Jump to content

Nvidia 4xxx Series - The Official Perennially Disappointing Hunt for More Power!


Mr.Vic20

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Zaku3 said:

 

Game is a huge one. 150GB last time I DL'ed before updates. Gonna get another SSD and the 7800Xt or better before I download it again. A benefit of setting up a dedicated desk for my PC is said desk can have all my accessories on it. So more flight/space sims incoming.

 

If AMD's next cards don't have a frame generation, you may seriously want to consider at least looking into nVidia. DLSS Frame Gen on Flight Sim is "holy f'n crap". @stepeemy previous post regarding flight sim was off a bit... because apparently I enabled frame generation but didn't have DLSS enabled and was using one of the "normal" AA methods and that's why my fps was bouncing a bit (so, I was getting that ~90fps at actual 4k with, I think, TAA :vortex: )... I enabled DLSS(3) in quality mode + frame generation and Flight Sim more-or-less never broke below 120fps at 4k Ultra Settings... annoyingly, though, VSync seems broken in the beta so it was going up to around 150fps at times and I was getting a little screen tearing :nottalking:
Frame Generation + DLSS (or + FSR for AMD if they are able to do a version of frame generation!) is an absolute game changer. Like, holy crap; it seriously bodes well for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, jaethos said:

Screen tearing is one of the main issues Digital Foundry has with DLSS 3. The VSync not working is as currently intended by Nvidia, so if it goes to a higher frame rate than your monitor supports you get tearing, even with Gsync.

 

It's still in beta fwiw. I'm not concerned as I'd imagine this will be fixed at some point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

I just walked around for like 10 minutes, choked some people, shot others, stole a dude's clothes. Frame rate was anywhere from 50-70, lowest was like 47 or something. Everything maxed, 4k, DLSS set to quality.

 

Okay mine was getting into the 70s also depending where I look too, so sounds like the ray traced reflections setting is just silly on that if you are also getting 50’s and drops to high 40’s in some views.

 

Now we need to see if Vic can hold 60 there!

 

Edit: What i found out recently, if you ever want to actually play it, is reflection quality does adjust ray tracing as well, so you can turn it down one notch and then lock 60 with no real noticeable change 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stepee said:

 

Okay mine was getting into the 70s also depending where I look too, so sounds like the ray traced reflections setting is just silly on that if you are also getting 50’s and drops to high 40’s in some views.

 

Now we need to see if Vic can hold 60 there!


Prob would be a solid 60+ with DLSS at balanced or performance 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:


Prob would be a solid 60+ with DLSS at balanced or performance 

 

Oh boo you didn’t check if it makes a difference, you gotta with cpu bottlenecks or it doesn’t help me gauge any. :P

 

For me it makes no difference between native and performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, stepee said:

 

Oh boo you didn’t check if it makes a difference, you gotta with cpu bottlenecks or it doesn’t help me gauge any. :P

 

For me it makes no difference between native and performance.


I don’t know if there’s much of a CPU bottleneck. The ray-tracing seems very heavy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:


I don’t know if there’s much of a CPU bottleneck. The ray-tracing seems very heavy.

 

It’s definitely cpu based on how it’s scaling, I think it’s that the ray tracing itself is cpu heavy, I think reflections are in general maybe because it’s having to keep track of more objects moving around and such? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

Is there an in gaming setting for FPS or do i need to run my own frame counter for this one? 


Alt + Z, go to the hud settings, performance, select fps and click which quadrant you want it to show in. (This is nVidia’s built in counter in geforce experience)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:


Alt + Z, go to the hud settings, performance, select fps and click which quadrant you want it to show in. (This is nVidia’s built in counter in geforce experience)

OK, so results certianly vary by location on this level:

 

Main plaza at the start jogging in a natural manner I experienced fluxtuations between 55-70FPS. Running around like a mad man, and intentional trying to constantly freakout the camera results in momentary dips as low as 44fps! Down by the beach, life is great with FPS ranging from 69-81. Overall, a messy level for consistant performance. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

OK, so results certianly vary by location on this level:

 

Main plaza at the start jogging in a natural manner I experienced fluxtuations between 55-70FPS. Running around like a mad man, and intentional trying to constantly freakout the camera results in momentary dips as low as 44fps! Down by the beach, life is great with FPS ranging from 69-81. Overall, a messy level for consistant performance. 

 

Sounds a lot closer to stable with that cpu boost! Though I also just realized my psu is 750watt lol

  • Shocked 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stepee said:

 

I thought it was 800w! I think 800w is what I was supposed to have for the ftw3 and was already undercutting it lol. No wonder it always seems like my cpu cooler isn’t working as it should…

Whelp, you're really making me feel better about adding this 13900K +4090 on a 1000w PSU! :sun:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, stepee said:


Why didn’t you switch to the 1200!

The sad truth is that I just didn't feel like going through the hassle. Things have been so crazy in my professional life that I needed a rebuild like another hole in my head. Twas the weariness of it all that stayed Vic's hands... :p

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

The sad truth is that I just didn't feel like going through the hassle. Things have been so crazy in my professional life that I needed a rebuild like another hole in my head. Twas the weariness of it all that stayed Vic's hands... :p

 

I know that feeling. It had been so long I had forgotten how big a pain in the ass a total new build is. Even tough I carried over my GPU and a few drives it was way more time than I wanted. I was lucky to remember where I put the extra PSU modular cables at so I was able to find an extra power cord to power the fan controller that that this cases uses.  My old case still had a Windows 8 key sticker on it.

  • Hugs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

Solid hit here:

 

FfhGEUnaUAEp_m7

 


It’s annoying that these cards only have a single HDMI 2.1 port. ASUS cards have a second 2.1 port somehow (probably one of the reasons they were the first to sell out :lol: ).

Is displayport 2 available yet? IIRC it allows for 10k 60hz or even two 4k 144hz displays running HDR at 30bpc off of a single cable with zero compression. DP1.4 maxes at 4k 120hz 8bpc HDR unless you enable compression which allows 144hz (but hurts image quality - my monitor is 1.4 and the 144hz mode is kinda meh with text vs no-compression, so I never use it)

 

EDIT: jfc it’s been available since about fall of 2019 and DP2.1 became available this past week. The new Intel Arc video cards are the first (and only) cards to have DP2.0… and there’s ZERO monitors that use it. WTF? :lol: I guess everyone is too focused on HDMI 2.1.

  • Halal 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mr.Vic20because I’m an absolute degenerate, I began looking at Intel 13th gen and AM5 compatible motherboards, to my dismay it seems that manufacturers are starting to make SATA not a thing. Most of the high-end boards only have 4x SATA ports (some, just 2) and only the highest end ones have 6. My current board for my Ryzen 5900x is high-end, but not one of those insane $1k motherboards, and has 8x SATA ports.
Very annoying for data hoarders like myself :nottalking:

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

@Mr.Vic20because I’m an absolute degenerate, I began looking at Intel 13th gen and AM5 compatible motherboards, to my dismay it seems that manufacturers are starting to make SATA not a thing. Most of the high-end boards only have 4x SATA ports (some, just 2) and only the highest end ones have 6. My current board for my Ryzen 5900x is high-end, but not one of those insane $1k motherboards, and has 8x SATA ports.
Very annoying for data hoarders like myself :nottalking:

 

 

Network attached storage.

I have 2 nvme drives and 2 SATA drives in my desktop but another 55 or so TB of storage for things like movies, photos, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...