. It does NOT hinder your performance, just saying, it's a bit small and you should get more space.

 

[KrachB00Mente]

I could be wrong, but since he is not running x99 Platform, could this be a PCI-E bottleneck issue?

I wonder why no one mentioned this before. In his profile i also see a soundcard - so i would assume that it is an electrical issue.

 

[Toothless]

4790k, double the memory, and get a better PSU is what I'm seeing in the thread and honestly, is also what I'm seeing too.

As for @Lowman316 's comment, that could also play a factor since that i5 only has 16 lanes. Adding in anything after those GPUs could take a hit.

5820k anyone?

 

[jonathan1107]

4790k, double the memory, and get a better PSU is what I'm seeing in the thread and honestly, is also what I'm seeing too.

As for @Lowman316 's comment, that could also play a factor since that i5 only has 16 lanes. Adding in anything after those GPUs could take a hit.

5820k anyone?

Wait I'm confused here:
What do you mean i5 4690k has 16 lanes?
As far as I know my mobo only has one downside, it only supports PCIE 8x/8x config (instead of 16x/16x).

Other downside of my mobo it doesn'T support 6th gen CPUs so I couldn't buy a 6700k processor unless I were to change my mobo too, which to me at least RIGHT NOW, doesn't feel tempting. As for the soundcard, I don't see what lowman meant? What the heck does this have to do with soundcards lol?

Educate me a bit here please

Oh and I'll clarify what I WANT vs what you guys might want in my position. My objectives:

- I don't intend to game with a 4k monitor (at least not anytime soon) I intend to go 4k maybe in a year or 2...
- I am NOT satisfied with a mere 60fps at 1440p with that much GPU horsepower EXCEPT for super demanding titles (and even then, I like to lower a setting or 2 and get 90FPS+)
- The reason I mention 90 FPS plus is I have an overclockable monitor that reaches 99hz refresh rate, so no... 60 FPS is not where I get satisfied... I'm happy to get 60fps but if I can I like to reach at least 85fps plus... don't ask me why, I just like it MUCH Better that way
- There are PC parts I'm more inclined to upgrade faster than others. I hate having to upgrade a motherboard (I just did like a year ago for this z97 mobo with the i5 4690k). I hate the very idea of having to change the PSU. It took me ages to setup all my cable management inside my case and I don't feel ready YET to change my PSU.
- RAM, I'll change it anyday just point me towards the best RAM kit I can get below 200$ (100-150$ price range even better)
- SSD I shall upgrade VERY soon for a 1tb SSD most likely, probably this christmas
- CPU, I'm either going to upgrade it very soon for a CPU that fits with my current mobo (so 4th or 5th gen intel CPU) or I'll upgrade my CPU and MOBO at the same time sometime next year or a bit after.

I did spend a lot for those 2x gtx 980 ti's and my wife won't approve of another BEEFY upgrade super soon lol. And I would totally understand her point of view there lol.

At the moment, I feel a bit cheated because I do feel that crysis 3 is not optimized that well. Although I do agree my CPU isn't that great in comparison with my GPU setup. I might indeed have over-estimated my current CPU.

For my intents and purposes my current setup is almost perfect for 85% of the titles available... it's just frustrating to see poor gpu SLI scaling in The witcher 3 and Crysis 3 at the moment with my current setup, no matter it's small shortcomings.

So just to make sure I got everything right:

4th gen upgrade would mean the i7 4790k correct? (is there another 4th gen CPU to consider?)
5th gen would mean the i7 5820k or the i7 5830k correct ? (what's the difference between the 2 5th gens?)

How much do you think I could sell the i5 4690k for?

 

[cadaveca]

So just to make sure I got everything right:

4th gen upgrade would mean the i7 4790k correct? (is there another 4th gen CPU to consider?)
5th gen would mean the i7 5820k or the i7 5830k correct ? (what's the difference between the 2 5th gens?)

How much do you think I could sell the i5 4690k for?

Your only true upgrade without changing mobos and ram is the 4790K, yes. But all it might really add is 4 HT cores... you would likely end up with the same OC. So don't bother with that.

you could probably get a decent amount of cash for your 4690K still. IF all goes well at most it would cost you $200 for the 4790K. Which might not make any difference at all...

The real fact of the matter is that you don't really have a CPU bottleneck. Yes, there is a bottleneck there, but anything you buy will only add minor gains, and only in some specific titles, because the true bottleneck is the programming.

Moving to X99 will get you more PCIe lanes, better drive support, and all that, but will cost you well over $800 ($200 for board, $200 for ram, $519 for 5820K CPU, that's over $900! ROFL).

You GPUs vastly exceed your CPU's potential for sure, but the same applies to ANY CPU on the market. I have them all, I use them all nearly daily, and there is only truly slight differences when you are a guy that OCs, since the end clocks are really close.

IF you ran stock CPU, then yeah, you might notice some huge differences, is you go by stock clocks.

 

[GreiverBlade]

4790k, double the memory, and get a better PSU is what I'm seeing in the thread and honestly, is also what I'm seeing too.

As for @Lowman316 's comment, that could also play a factor since that i5 only has 16 lanes. Adding in anything after those GPUs could take a hit.

5820k anyone?

nope, nope and still nope x8/x8 is still not a bottleneck for 3.0 rev. if it was a 1.0 x8/x8 maybe but 3.0: NO
sell one 980Ti if you 1440... one is already overkill ahah... use the money to buy some gift for your wife : positive side, wife's happy now

if i didn't got unlucky with my 4690K i would still have it and rock my 980 on it ... and get a steady 60 fps + in 1323p DSR in most of my games (Vsync on or off )

 

[jonathan1107]

Your only true upgrade without changing mobos and ram is the 4790K, yes. But all it might really add is 4 HT cores... you would likely end up with the same OC. So don't bother with that.

you could probably get a decent amount of cash for your 4690K still. IF all goes well at most it would cost you $200 for the 4790K. Which might not make any difference at all...

The real fact of the matter is that you don't really have a CPU bottleneck. Yes, there is a bottleneck there, but anything you buy will only add minor gains, and only in some specific titles, because the true bottleneck is the programming.

Moving to X99 will get you more PCIe lanes, better drive support, and all that, but will cost you well over $800 ($200 for board, $200 for ram, $519 for 5820K CPU, that's over $900! ROFL).

You GPUs vastly exceed your CPU's potential for sure, but the same applies to ANY CPU on the market. I have them all, I use them all nearly daily, and there is only truly slight differences when you are a guy that OCs, since the end clocks are really close.

IF you ran stock CPU, then yeah, you might notice some huge differences, is you go by stock clocks.

Yup indeed, "programming and optimization go a loooooooong way"... Here's the problem with nowadays titles... They are almost ALL built with consoles in mind, so yeah, many of them fall in the category of "improperly optimized" and put a huge burden on the CPU and don't use the GPU to it's full potential. That has been a problem for PC builders for years now... If the trend stays the same, there is an argument for getting strong CPUs (to compensate for the improper optimization) but that's just straight up robbery.

But yes, if I had to do it all over again, and I hate I'm saying this lol:
I'd probably have gotten just 1x GTX 980 ti (abandonning at the same time my 90+FPS dream lol) along with a big SSD, more and better RAM and faster HDDs (if they're worth it at all)
I must say I knew the "down sides of SLI" when I got into 2x gtx 980 ti (need for good driver support, stuttering issues and whatnot) but I felt the gains of a 2nd gtx 980 ti would still be very apparent in most games, but I have to say up to now I'm not impressed at all.

Although I'm sure I'll fall on a title (soon I guess) that will make me say "Thank god I have 2x gtx 980 ti's"
But that hasn't happened yet

THREAD CONCLUSION:

Although my objective has always been to get UBER performance out of my 2x GTX 980 TI's, I don't feel like I've gotten that just yet, at least not in the 3-5 titles I play mostly of late. I often end up turning off SLI and barely seeing any difference.

Here I have to mention that as a "V_SYNC" believer, I pay MUCH MORE attention to my MINIMUM Frame Rates than my Max Frame Rates, that is because once I find my most stable MIN. Frame Rate, I lock my refresh rate to that (HERE I remind you all that I have an overclockable monitor that can reach 100hz) min frame rate avg that I get. That means that even though I could get frames around 90-100 in The Witcher 3 for instance, I still locked it to 65 FPS in the end (65hz refresh rate) because that's what was stable.
Jumping all over the place from 65 FPS to 100 FPS is not acceptable for me, even if it might be for other people. Judging from what I've seen on many titles (youtube benchmarks I've seen) with similar setups to mine (2x gtx 980 ti's in sli) but with stronger CPUs I do notice a 15-25% Minimum FPS increase which is quite considerable in my opinion. It makes it Very tempting to upgrade the CPU but like Cadaveca said:

I'd only see the benefits of the CPU upgrade in a few improperly optimized titles (or demanding ones). There has been a mention of 4K on this thread. It is true that with 2x gtx 980 ti's I might see a bigger difference between single card vs SLI in 4k. Or at least in DSR 4k.

But again, in my opinion, at 1440p, DSR is not even a thing... It does make the graphics look better but the performance hit doesn't justify the added "AA" if I can compare DSR to "AA" in this matter. Buying a 4k monitor would make some sense but I feel it's way too early for me to jump to 4k, no matter how strong my setup might be.


So my final conclusion (thanks to your help and input) is:

I only see 3 acceptable solutions:

A) I sell my i5 4690k along with my mobo and RAM and swap them for a new mobo, RAM and a i7 6700k CPU setup. That would be expansive but would help with those MIN Frame Rates AVG I'm sure

B) I sell one of my GTX 980 ti and either spend the money on other minor compoenents (RAM, SSD, PSU or whatever) or hold on to it for an eventual SINGLE GPU upgrade in the future when the new PASCAL lineup comes out

C) I keep my actual setup and find out how I can take advantage of it to the maximum whilst finding ways in which I can really take advantage of the fact I currently own 2x GTX 980 ti's.

 

[GreiverBlade]

Yup indeed, "programming and optimization go a loooooooong way"... Here's the problem with nowadays titles... They are almost ALL built with consoles in mind, so yeah, many of them fall in the category of "improperly optimized" and put a huge burden on the CPU and don't use the GPU to it's full potential. That has been a problem for PC builders for years now... If the trend stays the same, there is an argument for getting strong CPUs (to compensate for the improper optimization) but that's just straight up robbery.

But yes, if I had to do it all over again, and I hate I'm saying this lol:

I'd probably have gotten just 1x GTX 980 ti (abandonning at the same time my 90+FPS dream lol) along with a big SSD, more and better RAM and faster HDDs (if they're worth it at all)

I must say I knew the "down sides of SLI" when I got into 2x gtx 980 ti (need for good driver support, stuttering issues and whatnot) but I felt the gains of a 2nd gtx 980 ti would still be very apparent in most games, but I have to say up to now I'm not impressed at all.

Although I'm sure I'll fall on a title (soon I guess) that will make me say "Thank god I have 2x gtx 980 ti's"

But that hasn't happened yet

that kind of post make me proud to be on TPU very realistic and forward, you wanted it you did it, tho you realize you could have done it less overkill but in the end "overkill" is not really a word that exist in computer world ... (otherwise my setup would also be overkill for my 1080p gaming basis )

 

[jonathan1107]

I've written my "thread conclusion in my last post by editing it" for those who did not notice. I left myself with 3 solutions which I consider acceptable for my situation and would like to know which one of the 3 you would go for considering what I've said in that Thread Conclusion post

 

[cadaveca]

I've written my "thread conclusion in my last post by editing it" for those who did not notice. I left myself with 3 solutions which I consider acceptable for my situation and would like to know which one of the 3 you would go for considering what I've said in that Thread Conclusion post

Keep it. Accept your system performance for what it is... overkill.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, there's not much you can do to make better use of your system other than DSR (rendering games at higher res then downscaling to chosen res).

Personally, I simply stopped using monitoring apps on my daily rigs, and I just play games? When things get a bit slow or whatever... I just deal with it. I have all the latest-greatest stuff in tech that money can buy, and it is all horribly used, and a vastly overpowered for most workloads. I am still using 780 Tis in SLI... because buying 980 TI's won't offer me much at my chosen 1920x1200x3 and 2560x1600. My current cards exceed 60 FPS in most titles, and anything more than that is useless.

The fact you overclock your monitor... wow. That's a waste of time to me. Buy a real 144 Hz panel, or something. Heck, buy two more monitors, and run three monitors like I do often.

Think about that for a moment. I have 5930K right now, with 780 Ti Sli, and I can play pretty much anything @ 60 FPS on three monitors. Sure, there is one or two titles that don't paly well, but to me, those are purposely coded that way to get people to upgrade. When you compare console gamnig vs PC gaming, and the differences in visual quality vs "horsepower", PC gaming is the worst optimized shit ever.


To me, your approach in system design is totally wrong. mid-range CPU with top-end cards, old ram and PSU and SSDs... so getting the rest of the system up to snuff would be my first focus, and while you don't like the PSU swap idea, it'd be the first thing I do. Having to re-do cable management stopping form a PSU swap is the excuse of a lazy person. They put capacitors on the end of those PSU lines because the PSU is rather crappy without them.

So, I can only conclude that the PowerCacheâ„¢ caps aren't just there for show - they're there because the unit's design needs them to be there. Forget the "extra power reserve" thing on the box... those capacitors have to be there primarily to make the unit itself more stable. Folks, don't run the TPQ 1200W without those cables... you want the stability they provide.

http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story3&reid=177


Yet, in the end, I'm very picky about the tech I use. I pay for very little of it, so I can afford to be snobbish about this stuff. I think your PSU is garbage, and that's based on having my own. One day it'll probably die like mine did... I simply cannot trust these PSUs.

But again, I'm a PC snob. I write reviews, and I get gear for free. I probably use my PC far differently that you do, so please take my opinion with a huge amount of salt.