Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Assassin's Creed Revelations SLI problem

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 22, 2012 7:10:46 PM

Hi All,

I have a problem with my game. I got 2 GTX 460 and tried to max out the game, but it is not at all as I have expected - fraps shows 8 FPS sometimes...

Don't get me wrong it goes well, then it starts to slow down for a sec - jumps few moments and fps is running low then back to 50 and down and up all the time.

I have:

Windows 7 ultimate 64
Phenom II 955 BE
4GB XMS 1333 RAM
M4N98TD Mobo with nForce980a
SAMSUNG SATA II hard drive
950 Coolmaster PSU

1GPU: PALIT GTX 460 SONIC PLATINUIM
2GPU: PALIT GTX 460 SONIC EDITION

Please let me know what could it be. I tried everything.

Swapped cards, updated chipset, nvidai drivers checked fraps and sli with a green stripe across the screen and it all works but well, I don't know..

Thanks
LK
a c 291 U Graphics card
July 22, 2012 7:13:30 PM

Is vsync on? I had the problem with that game lagging time to time when it was on. I fixed it by using the adaptive mode.

Also, you may try disabling SLI for that game - even single GTX 460 should max it out.
July 22, 2012 7:31:29 PM

I'll try that, thanks.

Yes it was on. I'll let you know
Related resources
July 22, 2012 7:38:48 PM

I've turned vsync off and disabled SLI - works better now.

But why would that be - I though it will be perfect 60fps all the time with 2 cards.

Did I spend £90 for nothing?
a c 291 U Graphics card
July 22, 2012 8:09:26 PM

No not really. I'd say the game was crap :p  Some games just act like that - they hate SLI.
July 22, 2012 8:37:00 PM

I tried this one and Batman Arkham City -same better of without SLI...
July 22, 2012 8:40:10 PM

To use SLI the game must be built for it. Which is why I stand by SLI being a waste. You are almost always better off getting a single graphics card than having two. Unless you require multiple monitors, etc.
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 22, 2012 8:41:08 PM

lukkuz said:
I tried this one and Batman Arkham City -same better of without SLI...


It looks like you have an actual CPU "bottleneck", congratulations! :sol: 
July 22, 2012 8:50:31 PM

But why does it work on one card maxed out though?
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 22, 2012 8:54:58 PM

lukkuz said:
But why does it work on one card maxed out though?

That's all the CPU can handle, it's the extra processing power required for SLi that the CPU hasn't got that is the issue.
July 22, 2012 9:08:26 PM

If I OC it to 4.0 Would it make a difference?
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 22, 2012 9:18:40 PM

lukkuz said:
If I OC it to 4.0 Would it make a difference?

Probably not but give it a go anyway, what have you got to lose?
July 22, 2012 9:23:32 PM

I think I'd have to get some better CPU cooler though as I only have the stock one. I am not sure if it's worth it if it may not work anyway....

Thanks for your help bud.

a c 272 U Graphics card
July 22, 2012 9:28:25 PM

lukkuz said:
I think I'd have to get some better CPU cooler though as I only have the stock one. I am not sure if it's worth it if it may not work anyway....

Thanks for your help bud.

NP. I ran into the same issue you are seeing a few years back and cured it by changing to an Intel platform, not the most cost effective some might say but the AMD CPU's of that era were just not up to the job IMHO.
a c 117 U Graphics card
July 22, 2012 10:44:10 PM

Mousemonkey said:
Probably not but give it a go anyway, what have you got to lose?


A 955BE and a M4N98TD

The NForce chipsets are horrible
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 23, 2012 11:32:35 AM

Pinhedd said:
A 955BE and a M4N98TD

The NForce chipsets are horrible

Only when used with crappy CPU's, I'm still using a 680i board that has had no problems whatsoever and with an e8400 is able to run SLi'd GTX560's without doing the bottleneck glugging the OP has experienced. I get the distinct impression that Pinhedd
has no actual experience but is merely parroting the words of others.
July 23, 2012 11:39:49 AM

Mousemonkey said:
Only when used with crappy CPU's, I'm still using a 680i board that has had no problems whatsoever and with an e8400 is able to run SLi'd GTX560's without doing the bottleneck glugging the OP has experienced. I get the distinct impression that Pinhedd
has no actual experience but is merely parroting the words of others.


so, even though a game does not support sli, say the assasins creed,
just an e.g.

will my sli'ed gtx 560 Ti rig still works if im using an i5 2500k? compared to a single 560 Ti card?
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 23, 2012 11:53:11 AM

1depp1 said:
so, even though a game does not support sli, say the assasins creed,
just an e.g.

will my sli'ed gtx 560 Ti rig still works if im using an i5 2500k? compared to a single 560 Ti card?

If you have a question then start your own thread instead of hijacking this one.
a c 117 U Graphics card
July 23, 2012 12:20:01 PM

Mousemonkey said:
Only when used with crappy CPU's, I'm still using a 680i board that has had no problems whatsoever and with an e8400 is able to run SLi'd GTX560's without doing the bottleneck glugging the OP has experienced. I get the distinct impression that Pinhedd
has no actual experience but is merely parroting the words of others.


The 680i boards had horrible current regulation which made overclocking Core2 Quad processors a pain in the ass. Some motherboards had a degree of load line calibration which increased the current inflow capabilities but many didn't and on the few that did it didn't work properly. The recommended solution was to mod a resistor with a graphite pencil or soldering iron. I had a striker II Extreme which failed horribly.

The 780i was just a marginally patched up 680i with a flaky PCIe splitter for tri-SLI which required that one of the 16x slots draw from the southbridge which caused IO issues. The northbridge alone dissipated nearly 50 watts of heat (3 times more than the P35) and came with a noisy active cooler.

No AHCI support at all which makes them worthless for native SATA devices such as SSDs and BluRay

Despite having DDR2-1200 support, the 780i couldn't safely deliver enough current to high voltage modules which resulted in the already flaky 50 watt northbridge burning out. P45 had no problems at all

The FSB was full of large frequency gaps. It did have quite a bit of overclocking headroom though provided the NB was actively cooled

Overclocking any component is dangerous and can lead to component failure if not done properly
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 23, 2012 12:27:02 PM

Pinhedd said:
The 680i boards had horrible current regulation which made overclocking Core2 Quad processors a pain in the ass. Some motherboards had a degree of load line calibration which increased the current inflow capabilities but many didn't and on the few that did it didn't work properly. The recommended solution was to mod a resistor with a graphite pencil or soldering iron. I had a striker II Extreme which failed horribly.

The 780i was just a marginally patched up 680i with a flaky PCIe splitter for tri-SLI which required that one of the 16x slots draw from the southbridge which caused IO issues. The northbridge alone dissipated nearly 50 watts of heat (3 times more than the P35) and came with a noisy active cooler.

No AHCI support at all which makes them worthless for native SATA devices such as SSDs and BluRay

Despite having DDR2-1200 support, the 780i couldn't safely deliver enough current to high voltage modules which resulted in the already flaky 50 watt northbridge burning out. P45 had no problems at all

The FSB was full of large frequency gaps. It did have quite a bit of overclocking headroom though provided the NB was actively cooled

Overclocking any component is dangerous and can lead to component failure if not done properly

And for all those who don't OC and don't use SSDs and BluRay and were prepared to get a board that was put together properly and not get one where the manufacturer had skimped on the layers used, we ended up with boards that are still performing admirably! :sol: 
a c 117 U Graphics card
July 23, 2012 1:04:08 PM

Mousemonkey said:
And for all those who don't OC and don't use SSDs and BluRay and were prepared to get a board that was put together properly and not get one where the manufacturer had skimped on the layers used, we ended up with boards that are still performing admirably! :sol: 


Certainly true. My 386dx from the mid 1980s still works great on the IBM board that it came with because it's never been abused. The NForce boards were quite feature rich which is nice but they were characteristically targeted towards enthusiast gamers and overclockers and to this end the performed quite poorly.

I burned through an Asus Striker II Extreme, two EVGA 780i SLI and an EVGA 780i SLI FTW Edition before I gave up and went with an Asus P5Q Pro Turbo that's been running a QX9650 at 4Ghz for 4 years like a champ.

Every additional bell and whistle is an additional potential point of failure.
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 23, 2012 1:10:46 PM

Pinhedd said:
Certainly true. My 386dx from the mid 1980s still works great on the IBM board that it came with because it's never been abused. The NForce boards were quite feature rich which is nice but they were characteristically targeted towards enthusiast gamers and overclockers and to this end the performed quite poorly.

I burned through an Asus Striker II Extreme, two EVGA 780i SLI and an EVGA 780i SLI FTW Edition before I gave up and went with an Asus P5Q Pro Turbo that's been running a QX9650 at 4Ghz for 4 years like a champ.

Every additional bell and whistle is an additional potential point of failure.

The problem with all of those boards you listed was that as I recall when I was looking at mobos around that, is that they all felt a bit flimsy compared with the board I ended up with which suggested to me that they were subjects of the "layer skimping" that I mentioned earlier.
a c 117 U Graphics card
July 23, 2012 1:26:47 PM

Mousemonkey said:
The problem with all of those boards you listed was that as I recall when I was looking at mobos around that, is that they all felt a bit flimsy compared with the board I ended up with which suggested to me that they were subjects of the "layer skimping" that I mentioned earlier.


That's possible and it might explain some of the spectrum problems. The Striker II Extreme felt pretty solid but it was also a 680i board and wasn't really quad core ready by NVidia's own admission. I never did try the Striker II Formula as I went with an EVGA reference board instead. What failed to surprise me though is that the EVGA 780i SLI FTW had many of the same problems as the non-FTW version (reference board). The quality of the components was certainly higher and it had a number of additional features such as load line calibration which were absent on reference boards but most of the chipset design problems were still present.

One design problem that I noticed with the 780i SLI reference board is that the filter capacitors are placed immediately above the PCIe slots which interfered with graphics cards that had backplates. The watercooled EVGA GTX280 would not fit in the EVGA 780i SLI, only the FTW edition.

Which board do you have?
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 23, 2012 1:35:41 PM

The ABIT IN9 32x MAX.
July 24, 2012 10:24:17 AM

Hi,

I have tried a bit of overclocking and doing 3.5Ghz does a bit of an improvement.

I though of one more thing. The cards should be exactly the same isn't it.

These 2 are different editions and their clocks are different, do you think there is any chance that this may be the issue.

Maybe I should downgrade (if this is even possible) the better one (Platinum)???
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 24, 2012 10:28:43 AM

lukkuz said:
Hi,

I have tried a bit of overclocking and doing 3.5Ghz does a bit of an improvement.

I though of one more thing. The cards should be exactly the same isn't it.

These 2 are different editions and their clocks are different, do you think there is any chance that this may be the issue.

Maybe I should downgrade (if this is even possible) the better one (Platinum)???

So are your framerates silky smooth now?
July 24, 2012 10:39:49 AM

No... jumped up about 8-10 frames and is no longer dropping down to 5-8

But it is still not a great deal of improvement.

I have bought a cooler 212 Evo and will install today or tomorrow, the try to get my CPU to 3.8 - 4.0 and will let you know if it has gone up even more.

I didn't know that the processor will have such a big impact on the sli, I though that GPU is responsble for all this graphic calculations..
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 24, 2012 10:48:41 AM

lukkuz said:
No... jumped up about 8-10 frames and is no longer dropping down to 5-8

But it is still not a great deal of improvement.

I have bought a cooler 212 Evo and will install today or tomorrow, the try to get my CPU to 3.8 - 4.0 and will let you know if it has gone up even more.

I didn't know that the processor will have such a big impact on the sli, I though that GPU is responsble for all this graphic calculations..

Run something like task manager in the background when you are gaming, then when you exit the game you can get an idea what the CPU usage was.
July 24, 2012 10:57:42 AM

Mousemonkey said:
Run something like task manager in the background when you are gaming, then when you exit the game you can get an idea what the CPU usage was.



done that before with resource monitor usually about 75% I am not sure how it looks during the lagging though, maybe jumps up to 1000% :) 

Mousemonkey, this is a nice read if you want, I have leanrned a bit from there:

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/sli/faq

Hope you enjoy it as it seems you're interested in the subject.
a c 272 U Graphics card
July 24, 2012 11:47:40 AM

lukkuz said:
done that before with resource monitor usually about 75% I am not sure how it looks during the lagging though, maybe jumps up to 1000% :) 

Mousemonkey, this is a nice read if you want, I have leanrned a bit from there:

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/sli/faq

Hope you enjoy it as it seems you're interested in the subject.

I've been running SLi rigs since 2004 and I'm pretty sure I've seen that faq in one of its earlier revisions, thanks for the thought though.
July 24, 2012 11:57:09 AM

Mousemonkey said:
I've been running SLi rigs since 2004 and I'm pretty sure I've seen that faq in one of its earlier revisions, thanks for the thought though.

Heheh sorry, I didn't mean to offend you:) 

Well, at least we know that this definetely is CPU issue, but there may be solution by rising settings even more (weird but I'll try when back at home)

And this is definetely not the card difference ex Paltinum / non Platinum

Then I'll OC - which may take some time - but I know my settings for 3.8 - will just try to put up to 4 and will let you know how it did.
!