pizzaboyuk

Note that it says the pc's native resolution, not the display...

I have my gtx970 connected to a hdtv via hdmi cable. When I go to nvidia control panel to change the resolution, it lists under pc 1280x720 native resolution. I do have the option to set the resolution to match my tv (1920x1080) and pretty sure the gtx970 was supposedly able to handle resolutions beyond that, so whats this native resolution?

OMG!! Google shows so many people with this problem. Open nvidia control panel. Under display, select set up digital audio. By default, the audio for the hdmi is set to off?!?!

I've connected the "hd audio" connector to the motherboard, setup all the drivers for it and changed the bios so its set to hd audio instead of spdif out. I have the hdmi cable connected from my gtx 970 to the hdtv. The signal equalizer thing shows there is sound going through but I can't hear anything...

Just watched the Team Viewer video... thanks all.

I have an i7 with a gtx970 which I use for photo/video capture and editing, is it possible for me to connect to it remotely and do the editing on another pc? My other pc is only Core Quad, so what I really want to know is, would the editing be performed on the i7 using all its resources (ram, graphics card) while the quad just "streamed" what was being rendered? Recommendations on remote software would also be of great help. Thanks.

Thanks captain amd W-L for the great video link. Kinda got the gist of it, was just confused why my quad was performing twice (sometimes even more) as slow with the video encoding than the dual, even though it had a much better processor, double the ram and a much better graphics card...

I have the following HDD drives: 1x 6gb/s,7200rpm,64mb cache,1tb. 1x 3gb/s,5400rpm,64mb cache,1tb. 3x 3gb/s,7200rpm,16mb cache,500gb. 1x 3gb/s,7200rpm,8mb cache,250gb. Originally I used a Core2Quad@2.6ghz,4gb ddr3@533mhz (1pair), with a nvidia gt430 for gaming, and for office work I had a Pentium dual core@2.9ghz,2gb ddr3@533mhz(single), with nvidia 9500gt. Never really thought much about hard drives apart from the size, but after doing some video encoding on both of the pcs, I noticed the quad core was slower than the dual (and by quite a bit). The dual has a 3gb/s,8mb cache for the OS, and a 3gb/s,16mb cache for downloads and documents. The quad has a 3gb/s,8mb cache for the OS, and the 5400rpm,3gb/s,1tb for downloads and documents. Both run win7 64bit and downloads are quite intensive. As I stored the videos for encoding on the 5400rpm drive, I'm wondering was this affecting the time of the encodes? I now have an i7 with a nvidia gtx970 which I will dedicate for gaming, but I also have an elgato video capture card, so should I use the 6gb/s hard drive solely for the video capture/editing rather than use it to install the OS and games? Is the rule of thumb fastest rpm with largest cache for documents (stuff thats opened and edited often) or should they kept for the OS and program installs? I presume partitioning is out of the question as they would still use up the same bandwidth? Suggestions for all 3 configs (gaming: i7, misc: quad & office work: dual) would be very much appreciated.

From what I read up so far, 16GB DDR3 (2400 should be the optimal frequency). The multi threads of the i7 (generally the more the better) will help out with the video editing/rendering (obviously, unless you want to go for the more expensive Enthusiasts CPUs which would probably be lots better). Then just check your RAM usage in the Task Manager under performance - if it reaches 80-90% then you could do with having more RAM. I'm more concerned with the dual/quad channel memory setups as it appears the channels are utilized to use the RAM in a specific optimal configuration, so if you decide not to fully populate the memory slots - you lose out - if you decide to upgrade later - you lose out!?!? Anyone help out with this?

Thanks STRMfrmXMN - was aware of the different gen socket types and multi-threading - just wasn't aware that i7 had that much more threading. Hmm... swaying a little towards the i7 now...

ilikemacandpc - my budget is as small as possible I also need the video capture for console gaming. Never considered that - great advice. Thanks. I'm wondering if its best to start with a i5 then changing it to an i7 later if I need to (they both use the same sockets right? So I'll basically be able to keep everything I've just bought - the price is about $100 difference - surely it'll drop or a faster model will be out by the time I feel I need to update?). In terms of performance - how much of a difference is there between the 2 processors? Also, when it comes to overclocking - how much of a performance gain is there? 3.6GHz to 4+GHz? How much is that really? :blink:

I want to build a gaming rig to run AAA games at 1920x1080 resolution (single monitor setup) thats going to allow me to have ultra settings on most games and possibly some headroom for games coming out in the next year or two. Not really considering overclocking at this time (can someone persuade me otherwise?). I will be doing some video/image editing - Photoshop, Premiere, After Effects, and will have a video capture card in the system - though for the moment, I don't think I'm that concerned about rendering times, as long as its reasonable - I gather the video capture and running AAA games on the other hand will be a major factor? Need some advice on cpu, ram and video card (I kinda have a budget in place but open to recommendations)... I am leaning towards a Haswell CPU - is i7 the way to go or can I get away with an i5? I presume DDR3 2400s (16GB setup) is the way to go? With this dual/quad channel configuration going on, I'm a bit concerned that if I want to start up with a 8GB setup and consider upgrading in the future - will there be issues? If not, then what do I have to bear in mind? With video cards, I'm at a complete loss as to what I can get away with and not have to worry of it having a lifespan of at least 3 years? I know most recommendations will sway towards the 970/980s - but do I really need this much performance if I'm only looking for 1920x1080 for a single monitor setup? Also, should I be concerned that DirectX 12 will be coming out soon? Thanks guys.