Switching To Nvidia

[stuff_me_good]

I for one don't get this "give everything right now" mentality and because of that superior attribute, I start play new games only few months after release. You may ask why, well then I don't have to deal with broken games and drivers. Makes my life simple and game experience better.


Most of the gaming problems reported here toward amd or nvidia are directly linked to player jumping too early on every announced broken game. Everybody knows and are pissed studios that they release broken games, yet still most buy them at launch anyway. All you can blame is yourself because you cannot control yourself and vote with your wallet.

 

[96Firebird]

HardOCP found a similar situation when maxing out GTA V @ 1440p and 4K. They assume it is due to running out of VRAM, in which case the only solution right now is to turn settings down or get the Titan X.

Though the performance is high, it is almost hard to call this playable because of the stuttering in-game with the AMD Radeon R9 295X2. I think we will end up having to lower settings on the R9 295X2 to alleviate hte VRAM bottleneck and create a smoother experience. Therefore, while the GTX TITAN X is playable at these settings, the R9 295X2 is not.


GeForce GTX 980 SLI seems to do a lot better, even though it too is limited to 4GB of VRAM per GPU. However, the performance difference is so much that the raw performance improvement makes up for the inconsistent frame rate. This setting is playable on the GTX 980 SLI, and the TITAN X.

Bumping the resolution up to 3840x2160 completely changes the picture oddly. Whereas AMD Radeon R9 295X2 was suffering at 1440p, it seems to "reverse the polarity of the neutron flow" and now accelerate past GTX 980 SLI and TITAN X in performance, by a lot. However, these numbers can be somewhat deceiving. During actual gameplay it did feel stuttery, and not as smooth as the performance would indicate. In fact, you can kind of see this in the framerate which again isn't a smooth line by any means, but rather a lot of up and downs in framerate.


It looks like GeForce GTX 980 SLI is bottlenecking hard here with the limited framebuffer. GeForce GTX TITAN X is able to pull ahead in performance with much more consistent framerates. Again, the smoothest experience is GeForce GTX TITAN X.

Source

 

[A.t]

There is no need to assume as there are ways to see how much VRAM you're consuming. GTA 5 has a lot of options as well as a meter that starts to go red once you reach your VRAM wall by mb number in the options. While options such as, IIRC, post processing up the VRAM usage a lot, others such as ambient occlusion don't even or just up it by a few megs.

With some fine tweaking, the 295X can perform better than the Titan X, and I'm sure it will.

 

[exar333]

Well, 295X is bit of a faster card than the Titan X, so if you're actually getting a single Titan X, then you won't be doing much of an upgrade.

GTA IV has a section in its options that shows you how much VRAM you're consuming in the options. Though, you're better off using Afterburner's if you think you're running out of VRAM. I'd say you're running out of GPU power before VRAM because I own a 980 and that is what has been happening to me for a long time. But you may of course be running out of VRAM as well.

As for Nvidia's options, I just upgraded my UHD TV today to one with 3D, and it's a bit nice. Though, with HDTV 3D you're limited to 720p at 60HZ for gaming, which blows.

OP mentioned getting 2 Titan X's...

 

[Innokentij]

You must be thinking of crossfire for older AMD cards. The 290/290X/295 have the best implementation of multi-GPU configs of any cards out. Lowest latency, highest scaling, and smoothest gameplay. It also has way more bandwidth than SLI, which helps at 4K.

Older AMD cards (Like the 7970 and such) use software CF and do still have some issues, and does not work with DX9. But it is way better than it was.

You might be right, i have no experience with CF on 2xx series. But from what i can see on test about frame time latency CF and SLI is still inferior to singel card so not a option for me personaly to it become a hardware solution and not driver / game dependant (software). I also tought that 200 series just removed the need for the SLI bridge (duno what it's called in CF term) so it could use the pci-e slot instead for CF but all is still controlled by driver, like my 690 GTX had internal SLI on the card but it still had to obey software. If this made any sense to you?

Edit: I looked it up and the "new" CF is nothing magic is same old just without cable. Taken from https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290X_CrossFire/1.html

The Radeon R9 290X is the first high-end graphics card from AMD since the introduction of CrossFire that lacks a physical interconnect between cards participating in a multi-GPU setup. Even the very first Radeon X1900 XT cards relied on a cable to pass CrossFire data between cards. The R9 290X relies on the PCI-Express bus to relay CrossFire data between other cards in the CrossFire setup—no CrossFire fingers or CFBI ribbon cables run between the cards themselves. AMD assured us that such a setup doesn't affect performance or frame-latency, stating that it is in fact better suited to high-resolution display heads, such as 4K Ultra HD

 

[dave1029]

You might be right, i have no experience with CF on 2xx series. But from what i can see on test about frame time latency CF and SLI is still inferior to singel card so not a option for me personaly to it become a hardware solution and not driver / game dependant (software). I also tought that 200 series just removed the need for the SLI bridge (duno what it's called in CF term) so it could use the pci-e slot instead for CF but all is still controlled by driver, like my 690 GTX had internal SLI on the card but it still had to obey software. If this made any sense to you?

SLI/Xfire will never be as good as a single card in terms of smooth gameplay... Problem is, there isn't a single GPU card out yet that can handle 4k by itself. Titan X comes very close, but you still need two of them to guarantee 60 fps.

 

[Spanners]

HardOCP found a similar situation when maxing out GTA V @ 1440p and 4K. They assume it is due to running out of VRAM, in which case the only solution right now is to turn settings down or get the Titan X.

Source

That's all tested with grass:ultra which they go on to state in a follow-up article is not a good idea anyway. I don't think VRAM was the only cause.

Source

 

[guskline]

It can't maintain 60 fps on new games. It's just not quite powerful enough. I'm getting a new card regardless... I'm just deciding on the Titan X (SLI) instead of the 390x in Crossfire.

dave1029: If this is your decision, I would wait until the release of the 390x. I'm sure the TitanX SLI vs 390x CF will be one of the first reviews right after TitanX vs 390x.

I'm sticking with my 2 R9 290s in CF to see what Win 10 does. (I'm using a single R9 290 in a 3770k rig right now in win 10 and game play is very good.)

In addition, my 290s are custom water cooled so unless the blocks fit the 390/390x series my best course is to stick with them. In addition, both of my monitors have 1440 resolution, so no need for me to go higher.

Since you are committed to 4k resolution and there have been enough reviews of a single TitanX vs 2 TitanXs in SLI at that resolution, it makes sense and perhaps cents (or dollars) to wait until the 390x release.

 

[dave1029]

dave1029: If this is your decision, I would wait until the release of the 390x. I'm sure the TitanX SLI vs 390x CF will be one of the first reviews right after TitanX vs 390x.

I'm sticking with my 2 R9 290s in CF to see what Win 10 does. (I'm using a single R9 290 in a 3770k rig right now in win 10 and game play is very good.)

In addition, my 290s are custom water cooled so unless the blocks fit the 390/390x series my best course is to stick with them. In addition, both of my monitors have 1440 resolution, so no need for me to go higher.

Since you are committed to 4k resolution and there have been enough reviews of a single TitanX vs 2 TitanXs in SLI at that resolution, it makes sense and perhaps cents (or dollars) to wait until the 390x release.

How is your x-fire config handling? My experience has been underwhelming to say the least.

 

[Headfoot]

Yes I'm playing at 4k. It's running out of Vram causing stuttering. Not smooth at all. If I stand still it can hit 60 but as soon as I start moving and new areas need to be loaded... stutter. Two Titan X's should fix the problem nicely. 12 GB of ram as opposed to 4 GB. My mind is already set on the Titan X because of that Vram... the 980 Ti will most likely only have 6 GB. Question is, will the X drop in price?

Edit: CPU is I7-4930k Hexacore

It really doesn't have much do to with the VRAM most of the time. It probably just straight up doesn't have enough power to push high frame rates at 4k given how hard it is to run 4k.

 

[Headfoot]

HardOCP found a similar situation when maxing out GTA V @ 1440p and 4K. They assume it is due to running out of VRAM, in which case the only solution right now is to turn settings down or get the Titan X.


Source

I suspect AMD's crossfire drivers are still stuttery on GTA V specifically before the VRAM issue. Just because the Titan X uses more than 4 because it has 12 available doesn't mean that is all needed... Many games pre-cache textures given free VRAM

Bumping the resolution up to 3840x2160 completely changes the picture oddly. Whereas AMD Radeon R9 295X2 was suffering at 1440p, it seems to "reverse the polarity of the neutron flow" and now accelerate past GTX 980 SLI and TITAN X in performance, by a lot. However, these numbers can be somewhat deceiving. During actual gameplay it did feel stuttery, and not as smooth as the performance would indicate. In fact, you can kind of see this in the framerate which again isn't a smooth line by any means, but rather a lot of up and downs in framerate.

 

[dave1029]

It really doesn't have much do to with the VRAM most of the time. It probably just straight up doesn't have enough power to push high frame rates at 4k given how hard it is to run 4k.

Tell that to my frame counter. On paper, I should be having no problems.

Warning issued for inflammatory language.
-- stahlhart

 

[Stuka87]

I'm pretty sure it's VRAM based on the issues I'm having. See, it's not a frame rate issue. Most games are running at "60 FPS" but it's not smooth. Great on a benchmark, but it just isn't smooth. And I know it's not regular ram or my hard drive because I'm running 16 GB at I think 1866 and a Samsung 1TB SSD. I've always heard that one of the issues AMD has, is that while the frames are usually on par with Nvidia equivalents, it's almost always not as smooth.

This was the case with older cards like the 7970. The 290 series introduced a new way of doing cross fire that moved them ahead of nVidia in frame times for crossfire/SLI setups.

Its extremely easy to check your vram though, it takes just moments. Open up MSI Afterburner, hit the detatch button for the graph, go play for a a bit until you are feeling the frame drops, then tab out and look at the graph. It will show you everything you need about the GPU, CPU, and Memory.

Also, as HardOCP stated, do not run grass at ultra (on any card). Drop it down one notch.

 

[A.t]

OP mentioned getting 2 Titan X's...

Let's be honest here, I'm not so sure this thread is even about getting a single Titan X. Because...

Tell that to my frame counter. On paper, I should be having no problems.

He just comes in here ranting for nothing, blabbering about how his 295X can't max out 4K helps nothing at all.

SLI/Xfire will never be as good as a single card in terms of smooth gameplay...

Also, this is wrong. Years ago I've experienced better "smooth gameplay" with two ATI cards over a single one in a few titles.

If you bothered to check your VRAM usage while messing with the settings in GTA 5 your card might have pulled it off. I've heard from several places that the 295X isn't as bad as you make it out to be in 4K. However, I can't tell this by myself as I own a 980 and rarely game.

Look, if your card doesn't have enough oomph either you should turn the settings down / run windowed or simply buy a better card. But that's not to say it needs to be the $1000 card as a watered down version of it is on the way.

Warning issued for inflammatory language.
-- stahlhart

 

[guskline]

How is your x-fire config handling? My experience has been underwhelming to say the least.

dave1029 I find it to be good BUT I'm not running at 4k, "only" 1440

 

[DaveSimmons]

If money means nothing to you, then it isn't crazy to buy 2 x Titan X right now! instead of waiting a month to see what the Radeons and possibly 980ti are like. If money means nothing you can always buy new cards again next month.

I'm too cheap to do that, and my GTX 680 still works well enough for me at 19x12. I might get an R3xx or 980ti eventually but I can wait.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I have the feeling that my 780ti and I are going to be together for quite a long time.

 

[dave1029]

Alright, I finally checked my VRAM usage on a couple of games that I'm playing/trying to play.
Far Cry 4 results: 3.7 GB
Watch_Dogs: 4 GB

So if these games are any indication, it's definitely coming close to the limit.

 

[Stuka87]

So the next question is what settings push it over. Most games have some settings that have a very heavy performance or vram hit, but offer almost no visual improvement. If you can set one setting with a big hit down one notch and the game then runs ok, you can save yourself a bunch of money, or make it so you can play until AMD releases new cards, and then you can decide Titan X or 390X.

 

[RaulF]

I am not 100% sure if this but I have use (according to Afterburner) more than 4GB of ram on my 295X2. I have seen over 6 on BF4 when using resolution scale. And I did not have any stutters.

I used to have 290X and 290 both in crossfire configurations and I would get stutters that behaved like vram caching.

I think the 8GB of ram in the 295X2 is actually fully accessible. The 295X2 is not like a regular crossfire setup, you can't even disable crossfire on the driver level.

Maybe someone from AMD can confirm.

 

[SPBHM]

if it's using more than the onboard memory, it's using system ram...

295X2 is a 4GB card (4GB per GPU) and it works in crossfire the same way as a 290x CF, the GPUs communicate via PCIE the same way as a CF using 2 separate cards.


as for switching from AMD to NV, just remove the old card and install the new one, nothing special is required, once the AMD card is out the AMD drivers wont be doing anything, you can uninstall them on add/remove programs...

 

[futurefields]

Alright, I finally checked my VRAM usage on a couple of games that I'm playing/trying to play.
Far Cry 4 results: 3.7 GB
Watch_Dogs: 4 GB

So if these games are any indication, it's definitely coming close to the limit.

Ubisoft games always use more VRAM than comparably looking titles.

Makes you wonder why everything pops-in so close. They really are producing unoptimized garbage.

What resolution is that at?

 

[Innokentij]

SLI/Xfire will never be as good as a single card in terms of smooth gameplay... Problem is, there isn't a single GPU card out yet that can handle 4k by itself. Titan X comes very close, but you still need two of them to guarantee 60 fps.

Yeah is why im not upgrading, waiting for a singel gpu that can do 4k x2 AA from Nvidia.

 

[RussianSensation]

HardOCP found a similar situation when maxing out GTA V @ 1440p and 4K. They assume it is due to running out of VRAM, in which case the only solution right now is to turn settings down or get the Titan X.

Source

Incorrect assumption in their 1st review. With the latest drivers, game patches, etc. 970 SLI, 980 SLI, R9 295X2 >>>>>> Titan X at 1440P. R9 295X2 completely destroys the Titan X at 4K, but still has driver issues at 1440P right now.

970 SLI with only 3.5GB of VRAM had no trouble running higher settings than the Titan X at 1440P either. The Titan X was the worst performance out of all these dual card setups. I've provided this to you already in the other thread.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37397081&postcount=1613

The best bet right now is to wait 4-5 weeks for R9 390X and then buy a new card because the Titan X's $1K price isn't going anywhere but there is a strong shot R9 390/390X will reset existing prices and establish new price/performance levels, as well as NV may just have an after-market GM200 6GB ready to spoil AMD's parade. If both of these scenarios do not play out, well the Titan X is still going to be $1K USD by June 25th.

 

[Final8ty]

I for one don't get this "give everything right now" mentality and because of that superior attribute, I start play new games only few months after release. You may ask why, well then I don't have to deal with broken games and drivers. Makes my life simple and game experience better.


Most of the gaming problems reported here toward amd or nvidia are directly linked to player jumping too early on every announced broken game. Everybody knows and are pissed studios that they release broken games, yet still most buy them at launch anyway. All you can blame is yourself because you cannot control yourself and vote with your wallet.

+1