Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Performance Problem with GB 4870x2

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 26, 2009 6:28:16 AM

hi guys,
first- this is my rig:
GB EX58-Extreme
Core i7 920 @ 3.8Ghz w/ TR 2x120CFM fans
6GB OCZ Gold 1600mhz
GB 4870x2 w/Cata 9.7
Enermax Galaxy 1000w
WD 640GB x3 @ RAID 0-windows 7 64-bit & Games/ RAID 5- installs & Media.
WD 750GB Media
Seagate 250GB
all packed in a lian-li A71 Case.

Dell UltraSharp 27" + Samsung 730B 17"

the problem is that i cannot get the FPS i can see in benchmarks like at Guru3d-
Crysis Warhead max@1920 2xAA- ~30FPS, Guru3d- ~40
Anno 1404 Max@1920 4xAA 8xAF ~40FPS, Guru3d 65
Far Cry 2 1920 no AA round 70 FPS, with 2xAA drops to 40. i don't remember the Bench in guru3d but it is old with catalyst 8.6 or something like that.... so i don't think it's relevant.


and so on.

i don't think it's the catalyst cause it is like that for a while- i think even from the start.
my indication of dual GPU working is on the Everest Gadget Seeing two GPU working- most games- 70%/70%, some get 99%/99%
i can see that while gaming cause of the dual screen configuration.
at first i thought that the "Low" performance is because the dual screen configuration- but disabling it didn't changed a thing.

anyone with an idea?
a b U Graphics card
August 26, 2009 6:35:26 AM

This can be from alot of different things. Maybe in those benchmarks they had faster ram, with better timings or they were overclocked the CPu further, maybe their case had better airflow bringing the temps down so the cards ran better. Are the cards from the same vendor as yours? Did they have a factory overclocked card, or are you sure you are comparing it to the stock clocked one? Many reviewers do 1 set of benches with stock and the other overclocked.
August 26, 2009 7:07:42 AM

darkvine said:
This can be from alot of different things. Maybe in those benchmarks they had faster ram, with better timings or they were overclocked the CPu further, maybe their case had better airflow bringing the temps down so the cards ran better. Are the cards from the same vendor as yours? Did they have a factory overclocked card, or are you sure you are comparing it to the stock clocked one? Many reviewers do 1 set of benches with stock and the other overclocked.



hi...
the guru 3d rig had ram like mine, the cpu is 965 with a little OC, to 3780 with Turbo.
with my rig, crysis for ex, uses a single thread getting only to 90% load on that thread alone.

cpu "horsepower" is not the issue here... i never get even 1 thread to 99% while gaming with the 3.8Ghz. 2.66 is a different issue... but i don't care that is why i have the TR.

because of my 2 LCDs i can see the load while i'm in the game.
heat is not the problem- cpu is round 45C, GPUS @ full load get to 80 with moded stock cooler- while gaming- all case fans & cpu fans @ 5v (1000rpm)- you cannot hear any noise from the.

prime95- full load cpu gets 65-69C max... when cpu& case fans @ 12V (2000rpm), 75C if it's @ 5v.

i got the 4870x2 card not two 4870- if that is what you mean by "same vendor"

if you mean if guru3d benched the same vendor- i'm following h/w benchmark for more than 6 years now.
vendor difference is very small- 2-3 FPS- for the same reference design- not OC cards.
the difference of vendors is round 2% max- for ex. the difference from 60 to 62fps is 1.3%

so if i got GB or Asus 4870x2- the difference is very small... not the numbers i'm talking about.... Anno- 40 vs 65 that is more then 50% difference. (40*150%=60)

another issue is the OC of the card. i see a lot of OCing of this card- without bios modification- just the catalyst option- especially in reviews (when the card showed up in the market long time ago...)- getting 790mhz GPUs...

in my case- i cannot OC the card for a stable point, even 740mhz freezes...
OCing this card is not much of an issue cause the performance difference is too small for the risk.

i tried changing the power connection to other rail- but there is no difference...
the PSU is laughing at my rig... psu fan is always @ minimum- 1500rpm.
(according to enermax- the psu will increase the rpm only when reaching above 50% load. )

Related resources
a c 169 U Graphics card
August 26, 2009 7:08:30 AM

Your scores look fine to me,Catalyst 8.6 is a very old driver so it may be the reason also as darkvine said they may have used faster RAMs etc.....
Again your scores look fine :) 
August 26, 2009 7:12:06 AM

Maziar said:
Your scores look fine to me,Catalyst 8.6 is a very old driver so it may be the reason also as darkvine said they may have used faster RAMs etc.....
Again your scores look fine :) 


the bench is old, using cata 8.6 or 8. something

i'm useing 9.7
9.8 had problems with anno texture.
so i had to switch back.


August 26, 2009 7:22:36 AM

Maziar said:
Your scores look fine to me,Catalyst 8.6 is a very old driver so it may be the reason also as darkvine said they may have used faster RAMs etc.....
Again your scores look fine :) 


i saw in your profile that you too have 4870x2... so i trust your word...

but, i just checked the rig @ guru for ANNO 1404-
965@3.6+turbo- 3750Mhz.
Ram OCZ 1800 @ 1500 Mhz... didn't say timing but i'll say 7-7-7

these differences will not add 25FPS to any game... (anno- 40 vs 65)

check benches of 2000mhz Ram & see the differences from 1600mhz.. very small.

when the cpu is so powerfull like core i 7, moreover when OCed...
the only thing that capable of change benchs like that is GPU.
for my opinion...
a b U Graphics card
August 26, 2009 7:29:13 AM

If you can't even overclock to that small amount sounds like something might be up with your card. 740mhz is a fairly small overclock and it shouldn't be having a problem with that at all. Many people get well into the 800's with the stock cooler.

If it was just the performance I would have said next that maybe it was something with the motherboard. If your still under warranty I would try calling them and seeing about an RMA to get a new card. I can't say for sure anything is even wrong with the card but it's worth a try. Or if you have a friend with a rig close to the same as yours you can pop your card into theirs and see if it is still acting weird.

I would say your FPS are within the margin of error but somehow the Far Cry 2 one's strike me as a bit odd. You should be getting more there even if you have
August 26, 2009 8:41:38 AM

Double check your CCC settings. Be sure you have everything set to "use app. settings" and performance mode. Also make sure you have crossfire enabled.
August 26, 2009 8:47:22 AM

belial2k said:
Double check your CCC settings. Be sure you have everything set to "use app. settings" and performance mode. Also make sure you have crossfire enabled.


every thing is use app setings, but:
catalyst AI: Advanced
Mipmap: max Quality
wait for vertical refresh: off- unless app specifies.
Adaptive AA: Enabled
OpenGL- unmarked "Triple Buffering"

i'll check all at the opposite direction & report back
a b U Graphics card
August 26, 2009 8:58:35 AM

Honestly, the Crysis numbers sound fine to me. I remember that before I got a second 4870x2, it wasn't able to play smoothly with AA cranked at 19x12 (though with 0xAA, it was smooth at 19x12 cranked). With the second card, 4xAA is doable though. As for the other games, I don't remember performance problems, though I don't recall any exact numbers. FC2 sounds a bit low perhaps...
August 26, 2009 9:03:36 AM

ok!!!
this is the trick!
ANNO 1920, AAx4, AFx8- Full Zoom- 90FPS, Regular 65, Full Zoom out 55. Sea- 110FPS.
Crysis 35-45FPS. but frams drop below 30FPS when fast spining/turning. 1920 AAx2, maxed out.
i'm gessing that farcry will pass the 100FPS....

also- Level/Map Load time was less than half!!! 3-5 seconds... in crysis (don't forget 3x640 in raid 0... that's 280mb/s read average...)
also, anno- before it was like 15-20 seconds...
now it was less then 5...

these differences are huge... this can point on a very different image quality...
i didn't check for image quality for comparison but- i will when i'll have more time.

anyone with a comparison what is the difference between these settings?

belial2k thanks!
August 26, 2009 9:18:32 AM

glad to help
August 26, 2009 10:11:47 AM

cjl said:
Honestly, the Crysis numbers sound fine to me. I remember that before I got a second 4870x2, it wasn't able to play smoothly with AA cranked at 19x12 (though with 0xAA, it was smooth at 19x12 cranked). With the second card, 4xAA is doable though. As for the other games, I don't remember performance problems, though I don't recall any exact numbers. FC2 sounds a bit low perhaps...


check the new numbers below man...
August 26, 2009 10:23:02 AM

Far Cry 2: 1920 no AA- before 60-70 FPS
now 1920 AAx4!! 70-75FPS frames dropped to 65 when 6 enemies & lot of explosions...
( i got a save just 2 seconds before a big action is coming..)

but with far cry 2 i can feel the image Q difference... didn't played a lot... just 4 min or so... cause i don't have time to dig in it too much to point the differences... but it was obvious in far cry 2 more than the other games...
!