Cannot max out games?

gt_junkie · 16 Apr 2009 at 09:26

Use GPU-Z or CPU-Z to see whether your mobo's PCI-E slot is running at the full 16x?

Looks to me like something's bottlenecking the card. Can you clock the dual any further?

gt

{SAS}TB · 16 Apr 2009 at 09:59

Something sounds wrong TBH

Sig as spec - With DOF disabled in W@W i play at 1920x1200 4xAA and 8xAF and get a solid 120 fps getting up into 200s and a minimum of no lower than 60 odd in intense situations.

Furmark gives

@ 1280 x 1024

and

:|

arc@css · 16 Apr 2009 at 15:19

dmxdex2020 said:
Your score is better than my x2 this is depressing

My min is terrible compare to a lot of other peoples.

Not sure if its a x2 problem.

Not intending to make you feel any worse dude but I forgot to mention that I ran every setting possible on max.(4870 512)

Now have 4870X2 in and will see what I get. Bit of a bugger though, it has a habit of resetting my cpu clocks to stock on start up of system so I have to reset it each time / some of the time.

dmxdex2020 · 16 Apr 2009 at 18:56

I aint sending it back again cannot be arsed i will just re buy a new one or buy 295 in few months when they come down.

thegoonden · 16 Apr 2009 at 19:39

I doubt it's actually the card though, "slow" isn't really a symptom of "broken", well not often. My money is on something else in the system/OS.

BTW, I by "using both cores" I meant using the card AS an X2, which it seems 3dMark doesn't, so in SOME tests, you are really running a single 4870.

dmxdex2020 · 16 Apr 2009 at 22:25

Well i do not know what it is gpuz said its using both cores and on google an guy with an x2 has same probs as me with fear.

Like i said in certain area's of cod 5 fps are high and in others extremely low.

Lowest i have seen in cod 4 is 48 and higest is like 125 all maxed out.

arc@css · 17 Apr 2009 at 03:33

Well, just ran furmark again with the 4870X2 which was, for this, o/c to 800 / 1000/4000. I set everything to as high as possible apart from MSAA which was at 2. Didn't bother with 8 since so far it seems to always read 2 regardless. Nothing else was changed in CCC, settings on min for max frames in source anyway.
I got :

min 81
average 94
max 128
score 106556

Then turned off MSAA completely and got min 158 / average 181 / max 241

Hissingroach · 17 Apr 2009 at 11:28

I got this with furmark...MSAA off...

dmxdex2020 · 17 Apr 2009 at 13:28

Ok so i did it without AA on and i got this.

Score 8492

Min 15

Average 145

time 60000

Res 1600x1200

cpu core 2 duo

cpu speed 3771

os vista 64bit

Max 192

dmxdex2020 · 17 Apr 2009 at 13:29

Hissingroach said:
I got this with furmark...MSAA off...

Your score is similar to mine expect for higher min and higher res.

Greebo · 17 Apr 2009 at 13:36

dmxdex2020 said:
Your score is similar to mine expect for higher min and higher res.

Except his is at 1920 x 1200 and yours was done at 1600 x 1200 so there is something major wrong with your performance as you should have beaten him hands down.

dmxdex2020 · 17 Apr 2009 at 13:55

Well now my min is 92 average 143 max 194

score 8537.

without aa

0S full ver is. windows vista
OS version in full is ver.6.0 build 6001 service pack 1.

thegoonden · 17 Apr 2009 at 14:04

15 is madly low.
Watch is closely, is 15 happening when the ring is presnting itself as an "O" or when it's not?
(I ask because performance in furmark is highest when the ring is edge on and lowest when it's side on, ie, presenting an "O" not a "---" shape.)

Or is it spiking down to 15 as and when it pleases?
If the latter, I suggest you have some horror of a process wrecking your machine, you don't have Norton installed do you?

dmxdex2020 · 17 Apr 2009 at 14:06

thegoonden said:
15 is madly low.
Watch is closely, is 15 happening when the ring is presnting itself as an "O" or when it's not?
(I ask because performance in furmark is highest when the ring is edge on and lowest when it's side on, ie, presenting an "O" not a "---" shape.)

Or is it spiking down to 15 as and when it pleases?
If the latter, I suggest you have some horror of a process wrecking your machine, you don't have Norton installed do you?

No i have no virus scanner i have recently installed vista so a lot processor will be running i guess.

I have managed to improve fps with overclocking the gpu the 777 core mem 1010 same on both gpus i am not sure if they have to match.

I have also pushed cpu to its max which is 3.7 and mem is at 1172 some like that.

dmxdex2020 · 17 Apr 2009 at 14:24

Call of duty maxxed out still dips below 60 in certain area's.

arc@css · 17 Apr 2009 at 15:40

I'm not anti-vista but I don't use it atm, though was wondering if it couldpossibly be something to do with it. Crazy it sounds I know, just remember buying new 64 bit hardware and firing up Dx10 games and omg it ran like a dog. I'm sure a year later a lot of fixes and updates have sorted most of vista's issues out. Just thought I'd throw the possibility in.

dmxdex2020 · 17 Apr 2009 at 15:55

Not sure what other OS to try out mate a lot people who have show me their benchmarks are on windows server.

wombraider · 17 Apr 2009 at 16:17

arc@css said:
I'm not anti-vista but I don't use it atm, though was wondering if it couldpossibly be something to do with it. Crazy it sounds I know, just remember buying new 64 bit hardware and firing up Dx10 games and omg it ran like a dog. I'm sure a year later a lot of fixes and updates have sorted most of vista's issues out. Just thought I'd throw the possibility in.

Yeah I doubt its Vista related , it only performs 20+ DRM related checks every second

Not like that could affect your gaming in any way

Do you have an olde XP disc you could use to do a dual boot and try that out ?

dmxdex2020 · 17 Apr 2009 at 16:28

wombraider said:
Yeah I doubt its Vista related , it only performs 20+ DRM related checks every second

Not like that could affect your gaming in any way

Do you have an olde XP disc you could use to do a dual boot and try that out ?

No i aint.