Suggest a game

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

mnewsham

Lifer
Oct 2, 2010
14,539
428
136
Quick update for those who care:
Ninja 3 Cooler without any fan on it has i7 980x running at 90C per core. With 120mm fan added to the coler the 980X runs at 74C. Curently still running only 1 x 6990, because I still did ton recieve my aux PSU. The total systep power load on my APC UPS is 580watts. this includes 980X plus 1 HD6990 card and 12 GB of RAM in Rampage III formula mobo.

I am using antec 1200 case with top and back fans on; on high.

Potential problems with this set up:

1. The fan on Ninja3 cooler is only about an inch away from 6990. So air intake is effected but it still works good for air cooling. I7 980X is at 74 degrees C under full load. Ninja 3 cooler will block one of DDR3 slots on mobo, unless the ram module in that slot has to hear sink ontop of its heat spreader.

2. The location of the fan on 6990 is too close to the back of the case and can be blocked by a card sitting in the next slot over. 6990s have rubber feet on pcb to keep them separated when plugged into slots near eachother, but you may have problems if you have a different card in the slot next to 9660 which has no rubber feet.

3. Exhaust of hot air into the case is not a big problem due to size of the cards. The air exhaust into the case is so close to the front of the case that reversing the direction of fan on forward side of the case sucks that hot air out of the case.

4. Dont expect to have HDs or anything else mounted in case bays whch are next to the cards...

6990 under a full load is not as loud as 4870x2 was, but close.

I'll keep updating as i learn more... Every onle already has the benchmarks posted online, so i will try to concentrate mostly on mechanical aspects of the setup...

RAM heatsinks dont really do much of anything, Sounds like you need a bigger motherboard. :p
 

Skurge

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2009
5,195
1
71
you can look at gpu reviews of the 6970 to see that.

and to follow up I ran some of my own benchmarks.

1680x1080 high settings, AAA, 4x AF

36.71 fps without advanced phsyx

31.09 fps with advanced physx run on my gpu

18.08 fps with advanced physx run on my cpu

Those results kind of agree with me. If you are GPU limited in that game, it could be faster to do physx on the CPU, if you have a fast CPU. You have a dual core.

You get 31fps with physx on your GPU. Xbit get the same FPS with an i7 or a phenom X4, but get 51fps with a 2500k.
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
if you have a fast CPU. You have a dual core.

that hasn't been true for years now. Dynamic power switching and overclocking (turbo boost in intel and whatever AMD calls it in theirs) means that a quad core is always faster, because it can shut down 1, 2 or 3 cores and increase the clocks of the remaining cores on the fly.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
Those results kind of agree with me. If you are GPU limited in that game, it could be faster to do physx on the CPU, if you have a fast CPU. You have a dual core.

You get 31fps with physx on your GPU. Xbit get the same FPS with an i7 or a phenom X4, but get 51fps with a 2500k.
no, I am getting 31 fps with my gpu handling BOTH graphics and physx. the i7 and Phenom were not having to also handle graphics of course. but yes Sandy Bridge has made a massive leap at handling physx.
 

flexcore

Member
Jul 4, 2010
193
0
0
With the components you have I would have thought you would of went with a better CPU cooler. And another vote for ARMA 2! Thats one resource hungry game that looks awesome! You should be able to really have that game looking amazing!
 

pcm81

Senior member
Mar 11, 2011
598
16
81
With the components you have I would have thought you would of went with a better CPU cooler. And another vote for ARMA 2! Thats one resource hungry game that looks awesome! You should be able to really have that game looking amazing!


I am going to upgrade to H2O once the coolers for 6990s are released...
 

Skurge

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2009
5,195
1
71
no, I am getting 31 fps with my gpu handling BOTH graphics and physx. the i7 and Phenom were not having to also handle graphics of course. but yes Sandy Bridge has made a massive leap at handling physx.

Yeah, I was saying if you have a highend CPU like SB or a 980x like the OP, that game run faster if you let the GPU do the graphics and run advanced physx on the CPU. I wasn't saying that it would be the case for all physx games. Just metro.
 

Skurge

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2009
5,195
1
71
that hasn't been true for years now. Dynamic power switching and overclocking (turbo boost in intel and whatever AMD calls it in theirs) means that a quad core is always faster, because it can shut down 1, 2 or 3 cores and increase the clocks of the remaining cores on the fly.

That's not what I was implying at all. I wasn't saying a dual core was a fast CPU.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
Yeah, I was saying if you have a highend CPU like SB or a 980x like the OP, that game run faster if you let the GPU do the graphics and run advanced physx on the CPU. I wasn't saying that it would be the case for all physx games. Just metro.
it would still run faster on an Nvidia gpu than the cpu. to be clear, someone with a gtx570 would get faster performance letting the gtx570 handle both graphics and physx than having even Sandy Bridge handle the physx.
 
Last edited:

Skurge

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2009
5,195
1
71
it would still run faster on an Nvidia gpu than the cpu. to be clear, someone with a gtx570 would get faster performance letting the gtx570 handle both graphics and physx than having even Sandy Bridge handle the physx.

A 570 can't even get 40fps on very high at 1080p. So I don't think it would. We could always ask someone with a Sandy Bridge and a 580/570.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
A 570 can't even get 40fps on very high at 1080p. So I don't think it would. We could always ask someone with a Sandy Bridge and a 580/570.
they were running only high settings at 1680x1080 with just AAA, no tessellation and no dof.. a gtx570 would easily average about 65-70fps with those settings without physx and about 60-65 with it.
 
Last edited:

Shmee

Memory & Storage, Graphics Cards Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
8,132
3,069
146
quake wars and homefront, world of tanks.