I am getting low FPS on my HD 7970!

Here is my specs
Core i7 2700k
Asus HD 7970
Asus Sabertooth P67
Corsair Vengeance 8GB 1600Mhz
Seasonic 850W
Corsair H100

I get an avg FPS of 32 in Battlefield 3 but i get 25 in Mafia II bench,ark with Phyx enabled.
I have seen many people on the internet get higher numbers.
Am I doing something wrong?


I overclocked my GPU


and I overclocked my CPU
85 answers Last reply
More about 7970
  1. What settings/resolution are you talking about? If you're talking about 1080p resolution then something is definitely wrong - are your drivers up to date?
  2. It is 1080p.
    Graphic Drivers are upto date. I have not yet updated motherboard bios but will that make a difference?
  3. I dunno, but that's a weird problem. Did you upgrade from an nvidia card and still have old nvidia drivers sitting around in your system?
  4. This was a completly new build.
  5. Sorry man I dunno I'll be of much help with this one - I've never really experienced anything like that.

    If all your temps are good, your overclocks are confirmed stable, and your drivers are up to date, then something is faulty. I don't know where to begin looking, though. Something like that could be a PSU issue, a mobo issue, a GPU issue, etc...

    Do your GPU and CPU operate around a usage % during games/testing that you would expect to see? Does the GPU produce those low frames at 100% usage?

    Also, do you have anything crazy enabled in Catalyst Control Center like tons of super-sampling AA or forced vsync? Do you have the power slider increased 20% for your GPU overclock?
  6. u sure its the proper drivers? a few weeks back i heard that 7900 series not officially supported in 12.1.


    edit: nvm there is a 12.2 pre certified. took them forever to roll official drivers
  7. Enabling Physx will hurt your FPS a lot since Radeon cards don't support Physx. As for your Battlefield 3 FPS, what settings, resolution, ect are you running at?

    You should be running 12.2 drivers by the way.
  8. Honestly? That is about right.

    Unfortunately, BF3 is currently the most legitimately demanding game on PC. It is no cakewalk by any means. I sometimes drop down into the 50fps range with my dual 6970's. If someone is doing better, they are probably using tweaks and/or have their CCC sliders turned off.

    As for Mafia 2, you are not going to run it without a PhysX card. Period. Add another 7970 and you still won't. Hell, you should be glad you can get 25fps. That is about double what I get when I enable PhysX in Mafia 2.
  9. omega21xx said:
    Enabling Physx will hurt your FPS a lot since Radeon cards don't support Physx. As for your Battlefield 3 FPS, what settings, resolution, ect are you running at?

    It's not that Radeons can't do Physx it's that Nvidia Crippled the code to not run on anything but there cards instead of reverting to the CPU where it should be in the first place. Nvidia = Corporate Dirt bags.
  10. Boopoo said:
    It's not that Radeons can't do Physx it's that Nvidia Crippled the code to not run on anything but there cards instead of reverting to the CPU where it should be in the first place. Nvidia = Corporate Dirt bags.


    Oh, it's blatant sabotage, no doubt about it.

    Want to know the worst part?

    Not only do they cripple the code, they also force developers to allocate normal physics renderings (that the developer would otherwise assign to the CPU) to be handled by PhysX.

    I am not talking about million particle effects. I am talking about banners swinging in a breeze. Rain. Smoke. Things we have seen a million times before PhysX even existed.

    If we don't give Nvidia our money, we don't get the full game we purchased. Plain and simple.
  11. PCgamer81 said:
    Honestly? That is about right.

    Unfortunately, BF3 is currently the most legitimately demanding game on PC. It is no cakewalk by any means. I sometimes drop down into the 50fps range with my dual 6970's. If someone is doing better, they are probably using tweaks and/or have their CCC sliders turned off.



    not true. i have a 7970 clocked at the same speeds but I average 50 fps on ultra (32 vs 32 map). i get more frames if i kick down the AA to 2 from 4.
  12. Boopoo said:
    It's not that Radeons can't do Physx it's that Nvidia Crippled the code to not run on anything but there cards instead of reverting to the CPU where it should be in the first place. Nvidia = Corporate Dirt bags.


    I'll put it this way, they don't support "Physx"
    The specifc code they bought from I think it was Agiea (or something)
    Now they handle actual Physics fine, and with the new arc. can do it even better than current Nvidia gpu's if companies move to an open standard.
  13. aznplayer213 said:
    not true. i have a 7970 clocked at the same speeds but I average 50 fps on ultra (32 vs 32 map). i get more frames if i kick down the AA to 2 from 4.


    Correct, they really should be getting more as it sounds like they are only managing the performance I GET in BF3 @ Ultra. Although I believe I average higher than 32 fps but get plenty of dips below 30. (of course I don't game at this, Just tried it.)
  14. PCgamer81 said:
    Oh, it's blatant sabotage, no doubt about it.

    Want to know the worst part?

    Not only do they cripple the code, they also force developers to allocate normal physics renderings (that the developer would otherwise assign to the CPU) to be handled by PhysX.

    I am not talking about million particle effects. I am talking about banners swinging in a breeze. Rain. Smoke. Things we have seen a million times before PhysX even existed.

    If we don't give Nvidia our money, we don't get the full game we purchased. Plain and simple.

    Good thing Physx is hardly in any games people want to play and every year the list is getting smaller and smaller.
  15. omega21xx said:
    I'll put it this way, they don't support "Physx"
    The specifc code they bought from I think it was Agiea (or something)
    Now they handle actual Physics fine, and with the new arc. can do it even better than current Nvidia gpu's if companies move to an open standard.

    It was Nvidia's intent to put a Monopoly on the market when they acquired Ageia physics back in when was it like 07 but Physx is going nowhere fast.
  16. Boopoo said:
    It was Nvidia's intent to put a Monopoly on the market when they acquired Ageia physics back in when was it like 07 but Physx is going nowhere fast.


    Doesn't matter about a monopoly on "physx" since companies could easily move to an open standard like in the case of DX vs OpenGL/OpenCL.

    Physx how it is now is pretty pointless anyway. Haven't seen a game that actually makes a really difference in. "oh i can kick this paper around when i walk" yeah... thats about it.
  17. omega21xx said:
    Doesn't matter about a monopoly on "physx" since companies could easily move to an open standard like in the case of DX vs OpenGL/OpenCL.

    Physx how it is now is pretty pointless anyway. Haven't seen a game that actually makes a really difference in. "oh i can kick this paper around when i walk" yeah... thats about it.


    XD

    Anyone remember Red Faction 2 and the whole GeoMod engine (I think that is what they called it)? It sounds like the realtime destruction BF3 boasts, as well as the "physics" Physx boast.
  18. omega21xx said:
    Doesn't matter about a monopoly on "physx" since companies could easily move to an open standard like in the case of DX vs OpenGL/OpenCL.

    Physx how it is now is pretty pointless anyway. Haven't seen a game that actually makes a really difference in. "oh i can kick this paper around when i walk" yeah... thats about it.

    Don't forget about the extra ripple in the trench coast in Mafia 2 for a slight performance hit of only 20fps LOL.
  19. BigMack70 said:
    Sorry man I dunno I'll be of much help with this one - I've never really experienced anything like that.

    If all your temps are good, your overclocks are confirmed stable, and your drivers are up to date, then something is faulty. I don't know where to begin looking, though. Something like that could be a PSU issue, a mobo issue, a GPU issue, etc...

    Do your GPU and CPU operate around a usage % during games/testing that you would expect to see? Does the GPU produce those low frames at 100% usage?

    Also, do you have anything crazy enabled in Catalyst Control Center like tons of super-sampling AA or forced vsync? Do you have the power slider increased 20% for your GPU overclock?


    Yes thank you. I had enabled super sampling AA and forced vsynch. Now fps have gone high.
  20. I've seen Radeons in the past get poor number because they weren't seated well, and was running at x4 bus speeds or lower. Take a look at GPU-Z. See what the bus interface says. This will also allow you to check temps and check to make sure it's running at the right clocks under load.
  21. So a company buys another company for it's patents with millions of dollars. Ageia and Nvidia part happily. The new owner then pays developing costs for a game, in turn, putting a 'proprietary option' into the game as a treat for those who supported the company that had to front all of the money in the first place. They also block their competitor from using the software because they didn't provide any money to support or acquire the software. This is bad business how? You said so yourself that hardly any games use it, so why do you care. Secondly, AMD could've licensed the tech along time ago to support Nvidia's development cost with including it games. Then hey, maybe all games would have better physics and we'd all be enjoying them...or we can sit at opposite sides of the fence and pop verbal shots at each other.
  22. joshyboy82 said:
    So a company buys another company for it's patents with millions of dollars. Ageia and Nvidia part happily. The new owner then pays developing costs for a game, in turn, putting a 'proprietary option' into the game as a treat for those who supported the company that had to front all of the money in the first place. They also block their competitor from using the software because they didn't provide any money to support or acquire the software. This is bad business how? You said so yourself that hardly any games use it, so why do you care. Secondly, AMD could've licensed the tech along time ago to support Nvidia's development cost with including it games. Then hey, maybe all games would have better physics and we'd all be enjoying them...or we can sit at opposite sides of the fence and pop verbal shots at each other.

    That's bad business and an example of how sloppy and inefficient the monetary system is LOL.
  23. MrLoooooooo said:
    Yes thank you. I had enabled super sampling AA and forced vsynch. Now fps have gone high.


    There you go! Glad it wasn't a hardware problem :D

    Super sampling AA is probably the single biggest performance killer out there - it's WAY more demanding than MSAA. I'd advise only turning it on for games that aren't all that GPU-intensive to start. My rule of thumb is that I only start enabling SSAA if I can average 100+ fps without any AA.
  24. joshyboy82 said:
    So a company buys another company for it's patents with millions of dollars. Ageia and Nvidia part happily. The new owner then pays developing costs for a game, in turn, putting a 'proprietary option' into the game as a treat for those who supported the company that had to front all of the money in the first place. They also block their competitor from using the software because they didn't provide any money to support or acquire the software. This is bad business how? You said so yourself that hardly any games use it, so why do you care. Secondly, AMD could've licensed the tech along time ago to support Nvidia's development cost with including it games. Then hey, maybe all games would have better physics and we'd all be enjoying them...or we can sit at opposite sides of the fence and pop verbal shots at each other.



    Woulda coulda shoulda blah blah blah. It doesn't matter that AMD "could've licensed the tech along time ago to support Nvidia's development cost with including it games". That has nothing to do with what is right. That is like saying, "You could have stolen the gold if you had gotten here first, so don't call me a thief." That line of thinking is absolutely hilarious and indicative of an Nvidia fanboy who refuses to admit the truth.

    It is one thing to use PhysX to handle the physics renderings that couldn't be handled by normal GPUs or even most mid-range CPU's.

    But to have developers allocate normal, everyday, run of the mill physics calculations to the PhysX engine, and then blatantly sabotage the code so that even high end CPUs can't handle them (waving banners, a puff of smoke, breaking glass - my high end Sandy Bridge @ 4.5GHz is crumbling!!! Yeah. Right.) is an outrage.

    You can't argue your way out of this one. You're beat.
  25. PCgamer81 said:
    Woulda coulda shoulda blah blah blah. It doesn't matter that AMD "could've licensed the tech along time ago to support Nvidia's development cost with including it games". That has nothing to do with what is right. That is like saying, "You could have stolen the gold if you had gotten here first, so don't call me a thief." That line of thinking is absolutely hilarious and indicative of an Nvidia fanboy who refuses to admit the truth.

    It is one thing to use PhysX to handle the physics renderings that couldn't be handled by normal GPUs or even most mid-range CPU's.

    But to have developers allocate normal, everyday, run of the mill physics calculations to the PhysX engine, and then blatantly sabotage the code so that even high end CPUs can't handle them (waving banners, a puff of smoke, breaking glass - my high end Sandy Bridge @ 4.5GHz is crumbling!!! Yeah. Right.) is an outrage.

    You can't argue your way out of this one. You're beat.


    I don't know if they purposefully sabotage the code for cpu's to render Physx (I know they did for AMD GPU's since if you have one present in the system, you can't use the dedicated physx card from ageia anymore without a crack) but at the very least, it's VERY badly optimized for anything else other than Nvidia GPU's. Like you said, the big downside is we get robbed out of basic physics that can be implemented by our CPU's.
  26. omega21xx said:
    I don't know if they purposefully sabotage the code for cpu's to render Physx (I know they did for AMD GPU's since if you have one present in the system, you can't use the dedicated physx card from ageia anymore without a crack) but at the very least, it's VERY badly optimized for anything else other than Nvidia GPU's. Like you said, the big downside is we get robbed out of basic physics that can be implemented by our CPU's.

    Don't be so naive of course Nvidia will do whatever they can within there realm of power to get a differential advantage over the competition Nvidia are a dirt bag corporate structure in every sense of the word.
  27. I see that some people still haven't done any research into why Nvidia might have decided to lock AMD/ATi cards out of PhysX.
  28. Mousemonkey said:
    I see that some people still haven't done any research into why Nvidia might have decided to lock AMD/ATi cards out of PhysX.

    Market Share ?
  29. Boopoo said:
    Market Share ?

    Nope, nothing to do with that. Looks like it's time for you to do some actual research. :lol:
  30. The said the locked it out due to not wanting to be responsible for incapabilities. That's not necessarily why they actually chose to not allow it. After all, the Agea version worked just fine with both, and so does all the hacked versions.
  31. Mousemonkey said:
    Nope, nothing to do with that. Looks like it's time for you to do some actual research. :lol:

    It's under a guise then if not for Market Share when they bought out Ageia.
  32. bystander said:
    The said the locked it out due to not wanting to be responsible for incapabilities. That's not necessarily why they actually chose to not allow it. After all, the Agea version worked just fine with both, and so does all the hacked versions.

    You failed to mention the, how shall I put it? "Ex employee" issue! ;)
  33. Boopoo said:
    It's under a guise then if not for Market Share when they bought out Ageia.

    Again, you need to do some research and I've already dropped a rather big hint for you and anyone else who's actually interested in the possible reasons for what is a rather large corporate decision.
  34. Mousemonkey said:
    Again, you need to do some research and I've already dropped a rather big hint for you and anyone else who's actually interested in the possible reasons for what is a rather large corporate decision.

    Please post a proper link with relevant information.
  35. Boopoo said:
    Don't be so naive of course Nvidia will do whatever they can within there realm of power to get a differential advantage over the competition Nvidia are a dirt bag corporate structure in every sense of the word.

    I agree with you, for the most part. But I have to admit that my only problem with Nvidia is the PhysX issue, and I guess the developers (as well as other factors) are also responsible.

    I have to disagree with the "dirt bag corporate structure in every sense" part of your post, although I get where you're coming from.
  36. PCgamer81 said:
    I agree with you, for the most part. But I have to admit that my only problem with Nvidia is the PhysX issue, and I guess the developers (as well as other factors) are also responsible.

    I have to disagree with the "dirt bag corporate structure in every sense" part of your post, although I get where you're coming from.

    Well Physx is pretty well dead anyway so Nvidia will just have to find a way to make better cards instead of relying on Physx and drivers to cripple the competition.
  37. Boopoo said:
    Please post a proper link with relevant information.

    I'm not going to spoon feed you the information, all the relevant stuff is out there so just google it.
  38. Mousemonkey said:
    I'm not going to spoon feed you the information, all the relevant stuff is out there so just google it.

    I have read and am reading another article I am on the anandtec one currently however I have found nothing to back up your claims with and what was you claim so than I can narrow my search LOL.
  39. Boopoo said:
    I have read and am reading another article I am on the anandtec one currently however I have found nothing to back up your claims with and what was you claim so than I can narrow my search LOL.

    Well you claimed to know the dates and I've already dropped a couple of rather large hints, it's not my fault that you cannot join the dots. And after the amount of accounts you have started and the kind of PM's you have sent to me from some those accounts I really have no inclination to help you in any way whatsoever.
  40. Mousemonkey said:
    You failed to mention the, how shall I put it? "Ex employee" issue! ;)


    I had heard about this! :o
    Never really looked into this much when I heard but thanks, I like having things to read :)
    Something about the co-founder of Physx moved to AMD right?
  41. omega21xx said:
    I had heard about this! :o
    Never really looked into this much when I heard but thanks, I like having things to read :)

    There have been a couple of new rumours recently that seem to lend even more credence to some peoples belief (mine included) that there was less to this than meets the eye! :lol: A bit of research with a neutral approach and most people should be able to join the dots as to how the the whole thing came about.
  42. http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2010/05/26/physx-founder-leaves-nvidia-for-amd/1

    Didn't they lock out Ageia/AMD cards before this happened though? Either way it's definitely a possible explaination.
  43. omega21xx said:
    http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2010/05/26/physx-founder-leaves-nvidia-for-amd/1

    Didn't they lock out Ageia/AMD cards before this happened though? Either way it's definitely a possible explaination.

    Well it's still besides the fact that there just is not many games that support my Physx GPU and the ones that do have crippling performance with Physx enabled.
  44. omega21xx said:
    http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2010/05/26/physx-founder-leaves-nvidia-for-amd/1

    Didn't they lock out Ageia/AMD cards before this happened though? Either way it's definitely a possible explaination.

    Yes it did happen before that and he is not the guy that is most likely responsible. ;)
  45. Mousemonkey said:
    Yes it did happen before that and he is not the guy that is most likely responsible. ;)

    We could get into the politics all day butt what Nvidia needs is a Die Shink and price drop to become competitive with Radeon.
  46. Mousemonkey said:
    Yes it did happen before that and he is not the guy that is most likely responsible. ;)


    Does it have to do with the guy who was coding to make radeon compatible with physx but ended up hired by NVIDIA?
  47. omega21xx said:
    Does it have to do with the guy who was coding to make radeon compatible with physx but ended up hired by NVIDIA?

    Probably not, he was an independent coder who was just good at what he did and was not employed by ATi/AMD at the time this came about (there's another hint by the way). ;)
  48. Mousemonkey said:
    Probably not, he was an independent coder who was just good at what he did and was not employed by ATi/AMD at the time this came about (there's another hint by the way). ;)


    http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20100121053937_Nvidia_Denies_Accusations_of_Disabling_Multi_Core_CPU_Support_in_PhysX_API.html
    That guy? :) Isn't he working at Intel or something now?

    "Last week Richard Huddy, a software developer relationship manager at AMD, accused Nvidia of tweaking PhysX API so that processing of physics effects is only done on two microprocessor cores in order to artifically make graphics processing units seem better solution for computing of physics effects in games that use PhysX. Back in 2009 Nvidia disabled support of PhysX on the company's own GeForce GPUs as well as Ageia PhysX physics processing cards when drivers detected ATI Radeon hardware present."
  49. I like this article "Nvidia purposefully hobbles PhysX on the CPU"
    http://semiaccurate.com/2010/07/07/nvidia-purposefully-hobbles-physx-cpu/

    Anyway, not sure how this turned into a PhysX bash lol.
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards Asus HD Corsair Graphics Product