Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

best GPU for max out moded Skyrim.

Tags:
  • Video Games
  • Skyrim
Last response: in Video Games
Share
February 11, 2014 11:12:05 AM

Hi, I'm currently using an HD sapphire raderon 7950. Running Skyrim on ultra with enb, and it is running fine in most places with 300 mod on, but in big battles my fps drop to 15-20, probably due to mods that add a bunch of enemy. The game is playable, but I also wants to record my play, especially in those 15 fps battle.

And fx-8350 4.0g.z
8gb ram
7950 raderon

I was thinking of 760 sli or 780 ti. Anyone have any advice?

More about : gpu max moded skyrim

February 11, 2014 11:20:16 AM

760SLI should be better, try taking 760's with lots of VRAM - other than that, yea two 760s are cheaper and better than the 780ti
m
0
l
February 11, 2014 11:42:57 AM

This problem isn't so much to do with your Graphics card as having multiple moving objects on at once is completely to do with your CPU.
Personally, I'd suggest getting an R9 290. That paired with a great after-market cooler (preferably Gigabyte) and the recently released mantle will surely make it much easier to run this.
m
0
l
Related resources
February 12, 2014 12:38:23 AM

I don't mid updating my CPU with the card, and i was thinking of the fx-9350 4.7g, I heard that Skyrim play better with Nivadia and Intel. I was thinking of the 780 ti because im planning to continue to update in the future, not just stick with one set up.
m
0
l

Best solution

February 12, 2014 1:06:51 AM

Skyrim with many mods would probably require a monster GPU (Id go for 3GB on ram at least in single card).
First of all, it Needs TONS of Vram (no mods, just high texture pack and full HD, no AA its around 900MB Vram required).
Once you start adding more stuff, it gets harder and harder.
http://www.asot.es/2001/09/skyrim-mods.html
This is a decent guide.


In general, if you use heavy graphics mods you need about 2GB of ram dedicated to the game alone plus whatever windows takes.

Also, If you are that focused on skyrim, youd better have an SSD for it. Skyrim, once modded very heavy, increses the loading times quite a bit :D .
Share
February 12, 2014 1:25:09 PM

Skyrim does in fact perform better with an Intel CPU vs an AMD CPU below are benchmarks results from 2011. Naturally the FX-8350 and Ivy Bridge / Haswell generation CPUs are not included. I think the FX-9350 would be a waste of money.

http://www.techspot.com/review/467-skyrim-performance/p...

m
0
l
July 9, 2014 1:13:28 AM

jaguarskx said:
Skyrim does in fact perform better with an Intel CPU vs an AMD CPU below are benchmarks results from 2011. Naturally the FX-8350 and Ivy Bridge / Haswell generation CPUs are not included. I think the FX-9350 would be a waste of money.

http://www.techspot.com/review/467-skyrim-performance/p...


I wonder where my i5-4590 would be?
m
0
l
July 9, 2014 1:58:21 AM

I agree that CPU is important as well in skyrim, but note that the GPU they use has "only" 1.5 Vram. This is ok for an unmomded skyrim, but once you mod it a lot, it would not be enought.
I am unsure if you guys will agree on this, but a 40 FPS or more for me seems fluid enough that I dont actually need more. The key thing here is minimum frame rates and how often do they occur.

Since few websites actually give that info, i rearly trust the comparisons of CPU/GPU, except in some cases.

The strongest point for me here is that I assume that once you mod skyrim a lot, the GPU bottleneck will be so huge that a CPU upgrade wont really benefit that much. (maybe 2-3 FPS)
Since your CPU already seems to be around the 50 FPS mark, I think Id go for GPU only first. Then eventually see if the CPU is something id like to invest in.
m
0
l
July 9, 2014 2:45:46 PM

cats_Paw said:
I agree that CPU is important as well in skyrim, but note that the GPU they use has "only" 1.5 Vram. This is ok for an unmomded skyrim, but once you mod it a lot, it would not be enought.
I am unsure if you guys will agree on this, but a 40 FPS or more for me seems fluid enough that I dont actually need more. The key thing here is minimum frame rates and how often do they occur.

Since few websites actually give that info, i rearly trust the comparisons of CPU/GPU, except in some cases.

The strongest point for me here is that I assume that once you mod skyrim a lot, the GPU bottleneck will be so huge that a CPU upgrade wont really benefit that much. (maybe 2-3 FPS)
Since your CPU already seems to be around the 50 FPS mark, I think Id go for GPU only first. Then eventually see if the CPU is something id like to invest in.



What do you think about the SAPPHIRE DUAL-X 14-202-099 Radeon R9 280 3GB 384-Bit? If you can suggest a better one under $240 i will get it.
m
0
l
July 9, 2014 2:53:31 PM

Thanatognomonic said:
This problem isn't so much to do with your Graphics card as having multiple moving objects on at once is completely to do with your CPU.
Personally, I'd suggest getting an R9 290. That paired with a great after-market cooler (preferably Gigabyte) and the recently released mantle will surely make it much easier to run this.

Do you think the i5-4590 will be good? Because its what im getting

m
0
l
July 9, 2014 4:01:06 PM

My rig consists primarily of an i5-4670k and a 660ti.
The i5-4590 and a stock speed 4670k isn't very different, you may get a frame less.
However, the R9 280 (the best you will get for under $240) is better than the 660ti, so you should end up with more frames overall then I.
My rig can play Skyrim perfectly (40+ Frames constantly) with over 50 visual mods and can also play Battlefield 3, 60 FPS on ultra without breaking a sweat.

In conclusion, the i5-4590 and an R9 280 will work great for making a pretty Skyrim!
m
0
l
July 9, 2014 4:20:09 PM

Thanatognomonic said:
My rig consists primarily of an i5-4670k and a 660ti.
The i5-4590 and a stock speed 4670k isn't very different, you may get a frame less.
However, the R9 280 (the best you will get for under $240) is better than the 660ti, so you should end up with more frames overall then I.
My rig can play Skyrim perfectly (40+ Frames constantly) with over 50 visual mods and can also play Battlefield 3, 60 FPS on ultra without breaking a sweat.

In conclusion, the i5-4590 and an R9 280 will work great for making a pretty Skyrim!


THANK YOU! finally a clear answer :)  Do you think i could OC a R9 280, is it easy? Here is the two r9 280s i have found so far what one is better? One has boost clock what is that do i need i?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

m
0
l
July 10, 2014 6:05:52 AM

If you use very heavy mods a 280 will be cutting it close, but it will depend a lot on actually how many mods you will use.
You can definitly get skyrim to look well and go well with that GPU.
Please note that modding is not the easiest thing in the world, and once you start mixing mods, the game will start crashing more and more often.

That CPU will manage it very well.
m
0
l
July 10, 2014 7:09:43 AM

cats_Paw said:
If you use very heavy mods a 280 will be cutting it close, but it will depend a lot on actually how many mods you will use.
You can definitly get skyrim to look well and go well with that GPU.
Please note that modding is not the easiest thing in the world, and once you start mixing mods, the game will start crashing more and more often.

That CPU will manage it very well.


Skyrim has been somewhat surprisingly when I've come to modding my own. Pretty much all of the most popular graphical mods are compatible with one another. Through all the mods I've installed my systems not had one hiccup when loading skyrim and its never had to close due to incompatibility.

m
0
l
July 10, 2014 7:13:45 AM

Ferrariassassin said:
Thanatognomonic said:
My rig consists primarily of an i5-4670k and a 660ti.
The i5-4590 and a stock speed 4670k isn't very different, you may get a frame less.
However, the R9 280 (the best you will get for under $240) is better than the 660ti, so you should end up with more frames overall then I.
My rig can play Skyrim perfectly (40+ Frames constantly) with over 50 visual mods and can also play Battlefield 3, 60 FPS on ultra without breaking a sweat.

In conclusion, the i5-4590 and an R9 280 will work great for making a pretty Skyrim!


THANK YOU! finally a clear answer :)  Do you think i could OC a R9 280, is it easy? Here is the two r9 280s i have found so far what one is better? One has boost clock what is that do i need i?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...



Tech youtuber JayzTwoCents did a GPU show-off between the GTX 760 and the R9 280, he used the XFX Double Dissipation Card in this video. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qim-asQrT_Y )
He'll give you a good review on this XFX 280, but I dont know much about the Sapphire one. The XFX card, however, wins me over just from its visuals (It's beautiful!)

Both cards will be over-clockable, but before you consider doing over-clocking, make sure that your power supply has enough "juice" and that there is good airflow in your case (for the best over-clock and best lowest temperatures)
m
0
l
July 10, 2014 11:18:47 AM

Thanatognomonic said:
Ferrariassassin said:
Thanatognomonic said:
My rig consists primarily of an i5-4670k and a 660ti.
The i5-4590 and a stock speed 4670k isn't very different, you may get a frame less.
However, the R9 280 (the best you will get for under $240) is better than the 660ti, so you should end up with more frames overall then I.
My rig can play Skyrim perfectly (40+ Frames constantly) with over 50 visual mods and can also play Battlefield 3, 60 FPS on ultra without breaking a sweat.

In conclusion, the i5-4590 and an R9 280 will work great for making a pretty Skyrim!


THANK YOU! finally a clear answer :)  Do you think i could OC a R9 280, is it easy? Here is the two r9 280s i have found so far what one is better? One has boost clock what is that do i need i?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...



Tech youtuber JayzTwoCents did a GPU show-off between the GTX 760 and the R9 280, he used the XFX Double Dissipation Card in this video. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qim-asQrT_Y )
He'll give you a good review on this XFX 280, but I dont know much about the Sapphire one. The XFX card, however, wins me over just from its visuals (It's beautiful!)

Both cards will be over-clockable, but before you consider doing over-clocking, make sure that your power supply has enough "juice" and that there is good airflow in your case (for the best over-clock and best lowest temperatures)


Ok i get what ya mean. Now people are saying that if i get an AMD brand GPU it will look like crap on Skyrim because you cant force AO on it.

m
0
l
July 10, 2014 4:45:23 PM

Unless AO is automatically set then I don't think it matters.
I can't check if it is at the moment, i'm not on my computer, but when I'm next on it I will write if it really is that much of a necessity. (I'll try include some photos as well so you get an idea of what it will look like)
m
0
l
July 10, 2014 4:59:51 PM

Thanatognomonic said:
Unless AO is automatically set then I don't think it matters.
I can't check if it is at the moment, i'm not on my computer, but when I'm next on it I will write if it really is that much of a necessity. (I'll try include some photos as well so you get an idea of what it will look like)


Ok amn thanks, and do you think a GTX760 is better than a R9 280?

m
0
l
July 11, 2014 3:55:19 AM

No, the R9 280 is more comparable to a GTX770. It beats the GTX 760 is practcially every application.
m
0
l
July 11, 2014 3:58:23 AM

Alright. I checked my computer if AO was on and it was set to off. I took a few print-screens of some places you'll see early on in the game and these are the results : http://imgur.com/OlzHevG,HfYcGpW,xNgO8Uq#0

EDIT: After playing for 2-3 hours with AO enabled I failed to see any difference what-so-ever, you should be fine without it.
m
0
l
July 11, 2014 2:01:25 PM

Thanatognomonic said:
Alright. I checked my computer if AO was on and it was set to off. I took a few print-screens of some places you'll see early on in the game and these are the results : http://imgur.com/OlzHevG,HfYcGpW,xNgO8Uq#0

EDIT: After playing for 2-3 hours with AO enabled I failed to see any difference what-so-ever, you should be fine without it.


So those pictures are with AO? And i just ordered my GPPU, it is this one :)  Because the Sapphire and XFX R9 280 were out of stock or went up to $280.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

m
0
l
July 11, 2014 2:14:33 PM

Them pictures were without AO, ones I took upon first playing Skyrim modded. There is literally no difference between them and ones if I were to take them with AO.
m
0
l
July 11, 2014 2:30:57 PM

Thanatognomonic said:
Them pictures were without AO, ones I took upon first playing Skyrim modded. There is literally no difference between them and ones if I were to take them with AO.


I heard that you can even get a MOD that makes AO even better that what Nvidia comes with. And yea i mean its barely noticeable i mean PC is still much better than Console.
m
0
l
!