Overclockers UK Forums Click here for more details
Free Shipping for Loyal Forum Members - CLICK HERE

Go Back   Overclockers UK Forums > Hardware > Graphics Cards

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 16th May 2012, 23:57   #1
stev1212
Gangster
 
stev1212's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 135
GTX 680 Dirt 3 performance

Hey guys, My GTX 680 has trouble running dirt 3 at ultra settings with FXAA @ 1080p.

SPEC:
AMD FX8120 @3.65GHZ
GTX680 @ 1GHZ
8 GIG 1600MHZ ram

These specs should be more than enough for this game and yet mine runs between 40-50 fps. Seriously so confused. My drivers are all up to date and with this being a racing game it pretty much NEEDS 60fps.
Any ideas?
stev1212 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2012, 23:57   #2
stev1212
Gangster
 
stev1212's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 135
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/201...-2gb-review/10 I should be getting this.
stev1212 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 07:25   #3
Marine-RX179
Capodecina
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,263
Pretty sure it's because of your CPU holding back the graphic card. Most of the recent Codemaster's racing games are hugely CPU bounded.

My friend with a i3 2120 and a GTX560Ti 2GB overclocked to 950MHz don't even dip below 52fps on Ultra settings with 8xAA on Dirt 3.

i5 2500K@4.80GHz, Asus P8Z68-V GEN3, R9 290x, Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer DDR3-1600MHz 8GB, Corsair Force Series 3 120GB, OCZ Vertex 2 512GB, Asus Essence STX, Samsung SA700 3D 120Hz, CoolerMaster 690III , Corsair TX650W
Last edited by Marine-RX179; 17th May 2012 at 07:27.
Marine-RX179 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 07:58   #4
mattius1989
Gangster
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Kent
Posts: 410
Have you checked your CPU usage during gameplay?

Antec 1200, i5 3570K @ 4.4, Alpenfohn Matterhorn CPU Cooler, 8GB Corsair RAM, Corsair 750w PSU, Gigabyte UD3H, 970 GTX 4GB (SLI), ROG SWIFT PG278Q, Windows 10
mattius1989 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 08:00   #5
Martini1991
Capodecina
 
Martini1991's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 23,227
Shouldn't be his CPU, but when I was benching Dirt 3 with my GTX680 the average frames were pretty much more than double OP's and my minimum was like 90.
Martini1991 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 08:22   #6
RavenXXX2
Capodecina
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: North West
Posts: 14,634
Yeah 680 destroys Dirt 3 in FPS, check the nvidia contol panel and make sure all 3D settings are at application controlled. I take it all other games and benchmarks run fine?
RavenXXX2 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 08:59   #7
Purgatory
Mobster
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Location: Leeds
Posts: 2,815
Make sure you are running the benchmark in DX11 too, seems the GTX 6xx cards perform worse in DX9 than the previous gen cards, seems to a driver and architecture changes that cause titles that run in DX9 to perform worse at the moment and maybe when they optimise the drivers DX9 titles will perform better.

|FD Define XL|Intel i7-5930K @4.8Ghz|ASUS TUF X99 Sabertooth|32GB Corsair DDR4-2800 @1.2v|EVGA 980Ti CLASSIFIED|X-Fi Titanium-Fatal1ty Pro|2 x 850 Pro 1TB SSD|WD Black 6TB + 4TB + 2TB + WD Green 6TB|TX 750W|Logitech MX 1100 ,Illuminated KB,G940 Flight System & Z-5500|AOC U3477PQU|NP700G7A-S02UK|
Purgatory is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 09:13   #8
Gregster
Caporegime
 
Gregster's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: Essex innit!
Posts: 33,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini1991 View Post
Shouldn't be his CPU, but when I was benching Dirt 3 with my GTX680 the average frames were pretty much more than double OP's and my minimum was like 90.
+1

I have seen mine sitting around 110 and higher generally. I didn't take much notice of average but man it is never as low as the OP.

Gregster is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 09:53   #9
Marine-RX179
Capodecina
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini1991 View Post
Shouldn't be his CPU, but when I was benching Dirt 3 with my GTX680 the average frames were pretty much more than double OP's and my minimum was like 90.
But you got a overclocked i5 2500K. Bulldozer's IPC is quite bad...worse than Phenom II clock for clock, and Codemaster's racing games tends to usually only use up to 3 cores.

Check this out on the 8120 result on DIRT3:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...rk,3120-7.html
It is a close shave with the minimum just barely over 60fps. What I suspect is the 8120 can't keep the frame rate at above 60fps at all time, and the OP probably got vsync enabled so it will keep dipping down to the 40-50fps range.

If the OP can overclocked the 8120 to 4.0-4.2GHz, it might help with the situation.

i5 2500K@4.80GHz, Asus P8Z68-V GEN3, R9 290x, Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer DDR3-1600MHz 8GB, Corsair Force Series 3 120GB, OCZ Vertex 2 512GB, Asus Essence STX, Samsung SA700 3D 120Hz, CoolerMaster 690III , Corsair TX650W
Last edited by Marine-RX179; 17th May 2012 at 10:02.
Marine-RX179 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 10:02   #10
Martini1991
Capodecina
 
Martini1991's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 23,227
64 FPS min on that FX8120.
I'm no fool about AMD's lacklustre CPU's, but it shouldn't be *that* bad in Dirt 3.
Martini1991 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 10:04   #11
Marine-RX179
Capodecina
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini1991 View Post
64 FPS min on that FX8120.
I'm no fool about AMD's lacklustre CPU's, but it shouldn't be *that* bad in Dirt 3.
64fps min meaning it can easily drop to below 60fps when there are more cars on screen at the same time than in the bench. 4fps above 60fps is not really that much headroom.

As I said, it's most likely the vsync drop the frame rate down even futher to the 40-50fps range when the frame rate become even slightly under 60fps. I guess first thing the OP can try is to run the game with vsync disabled?

i5 2500K@4.80GHz, Asus P8Z68-V GEN3, R9 290x, Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer DDR3-1600MHz 8GB, Corsair Force Series 3 120GB, OCZ Vertex 2 512GB, Asus Essence STX, Samsung SA700 3D 120Hz, CoolerMaster 690III , Corsair TX650W
Last edited by Marine-RX179; 17th May 2012 at 10:07.
Marine-RX179 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 10:22   #12
mattius1989
Gangster
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Kent
Posts: 410
Are you using Adaptive V-Sync?

Antec 1200, i5 3570K @ 4.4, Alpenfohn Matterhorn CPU Cooler, 8GB Corsair RAM, Corsair 750w PSU, Gigabyte UD3H, 970 GTX 4GB (SLI), ROG SWIFT PG278Q, Windows 10
mattius1989 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 10:39   #13
stev1212
Gangster
 
stev1212's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 135
Hi guys, Yes im using adaptive V-SYNC and FXAA in the nvidia control panel. Crysis 2 runs fine at max settings with the high res pack installed.

I looked at GPU-Z while dirt was running and the 680 only seems to go up to 1006MHZ for about 40 seconds then it starts under-clocking itself to 700-800mhz, I dont understand why it's doing this. My cpu usage is between 30-50% the entire time so it shouldnt be a CPU problem. And just out of interest i turned all AA off and my frame rate was the same!? It doesnt matter if i run 8xaa or FXAA or no AA my frame rate is just consistently bad.
It's almost like the 680 is intentionality holding the game at the 45fps mark.
stev1212 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 10:49   #14
Marine-RX179
Capodecina
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by stev1212 View Post
My cpu usage is between 30-50% the entire time so it shouldnt be a CPU problem.
It doesn't work like that. You CPU got 8 cores, and Codemaster's racing games tends to run only in 3 threads...so it's pretty much down the the performance of 3 cores ut of 8 of the 8120.

As for the GTX680 downclocking, it could be just that the dynamic overclock feature of the GTX680 kicking in...because of there isn't enough workload (CPU not giving the GPU enough jobs at a fast enough rate and mixed with the use of vsync) for it to even see the need to run the GPU at stock clock (bare in mind what I said about my mate's overclocked GTX560Ti 2GB is already capable of doing constant 60fps on Ultra and 8xAA, but with only rare occasion of dipping down to 52fps on his i3 2120).

i5 2500K@4.80GHz, Asus P8Z68-V GEN3, R9 290x, Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer DDR3-1600MHz 8GB, Corsair Force Series 3 120GB, OCZ Vertex 2 512GB, Asus Essence STX, Samsung SA700 3D 120Hz, CoolerMaster 690III , Corsair TX650W
Last edited by Marine-RX179; 17th May 2012 at 11:03.
Marine-RX179 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:11   #15
stev1212
Gangster
 
stev1212's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marine-RX179 View Post
It doesn't work like that. You CPU got 8 cores, and Codemaster's racing games tends to run only in 3 threads...so it's pretty much down the the performance of 3 cores ut of 8 of the 8120.

As for the GTX680 downclocking, it could be just that the dynamic overclock feature of the GTX680 kicking in...because of there isn't enough workload (CPU not giving the GPU enough jobs at a fast enough rate and mixed with the use of vsync) for it to even see the need to run the GPU at stock clock (bare in mind what I said about my mate's overclocked GTX560Ti 2GB is already capable of doing constant 60fps on Ultra and 8xAA, but with only rare occasion of dipping down to 52fps on his i3 2120).
But in benchmarks the 8120 has never been beaten by an i3? This is so frustrating it's unreal haha. Gtx 680 and my brothers 6950 runs dirt 3 better.
stev1212 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:14   #16
StonedPenguin
Mobster
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 3,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marine-RX179 View Post
Pretty sure it's because of your CPU holding back the graphic card. Most of the recent Codemaster's racing games are hugely CPU bounded.
Dont think it is mate, I went from a e6600 > 2500k and noticed no difference in Dirt 3, Still a solid 60 fps on either, It's GPU intensive.
StonedPenguin is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:22   #17
Martini1991
Capodecina
 
Martini1991's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 23,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by stev1212 View Post
But in benchmarks the 8120 has never been beaten by an i3? This is so frustrating it's unreal haha. Gtx 680 and my brothers 6950 runs dirt 3 better.
It has.
In anything that uses upto 2 threads (And some cases 3 threads depending on how much workload is on that thread) will see the 2100 smash your FX8.
Martini1991 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:23   #18
Darren1967
Gangster
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: East Yorkshire, U.K.
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by stev1212 View Post
Hi guys, Yes im using adaptive V-SYNC and FXAA in the nvidia control panel. Crysis 2 runs fine at max settings with the high res pack installed.

I looked at GPU-Z while dirt was running and the 680 only seems to go up to 1006MHZ for about 40 seconds then it starts under-clocking itself to 700-800mhz, I dont understand why it's doing this.
To benchmark DiRT 3 you need to disable V-sync to see what the max. and min. framerates are at your chosen settings by the way. If you're forcing Adaptive V-sync then you're maximum framerate will be capped to 60 fps (on a 60 Hz display).

The behaviour you're describing above is due to using Adaptive Performance which means that if the game is running at 60 fps on a 60 Hz display with v-sync enabled then the driver will drop the clocks to reduce power consumption (since high clocks aren't needed to maintain 60 fps at that point). It'll then raise the clocks when more performance is needed.

To avoid this I'd suggest setting the Global profile's performance to "Prefer maximum performance" or, if you prefer, set it only for the DiRT 3 profile. The card will still drop down to 2D speeds on the desktop but during games it'll run at full 3D speeds.

Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3.5GHz, ASUS Z87 Deluxe v1802, 16GB DDR3 1600MHz RAM, GeForce GTX 780 graphics, X-Fi Titanium HD audio, 256GB Crucial M4 SSD + 7TB SATAII HDDs, CM Silent Pro 850W, Windows 8.1 Pro x64
Darren1967 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:24   #19
stev1212
Gangster
 
stev1212's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren1967 View Post
To benchmark DiRT 3 you need to disable V-sync to see what the max. and min. framerates are at your chosen settings by the way. If you're forcing Adaptive V-sync then you're maximum framerate will be capped to 60 fps (on a 60 Hz display).

The behaviour you're describing above is due to using Adaptive Performance which means that if the game is running at 60 fps on a 60 Hz display with v-sync enabled then the driver will drop the clocks to reduce power consumption (since high clocks aren't needed to maintain 60 fps at that point). It'll then raise the clocks when more performance is needed.

To avoid this I'd suggest setting the Global profile's performance to "Prefer maximum performance" or, if you prefer, set it only for the DiRT 3 profile. The card will still drop down to 2D speeds on the desktop but during games it'll run at full 3D speeds.
Thanks pal, il bench it now and give you the results.
stev1212 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:30   #20
stev1212
Gangster
 
stev1212's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 135
Total frames: 7729
Average FPS: 70
Minimum FPS: 44

Thats with ultra pre-sets 4xaa no v-sync. Honestly dont know whats causing this. At the beginning of the benchmarks when you see all the cars on the line waiting to go even then my FPS sits at 55. Thats when the cars aren't even moving!
stev1212 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:32   #21
Darren1967
Gangster
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: East Yorkshire, U.K.
Posts: 130
I've always had the Global profile set to Prefer Maximum Performance, even when I had my GTX 580, as it was annoying to see the card running at low clocks when playing older games such as Psychonauts with v-sync enabled for example.

Yes, these games still ran smoothly at 60 fps but I'd rather have the extra overhead available to guarantee that the game will run smooth. With Adaptive Performance I even saw my GTX 680 drop down to 700 MHz on the core while playing Skyrim... and that was at 1920x1200, Ultra settings and 8xAA/16xAF/FXAA with the HD texture pack installed!!!

Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3.5GHz, ASUS Z87 Deluxe v1802, 16GB DDR3 1600MHz RAM, GeForce GTX 780 graphics, X-Fi Titanium HD audio, 256GB Crucial M4 SSD + 7TB SATAII HDDs, CM Silent Pro 850W, Windows 8.1 Pro x64
Darren1967 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:34   #22
Martini1991
Capodecina
 
Martini1991's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 23,227
Wrongly or rightly, if the OP paired his 680 up with an i5 he'd get what he wants
Martini1991 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:37   #23
stev1212
Gangster
 
stev1212's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini1991 View Post
Wrongly or rightly, if the OP paired his 680 up with an i5 he'd get what he wants
I dont think it's my 8120. All the bencmarks for the 8120 get AT LEAST 60FPS with a worse GPU. Im getting barely 50 when it's running with a 680. So something else is going on here.

Not to mention mines OC'd
stev1212 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:39   #24
Darren1967
Gangster
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: East Yorkshire, U.K.
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by stev1212 View Post
Total frames: 7729
Average FPS: 70
Minimum FPS: 44

Thats with ultra pre-sets 4xaa no v-sync. Honestly dont know whats causing this. At the beginning of the benchmarks when you see all the cars on the line waiting to go even then my FPS sits at 55. Thats when the cars aren't even moving!
Ouch! That does sound really low. A single GTX 680 and a 3.5 year old quad-core i7-920 @ 3.6 GHz scored much higher than that from memory. I think the minimum was in the 70-80 fps range and that was DX11 Ultra settings, 1920x1200 and 8xQCSAA.

Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3.5GHz, ASUS Z87 Deluxe v1802, 16GB DDR3 1600MHz RAM, GeForce GTX 780 graphics, X-Fi Titanium HD audio, 256GB Crucial M4 SSD + 7TB SATAII HDDs, CM Silent Pro 850W, Windows 8.1 Pro x64
Darren1967 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:42   #25
Martini1991
Capodecina
 
Martini1991's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 23,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by stev1212 View Post
I dont think it's my 8120. All the bencmarks for the 8120 get AT LEAST 60FPS with a worse GPU. Im getting barely 50 when it's running with a 680. So something else is going on here.

Not to mention mines OC'd
Put your PC completely to stock.
Download and install the Bulldozer Patch for Windows 7 to "fix" its scheduling then try.

If that fails, reformat, fresh install with Nvidia drivers and try Dirt 3.
If that fails, get rid of the crappy FX8
Martini1991 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:42   #26
Marine-RX179
Capodecina
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by stev1212 View Post
Total frames: 7729
Average FPS: 70
Minimum FPS: 44

Thats with ultra pre-sets 4xaa no v-sync. Honestly dont know whats causing this. At the beginning of the benchmarks when you see all the cars on the line waiting to go even then my FPS sits at 55. Thats when the cars aren't even moving!
You want to ignore what I say...fine, but do yourself a favor...either:
a) use something like MSI Afterburner to display GPU usage while you bench (I'm willing to bet it is NOWHERE close to 100%)
b) overclock your CPU to see if frame rate improves on the same bench

...both will confirm if your 8120 is holding back your GTX680 or not. And I don't know what's so difficult...when you lower all the graphic settings and still pretty much get the same frame rate, it's clearly points that the CPU is the bottleneck easy enough...

And for your reference, i3 2100 is roughly on par with the Phenom II X4 980 (3.7GHz) for gaming (faster in games that use less than 4 cores), and both of them are faster than Bulldozer at 3.6GHz (around as fast as Phenom II at 3.2~3.3GHz) on gaming.

i5 2500K@4.80GHz, Asus P8Z68-V GEN3, R9 290x, Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer DDR3-1600MHz 8GB, Corsair Force Series 3 120GB, OCZ Vertex 2 512GB, Asus Essence STX, Samsung SA700 3D 120Hz, CoolerMaster 690III , Corsair TX650W
Last edited by Marine-RX179; 17th May 2012 at 11:47.
Marine-RX179 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:45   #27
Gregster
Caporegime
 
Gregster's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: Essex innit!
Posts: 33,929
This chart shows the difference between the FX-8150 and an I3. Maybe guys are correct in the CPU holding back the 680?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=143

I know full well an I3 will bottleneck a 680.

Gregster is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:46   #28
555BUK
Mobster
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,155
My 680 is out of my case at the moment, but I confirm that it eats Dirt3 for breakfast. Even my 7850 plays it on Ultra without any issues.
555BUK is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:51   #29
Marine-RX179
Capodecina
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregster View Post
This chart shows the difference between the FX-8150 and an I3. Maybe guys are correct in the CPU holding back the 680?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=143

I know full well an I3 will bottleneck a 680.
Wrong i3

But as you can see in the WOW results (which is pretty much a one thread game), the the 8150 at 3.6GHz is only on par with even the i3 540 at just 3.06GHz...that's how bad IPC and per core performance the Bulldozer is.

i5 2500K@4.80GHz, Asus P8Z68-V GEN3, R9 290x, Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer DDR3-1600MHz 8GB, Corsair Force Series 3 120GB, OCZ Vertex 2 512GB, Asus Essence STX, Samsung SA700 3D 120Hz, CoolerMaster 690III , Corsair TX650W
Marine-RX179 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2012, 11:54   #30
Martini1991
Capodecina
 
Martini1991's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 23,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregster View Post
This chart shows the difference between the FX-8150 and an I3. Maybe guys are correct in the CPU holding back the 680?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=143

I know full well an I3 will bottleneck a 680.
Debatable on how noticeable it'd be, I've already ran the tests.
I mean an i3 2100, not that i3 540.
Martini1991 is offline   View trust for Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:21.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Overclockers UK (Ocuk Ltd)