Crossfire 7970 big sham???

[LtMatt]

Hi, I have the latest beta drivers but I don't see a second box that I have to tick like in your picture. And also I have vsync disabled. I bought the CPU because it is the best CPU I can get for my mobo and I can't afford to change mobo as well. Even if my cpu has been used can I still return with the 14 day satisfaction guarantee?

Show me a screenshot of what you see please.

Cpu will be fine for those gpu's don't worry. Sure there are better alternatives but its not that bad.

 

[RetrogamerX]

Retro gamer can you think of any reason why that 2nd box isn't showing for me.

Also I'm trying splinter cell . Farcry 3. Tomb raider. Hit man. Sniper v2

Don't know mate. No nothing about AMD mobos or CPUs.

 

[Martini1991]

Cpu will be fine for those gpu's don't worry.

No it won't, he'll see quite a lot of bottlenecking, far more than he would with a cheaper 4670k.

In a lot of games you can see bottlenecking with a 7970 and a 4GHZ FX8350, let alone 2 of them with only a 10% clock extra on the CPU.

 

[dmhenson1989]

I spent 270. Look I'm asking for help not criticism

 

[Martini1991]

Unless I'm mistaken, advising you to get the most out of your set up is helping.
I mean you've got a lot about 1K in 2 GPU's and a CPU, do you want to get more out of them or not?
270 is 4770K money, which is a much better CPU for gaming, and then it's got much more overclocking potential, you'll get a lot more out of your GPU's, and a board comes in at 100, you'd probably recoup a fair whack of that with selling your board.

Otherwise there was no need to spend that amount of money.

Run Heaven, get MSI Afterburner up showing GPU usage.

 

[555BUK]

A few things to check.

*Have you connected the crossfire bridge between cards?
*Did you uninstall and reinstall the latest AMD Catalyst Drivers? The second card may not be detected correctly unless you reinstall drivers after installing the card.

 

[LtMatt]

No it won't, he'll see quite a lot of bottlenecking, far more than he would with a cheaper 4670k.

In a lot of games you can see bottlenecking with a 7970 and a 4GHZ FX8350, let alone 2 of them with only a 10% clock extra on the CPU.

The point is its not going to be the reason hes seeing no benefit in fps while using crossfire. Sure there will be a slight bottleneck but not enough to result in negative scaling.

In properly optimized games like Crysis 3 and Battlefield 4 that make uses of 8 cores the FX 8350 cpu may well be faster than the intel i5. Here it is beating out an i7 sandy with HT. 8 cores in the consoles means we can expect a lot more optimization like this in the not too distant future imo.

*Have you connected the crossfire bridge between cards?
.

That's a good shout and would explain why he only saw one box as opposed to my two.

 

[Martini1991]

The point is its not going to be the reason hes seeing no benefit in fps while using crossfire. Sure there will be a slight bottleneck but not enough to result in negative scaling.

I agree, in my first post I said he'd see a difference

But even still, with the money he's spent, he'd be much better off making the jump to socket 1150 to get the most out of his set up, as he can DSR his CPU, that's the 4770K paid for.

EDIT : That benchmark conflicts with loads of other benchmarks for Crysis 3 which show a different hierarchy (To quite a degree) annoys me silly to see that Crysis 3 benchmark get touted

http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html ; Parity with the i5 3470.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performance-benchmark-gaming,3451-8.html ; Parity with the i5 3550.

We can throw cherry picked benchmarks at each other all day, but Crysis 3/BF4 aren't the only games in existence, heavily threaded games might be the future, but we don't live there yet.

 

[dmhenson1989]

Everyone just to recap on a mistake I made! My CPU is 9590! Which "should not" bottleneck my system surely?

 

[LtMatt]

I agree, in my first post I said he'd see a difference

But even still, with the money he's spent, he'd be much better off making the jump to socket 1150 to get the most out of his set up, as he can DSR his CPU, that's the 4770K paid for.

EDIT : That benchmark conflicts with loads of other benchmarks for Crysis 3 which show a different hierarchy (To quite a degree) annoys me silly to see that Crysis 3 benchmark get touted

http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html ; Parity with the i5 3470.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performance-benchmark-gaming,3451-8.html ; Parity with the i5 3550.

We can throw cherry picked benchmarks at each other all day, but Crysis 3/BF4 aren't the only games in existence, heavily threaded games might be the future, but we don't live there yet.

I wouldn't trust anything from toms these days but techspot are normally sound.

That said though, have a couple back.

Anyway i agree, but the point is this cpu is not that bad when multi threaded games are thrown into the mix. Infact when this occurs its a capable cpu. For single threaded stuff yeah its not going to be as good but im guessing with his setup he won't be playing many old games that only use 1 thread.

 

[Martini1991]

Everyone just to recap on a mistake I made! My CPU is 9590! Which "should not" bottleneck my system surely?

It still will, the extra clock speed will help, but the IPC is so low , and the vast majority of games don't thread too well.

So in most games what you're playing with is 4 cores, and their performance per core isn't what it could be.

Steamroller should offer beefed up cores, and with them being 8 cores and having their module approach worked on, they should be pretty decent performers, but they're a while off.

 

[LtMatt]

Everyone just to recap on a mistake I made! My CPU is 9590! Which "should not" bottleneck my system surely?

Generally speaking, you'll be fine. In a few circumstances you might bottleneck your gpu's a small amount in single/dual threaded games, but it is nothing too worry about. In games that make use of 4 or more threads your performance will be nearly equal to, or slightly slower than intel's current flagship i7. I'd expect things to get better once the consoles come out and 8 core threaded games become the norm.

Spoiler

 

[Martini1991]

I wouldn't trust anything from toms these days but techspot are normally sound.

Anyway i agree, but the point is this cpu is not that bad when multi threaded games are thrown into the mix. Infact when this occurs its a capable cpu. For single threaded stuff yeah its not going to be as good but im guessing with his setup he won't be playing many old games that only use 1 thread.

The second one shows it parity with the i5

It's a bit blanket to say single threaded and multi threaded, because that's not technically right.

It needs to be heavily threaded for the FX8350 to catch up (Or so GPU limited that lower threaded games aren't hit)

Because something that uses 4 threads is multi-threaded, but the FX8's not going to be better as its core for core is much lower.

 

[Martini1991]

Generally speaking, you'll be fine. In a few circumstances you might bottleneck your gpu's a small amount in single/dual threaded games, but it is nothing too worry about. In games that make use of 4 or more threads your performance will be nearly equal to, or slightly slower than intel's current flagship i7.

Spoiler

Isn't that with a single GPU? If he's not got enough in the tank to feed 1 GPU, he's not going to have enough to feed 2.
That's forgetting that the 4770K is stock, has about 1GHZ left in the tank, and the FX95 is pretty much at its max.

His performance won't always be equal even if 4 cores are used, and why suggest the i7 in that? Given you know, for the i7 to do anything over an i5 it needs to be using more than 4 threads.

And it's not in a few circumstances, unless you play like 6 games.

In the 200+ none indie games I have, you'll see a difference in about 200+ of them, in which case you'd have been better off getting a lower GPU set up to save money, or simply spending your money differently.

Put it this way, the money he's spent is enough for the Haswell set up, which is better, he can get that set up as he's within DSR, he then gets a better system.

 

[LtMatt]

This is a pointless debate as neither of us has any evidence to prove how much the 9550 will bottleneck his gpu's. I expect there will be some but i doubt it would cause the negative scaling or other issues he's currently having.

 

[dmhenson1989]

I'm at work at the moment but I remember in GPU-z it said GPU 1 was pic-e 3.0 16 x 16 and GPU 2 said something like pic-e 3.0 16x 1

 

[Martini1991]

You're using one of those new Asus boards with the 3rd party PCI-E 3.0 controller?

This is a pointless debate as neither of us has any evidence to prove how much the 9550 will bottleneck his gpu's. I expect there will be some but i doubt it would cause the negative scaling or other issues he's currently having.

Who said it's causing the negative scaling? No one.
There will be more than some if you can show differences with a single GPU, he's just upped his potential GPU performance by almost double.

The only reason I'm mentioning him going Intel is he's in DSR period, he'd be much better logically and statistically making the jump to socket 1150.

 

[Gripen90]

Guys guys it's not a CPU vs CPU debate. Lets help the guy and getting his problem solved. !

1) Check you have the CrossFire bridge on the cards.

2) Try running Unigine Heaven 4.0 benchmark this will immediately reveal whether or not CrossFire is running.

 

[Martini1991]

Guys guys it's not a CPU vs CPU debate. Lets help the guy and getting his problem solved. !

1) Check you have the CrossFire bridge on the cards.

2) Try running Unigine Heaven 4.0 benchmark this will immediately reveal whether or not CrossFire is running.

Both have been suggested and he's at work, so it's a waiting game

 

[Gripen90]

Both have been suggested and he's at work, so it's a waiting game

Arh sorry missed that... some times I forget to hit the F5 key before making the post