5870 + Physx 285 GTX + Radeon 5970 ??
Tags:
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Hello, i have a question for you guys
My Computer has the folowing specs:
PC:
-i7 920 @ 3.8GHZ + Turbo + HT
-CoolerMaster V10
-MSI Eclipse SLI
-1x 80mm Turbo Fan (for IOH)
-PCI-E Creative Sound 7.1
-5x 120mm Turbo Fan
-1x Blu-ray player SATA
-2x DVD/RW DL Samsung SATA
-Thermaltake Armor+
Ram & HDD
-6 GB DDR3 Corsair 1600MHZ
-1x SSD Intel X-25M 80GB
-1x Samsung 1TB F1
-1x Western D. 1.5TB Caviar Green
-4x 320GB Raid-0
Video
-XFX 5870 Black Edition 900MHZ/1280MHZ
-PNY 285 GTX "Stock" for Physx on the third slot at 4x
-24" HP LCD 1900x1200 w/ HDMI Interface
Im planning to buy a 5970 to tripplefire with my 5870 but im wondering if my PSU is strong enough for this machine..
My question is, Do you think my Corsair HX1000 has enough power to feed my computer if i add the 5970 to my current setup?
My Computer has the folowing specs:
PC:
-i7 920 @ 3.8GHZ + Turbo + HT
-CoolerMaster V10
-MSI Eclipse SLI
-1x 80mm Turbo Fan (for IOH)
-PCI-E Creative Sound 7.1
-5x 120mm Turbo Fan
-1x Blu-ray player SATA
-2x DVD/RW DL Samsung SATA
-Thermaltake Armor+
Ram & HDD
-6 GB DDR3 Corsair 1600MHZ
-1x SSD Intel X-25M 80GB
-1x Samsung 1TB F1
-1x Western D. 1.5TB Caviar Green
-4x 320GB Raid-0
Video
-XFX 5870 Black Edition 900MHZ/1280MHZ
-PNY 285 GTX "Stock" for Physx on the third slot at 4x
-24" HP LCD 1900x1200 w/ HDMI Interface
Im planning to buy a 5970 to tripplefire with my 5870 but im wondering if my PSU is strong enough for this machine..
My question is, Do you think my Corsair HX1000 has enough power to feed my computer if i add the 5970 to my current setup?
More about : 5870 physx 285 gtx radeon 5970
1000W should easily be able to power that system. Over clocked or not.
However, makes sure that your motherboard doesn't do something silly with 3 x16 slots full. Some might default to x16 x16 x1 or x8 x8 x4. That MB would be x16 x16 in two way for sure.. but you might have to go x16x8x4 to really make a point to it, would strongly recommend against the 5970 in an x8 if at all possible.
However, makes sure that your motherboard doesn't do something silly with 3 x16 slots full. Some might default to x16 x16 x1 or x8 x8 x4. That MB would be x16 x16 in two way for sure.. but you might have to go x16x8x4 to really make a point to it, would strongly recommend against the 5970 in an x8 if at all possible.
Related ressources
- Upgrade from a 280 GTX SSC to an Radeon 5850 or 5970 ? - Forum
- XFX Radeon HD 5870 1GB XXX Edition or EVGA GTX285 1GB Classified Edition? - Forum
- 5970 vs GTX 285 SLi ? - Forum
- 2x ATI Radeon HD 5870 Or 2x nVidia GTX 285 OC - Forum
- Gtx 285 4 way sli vs HD 5870 4 way crossfirex - Forum
OvrClkr said:
Your board is x16x16x4 so whatever card you put in the x4 slot (GTX 285) would be a waste.. You need at least x16x16x8..
I have done a couple of testing on the third slot (4x), as follows:
Vantage Performance Score:
-Same Computer Specs but W/9800 GTX + on the third slot (4x) as physx
21,800 Points
-Same Computer Specs but w/285 GTX on the third slot (4x) as physx
22,900 Points
There is a small increase in the vantage points using the 285 GTX even tho only runs at 4x.
Other testing in a game called: Warmonger, i could see a 35%+ increase in performance using my 5870 + 285 vs 5870 + 9800
So you think my PSU can handle it?
Thanks
merazo_2007 said:
I have done a couple of testing on the third slot (4x), as follows:Vantage Performance Score:
-Same Computer Specs but W/9800 GTX + on the third slot (4x) as physx
21,800 Points
-Same Computer Specs but w/285 GTX on the third slot (4x) as physx
22,900 Points
There is a small increase in the vantage points using the 285 GTX even tho only runs at 4x.
Other testing in a game called: Warmonger, i could see a 35%+ increase in performance using my 5870 + 285 vs 5870 + 9800
So you think my PSU can handle it?
Thanks
If you want performance go with crossfire or SLI, maybe Hydra X. But don't go with third card.
When you tested third slot you tested with only one card, right?
Look some reviews.
wolfram23 said:
It'll work fine I'm running crossfire 5850s at 8x/8x with a GT 240 on a 4x for PhysX. PhysX isn't all that demanding even a GT 240 is only getting to around 30% tops usage in Metro 2033, but I'm going to try Batman and Mirror's Edge asap... I'll make a thread on it whenever that happens.You also have a bottleneck if you are running both cards @ 8x/8x, that is actually half the bandwidth compared to a board running both slots at 16x.
bystander said:
Using the dedicated PhysX card in the x4 slot seems to work just fine, which leaves the 5870 and 5970 to fit in the x16 slots. I've seen benchmarks for dedicated physX cards that showed good performance even at x1.So you are saying that he would get the exact same outcome as if the physx card was running in an 16x slot?
Nvdia, evga supports physx in the 4x slot, its mentioned at evga's site. Even the most demanding title ,say for example Batman only has a small % of pixels's being rendered by the dedicated physX card. The same way the driver makes sli work, splits the rendering work for two cards, 'smartly' passes just the physX 'parts' back and forth over the system. Thats the best way I can explain it.
Sure that might be the more correct term for whats going on there.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/physx_faq.html#q4
When two, three, or four matched GPUs are working in SLI, PhysX runs on one GPU, while graphics rendering runs on all GPUs. The NVIDIA drivers optimize the available resources across all GPUs to balance PhysX computation and graphics rendering. Therefore users can expect much higher frame rates and a better overall experience with SLI.
A new configuration that’s now possible with PhysX is 2 non-matched (heterogeneous) GPUs. In this configuration, one GPU renders graphics (typically the more powerful GPU) while the second GPU is completely dedicated to PhysX. By offloading PhysX to a dedicated GPU, users will experience smoother gaming.
Finally we can put the above two configurations all into 1 PC! This would be SLI plus a dedicated PhysX GPU. Similarly to the 2 heterogeneous GPU case, graphics rendering takes place in the GPUs now connected in SLI while the non-matched GPU is dedicated to PhysX computation.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/physx_faq.html#q4
Quote:
How does PhysX work with SLI and multi-GPU configurations?When two, three, or four matched GPUs are working in SLI, PhysX runs on one GPU, while graphics rendering runs on all GPUs. The NVIDIA drivers optimize the available resources across all GPUs to balance PhysX computation and graphics rendering. Therefore users can expect much higher frame rates and a better overall experience with SLI.
A new configuration that’s now possible with PhysX is 2 non-matched (heterogeneous) GPUs. In this configuration, one GPU renders graphics (typically the more powerful GPU) while the second GPU is completely dedicated to PhysX. By offloading PhysX to a dedicated GPU, users will experience smoother gaming.
Finally we can put the above two configurations all into 1 PC! This would be SLI plus a dedicated PhysX GPU. Similarly to the 2 heterogeneous GPU case, graphics rendering takes place in the GPUs now connected in SLI while the non-matched GPU is dedicated to PhysX computation.
OvrClkr said:
You also have a bottleneck if you are running both cards @ 8x/8x, that is actually half the bandwidth compared to a board running both slots at 16x.Well, technically yes. But in practice the difference is pretty much nil. Maybe 1 or 2%. Considering all the other factors involved having 8x compared to 16x is a non issue to me. However, my real point was only in regards to the PhysX card, which is to say there's pretty much no way a dedicated PhysX card will be stressed to the point that having only 4 lanes is going to compromise it.
wolfram23 said:
Well, technically yes. But in practice the difference is pretty much nil. Maybe 1 or 2%. Considering all the other factors involved having 8x compared to 16x is a non issue to me. However, my real point was only in regards to the PhysX card, which is to say there's pretty much no way a dedicated PhysX card will be stressed to the point that having only 4 lanes is going to compromise it.yup, there are a few threads that talk about this topic. I thought physx needed at least 8x to operate @ 100%.
http://www.overclock.net/nvidia/722361-dedicated-physx-...
OvrClkr said:
yup, there are a few threads that talk about this topic. I thought physx needed at least 8x to operate @ 100%.http://www.overclock.net/nvidia/722361-dedicated-physx-...
Well yes I think that's true, because FluidMark can only stress mine to about 83% with the 4x slot. Could be worth trying a different slot just for the fun of it to see if that's the case. But the thing is, in gaming it doesn't get stressed that much. I'm too busy right now to run the proper testing but I've been playing Metro 2033 and the PhysX card rarely hits as high as 30%, it's almost never even over 20% usage. Probably Batman AA will stress it higher as I've seen there's more PhysX applied to that game, however I forget who it was but they said even Batman didn't get it over 40% usage. Basically from my understanding, from 16x to 8x you only lose at most 3%, but going down to 4x can have a far more dramatic reduction. You certainly wouldn't want to CF of SLI on a 4x but for a dedicated PhysX it really won't make a difference.
Quote:
Basically from my understanding, from 16x to 8x you only lose at most 3%, but going down to 4x can have a far more dramatic reduction. You certainly wouldn't want to CF of SLI on a 4x but for a dedicated PhysX it really won't make a difference.3% in basically nothing, I thought the margin was more towards 7/8%
wolfram23 said:
Well yes I think that's true, because FluidMark can only stress mine to about 83% with the 4x slot. Could be worth trying a different slot just for the fun of it to see if that's the case. But the thing is, in gaming it doesn't get stressed that much. I'm too busy right now to run the proper testing but I've been playing Metro 2033 and the PhysX card rarely hits as high as 30%, it's almost never even over 20% usage. Probably Batman AA will stress it higher as I've seen there's more PhysX applied to that game, however I forget who it was but they said even Batman didn't get it over 40% usage. Basically from my understanding, from 16x to 8x you only lose at most 3%, but going down to 4x can have a far more dramatic reduction. You certainly wouldn't want to CF of SLI on a 4x but for a dedicated PhysX it really won't make a difference.Metro 2033
9800 GTX 23% of usage "max"
285 GTX 8% of usage "max"
Mirror Edge "Ep-1"
9800 GTX 17% usage "max"
285 GTX 9% of usage "max"
FluidMark
9800 GTX 72% of usage "max"
285 GTX "OC" 83% of usage "max" http://www.ozone3d.net/benchmarks/score.php?id=b8742f46...
On batman for some reason im not able to disable the V-Sync so is a constant 60 FPS... with about 2 - 4 % of usage on both cards
merazo_2007 said:
Metro 2033 9800 GTX 23% of usage "max"
285 GTX 8% of usage "max"
Mirror Edge "Ep-1"
9800 GTX 17% usage "max"
285 GTX 9% of usage "max"
FluidMark
9800 GTX 72% of usage "max"
285 GTX "OC" 83% of usage "max" http://www.ozone3d.net/benchmarks/score.php?id=b8742f46...
On batman for some reason im not able to disable the V-Sync so is a constant 60 FPS... with about 2 - 4 % of usage on both cards
Nice! So looks like yes, the 4x holds back the cards from running full capacity (FluidMark) but in gaming they're barely put to the test at all. Based on this, IMO as a dedicated PhysX card both of those are in fact much more than needed at this point in time. My GT 240 was showing higher usage in Metro 2033 (absolute most I saw was around 30% but almost always staying under 18%), so I feel good that it's an optimal card for price vs performance in this type of application. I believe it's essentially a 9600GT... Not entirely sure how these 2xx cards compare.
I'm getting very curious about the future of dedicated PPUs as ATI is starting to push their bullet physics system which is supposedly able to run on OpenCL and Direct Compute and can utilize hardware acceleration... so will that be able to take advantage of dedicated PPUs the way PhysX can? Sure hope so!
wolfram23 said:
Yea should be fine
Can I ask why you're going to do that tho? (as in, it's just a tad excessive haha
)ya, a single 5870 OC 900MHZ is not enough to handle Metro 2033, DX11, DOF ON, TES ON, AAA, Very High, Advanced Physx on 1920x1200
So i have to add another card but adding another 5870 wouldnt increase enough FPS.
Besides im planning to hit 40k Performance on Vantage.
My system scores about 23k,
22k GPU
52k+ CPU/w physx
So adding the 5970 it should be well over 35k, add OC to the 5970 and it should hit 40 i guess
Related ressources:
- ForumPhysx : gtx285 vs 8800gt
- ForumHD 5970 over GTX 295?
- ForumEVA GeForce GTX 275 CO-OP PhysX Edition or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 ?
- ForumNikon d3000 slr, GTX 295, Ati 5870 , GTX285 , or 5850?!?
- ForumGTX 460 SLI beats 5870 Crossfire for 300 dollars less...
- ForumRadeon 5870 + A Dedicated PhysX Card?
- ForumExperts only. 4 HD 5970 's
- ForumMy experience with Radeon 5850 vs. GTX 285
- ForumGTX 285 SLI or RADEON 5850HD CrossFire for Core i7 920
- ForumRadeon HD 6870 vs. EVGA GeForce GTX 580
- ForumIs a GTX285 still worth getting at this point?
- ForumSwap HD 5850 for GTX 285
- ForumAsus gtx560ti directcuII-broken
- ForumGeforce 9800 GX2 vs Radeon 4890
- ForumIs zito 550W enough for radeon hd 5770
- More resources
Read discussions in other Graphics & Displays categories
!