Trying to diagnose if I have a problem or not here. Have a 980ti with the latest drivers and I notice that some games do not seem to make the core clock ramp up to full performance, as indicated by the core clock graph on MSI Afterburner or GPUz.
On desktop it will idle at about 950MHz, this is with 3 monitors attached, the primary being an Asus PG278Q@144Hz, and others being HDMI 60hz monitors. I kind of know it shouldn't idle at this high speed on just the desktop, but I am not that bothered about that, I just want to confirm if the card is behaving properly in games when the clock should ramp up to the full speed of the card. If I run BF4 or Skyrim, or 3DMark the core clock will ramp up to my full overclock of about 1485MHz. But in some games, which defo use 3D, it will either stay at 950, or will at most go up to 1100 or thereabouts.
This seems fair enough if the card decides certain games don't need full power for what it deems acceptable frame rates, and here I am talking about Minecraft and PS2 emulators. But I have one game which definitely should be using full power but isn't, Silent Hunter 5. With this game it will not increase core clocks and my fps shown in game is about 55fps. Bizarrely with this game, if I press escape to go to the quit menu, the core clock will jump up to the full clock, but go back down when I return to the game.
My main question is, is the card working as designed in the less power hungry games, i.e. is it meant to not jump straight to full clocks in ALL games which use 3D graphics, only those which the card thinks it should? And if so what could be causing it to think Silent Hunter 5 is not deserving of full power when it clearly needs it? Or, do I have a more widespread problem if the clocks are meant to ramp up for all 3D games? It would help for starters if anyone could tell me what core clocks they get in Minecraft compared to their desktop core speed.
On desktop it will idle at about 950MHz, this is with 3 monitors attached, the primary being an Asus PG278Q@144Hz, and others being HDMI 60hz monitors. I kind of know it shouldn't idle at this high speed on just the desktop, but I am not that bothered about that, I just want to confirm if the card is behaving properly in games when the clock should ramp up to the full speed of the card. If I run BF4 or Skyrim, or 3DMark the core clock will ramp up to my full overclock of about 1485MHz. But in some games, which defo use 3D, it will either stay at 950, or will at most go up to 1100 or thereabouts.
This seems fair enough if the card decides certain games don't need full power for what it deems acceptable frame rates, and here I am talking about Minecraft and PS2 emulators. But I have one game which definitely should be using full power but isn't, Silent Hunter 5. With this game it will not increase core clocks and my fps shown in game is about 55fps. Bizarrely with this game, if I press escape to go to the quit menu, the core clock will jump up to the full clock, but go back down when I return to the game.
My main question is, is the card working as designed in the less power hungry games, i.e. is it meant to not jump straight to full clocks in ALL games which use 3D graphics, only those which the card thinks it should? And if so what could be causing it to think Silent Hunter 5 is not deserving of full power when it clearly needs it? Or, do I have a more widespread problem if the clocks are meant to ramp up for all 3D games? It would help for starters if anyone could tell me what core clocks they get in Minecraft compared to their desktop core speed.