sgloux3470

First thought is the drivers are a bit messed up. A clean install may help. Any idea what sort of clockspeeds and temperatures you're getting in the benchmarks?

Best advice is to just ignore anyone who uses the word bottleneck.

The stock behaviour will boost 1-2 cores to much higher speeds than you will ever get with an all core manual OC. For gaming this is often more beneficial than making the entire chip faster.

Power draw is a lot lower when you don't have 130%+ power limit though.

CPU bottleneck. Overclock CPU and memory to get higher FPS if you really need it. For memory just enable XMP if it isn't already.

3600 or 3700X would be faster but I don't think you'd see enough benefit to justify the cost.

If they bumped the 4 core to an 8 core count that would make sense to do. Past 8 cores is largely irrelevant for gaming. 4 cores has faltered in certain multithreaded titles and should no longer be the definitive factor for gaming performance. This would solve i3/i5 hitting above their weight without unduly rewarding Ryzen extra points for high core counts that bring little benefit as far as gaming is concerned.

Just upgraded myself from a 1600 to a 3600 and I'll tell you why. 3600 is quite a bit faster single thread and equal in multithread to a 2700X. And atleast when I was looking the other day the price was identical. The IPC boost of Zen 2 vs original Zen is huge on top of faster corespeeds.

Make sure TAA is disabled. Use SMAA or turn anti-aliasing off and see if it fixes the issue. I can't find any other reports of this issue, but people have reported flickering on other cards. You can try rolling back drivers to an older version and see if the issue goes away.

The only way to do this is to limit framerate. Ideally, you want to have enough headroom that the game itself will run at a locked 60 FPS with Obs recording. More demanding games will make that tricky, especially on a GTX 1080. I'm not sure how theoretically limiting utilization would be beneficial over a straight framerate limit but regardless it is not possible.

Get 2080 ti black edition. Don't waste money putting a water cooler on it. I bought a black edition and overclocked it in the range of 1850-1950 MHz out of the box with temps sitting around 75C Threw a hybrid cooler on it and while the temps sit around 55 C under full load, it's pretty much maxing out the power limit at ~1900-2000 MHz. So really you have two options towards the 2080 ti 1. Buy black edition. Run it at 50% fan speed, OC it to pretty good levels and spend $1000 USD 2. Buy a higher end card that can flash the highest power limit BIOS onto it and put it under water and maybe get 2100 MHz for an extra 5% performance. This will cost you around $1400 USD.

SLI is usually more cost effective in the midrange. 2x cheaper cards will offer the same performance as a single card that cost more than both combined. The last couple of generations from Nvidia have been bad for this though due to the ever-increasing cost of mid range cards. (both 970 SLI and 1070 SLI were more or less identical in price and cost to the 980Ti and 1080Ti) But back in the day I bought 2x R9 270x cards for $490 CAD which was quite a bit cheaper than the R9 290x which was around $600 CAD and the 780Ti was in the stratosphere at $700 CAD. I was getting very similar performance for a much better pricepoint. They didn't even offer NVLINK for the 2070 because the price is so inflated. $500 for midrange is a joke.

My general recommendation for SLI or not is as follows: If you're playing at a resolution higher than 1440p, SLI will be a significant boost in most games. If you're trying to play at 1440p or lower at higher framerates you probably want a faster single GPU. All that being said, a 1080 would be a weak upgrade. You'll spend $400ish for one for ~25% performance when you could instead spend $600ish for double the performance with a 1080Ti/2080/Vega II. A second 1070 would end up being significantly more cost effective than both options of course but with the caveats that come with SLI. Some games won't support it, some will require Nvidia inspector and in other cases you'll be CPU limited anyway and won't see the benefit. It does when a used 1070 is $250 and a 1080ti or equivalent is more than double that. You could get 4 1070's for one 2080ti lol.

2080Ti is about 30% more performance. 1080Ti SLI is anywhere between 50-80% in most titles that support SLI and obviously 0% in those that don't. Depending on what you play or want to play the recommendation can be very different. I don't like to recommend SLI for pushing high refresh rate though. Your scaling can be severely limited by CPU/memory speed and AFR seems to have some extra overhead over an equivalent GPU. However since you've asked about Anthem and Destiny 2, both games will support SLI pretty well. Anthem I believe requires you to use Nvidia Inspector to set a custom profile for now though.

On air I was getting around 1800-1950 MHz under heavy loads. (Time Spy for example) with temps around 76-78 C with fans set to around 50%. (But that was with very good case airflow, 2x 140 mm intake fans and a side 1x 120mm outtake fan next to GPU) I was running a core clock offset of +170 MHz and +750 MHz on the memory. After slapping a hybrid cooler on it I'm getting about 100 MHz extra and it doesn't drop clockspeed as much. By default you lose 15 MHz every 2-3 degrees C over 55 degrees I think so once the card got up to 78 C or so it would be around 1830 MHz in heavy loads. Here's some 3Dmark Timespy scores to compare. My Best Air Score My Best Hybrid Score Graphics Score increased by 6% going from air to an EVGA hybrid cooler.

You're CPU limited in two different ways. 1. In FFXV the game does not fully utilize all threads of a CPU so your framerate will be held back. You could boost the resolution to 4K and get the same framerate. 2. In BFV which will happily use as many threads as it can you're still CPU limited because you're pushing too many frames for the CPU/RAM to handle. You can squeeze out more frames by overclocking the clockspeed of your CPU and RAM. BFV also benefits from having 16 GB of memory. However in both cases you will simply not be able to reach full utilization of the 2080 Ti. Atleast not until you can buy a processor that runs twice as fast.

I wouldn't recommend SLI if your goal is to push high framerate numbers. I've found it works best when you want to push higher graphical quality settings or higher resolution. 1080 SLI is excellent for 4K gaming but not so much for 1440p targeting 144 Hz. I can highly recommend the Black edition 2080 Ti. I have the card myself and I tell everyone DO NOT BUY ANY OTHER 2080 TI. You will spend $200-400 more for 5% more performance. Run the black edition through the OC scanner in Afterburner and you'll be within spitting distance of the absolute best card you can buy on water.

I just use 3dmark to make sure I'm gaining performance/not crashing etc and then play a bunch of games. You can also run a 3Dmark stress test that will do 20 runs in a row which is pretty good. The caveat is you have to make sure the game is fully loading the GPU. With Vega this means 4K.

The only reason Nvidia has the limitations of only certain cards can SLI and only identical cards etc is because they don't want to QA everything. I believe a SLI bridge is still mandatory though. (But AMD hasn't needed a bridge for a long ass time, so I'm not sure why Nvidia requires it still.) All you have to do is trick the Nvidia driver to allowing you to enable SLI and voila, hence Different-SLI. (Obviously it's a huge pain in the ass to do this.)

One thing to keep in mind however is that it is possible for Raytracing to run on mGPU as shown by the 3DMark Port Royale benchmark. If you are interested in ray tracing features then it is possible that games like Battlefield V and Metro Exodus will eventually support DX12 MGPU and thus raytracing with the second card. (Dice has always gone back and added mGPU to Mantle/DX12 eventually.) It's possible that Shadow of the Tomb Raider will also benefit since it already supports DX12 MGPU once they add the RTX features. I would wait for that to materialize before committing to that build though since right now it is still more common for DX12/Vulkan games to just not support SLI at all. Based on the Port Royal benchmark 2080 SLI is roughly 25% faster than a single 2080 Ti under a Raytracing workload.

Those specific titles are likely completely CPU bound for you on either GPU since they are very CPU heavy. That being said, in many other games you will be able to enable higher quality settings and achieve higher framerates. I would just keep the GPU while saving up to upgrade the CPU/Mobo/RAM, or perhaps replacing it with a 2060 and going for the upgrade sooner.

Assuming you did so in 2014 when the card launched you would have 1070 level performance for nearly 2 years before the 1070 came out. (Or just shy of a year before the 980Ti came out for the same cost as 2x 970's) Performance is close but 970 SLI does edge out the 1070 slightly, however the one caveat is that the 970 had gimped VRAM which would mean that in some titles you might not be able to use as high of texture quality settings. As far as 2014/2015 era SLI support things were good. Dragon age Inquisition, Shadow of mordor, Alien Isolation, Advanced Warfare, The Evil Within, Far Cry 4, Watch Dogs, Assassins Creed Unity, Thief, Titanfall, Lords of the Fallen, Witcher 3, MGSV Phantom Pain, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Evolve, Assassins Creed Syndicate, Battlefield Hardline, Just Cause 3, Rainbow Six Siege, Dying Light, Battlefront, Fallout 4 and Black Ops 3 is a quick list of AAA titles that supported SLI at the time. A few notable games that do not support SLI from that time period are Batman Arkham Knight and Wolfenstein New Order. Some of those games required external tweaking to work but most of them from my memory worked out of the box just fine. That is a pretty comprehensive list of AAA graphically demanding titles from 2014/2015. At 1080p I would suspect most of those titles would run just fine on a single 970. At the time I would have recommended 970 SLI for a 1440p target. Many of those games would have benefitted significantly from the extra performance from SLI. And obviously 1070 level performance is still excellent for 1080p even in games today so you could have still been using the same setup and playing most AAA games now just over 4 years later. Nvidia is killing SLI because they want to jack up prices. SLI constrained them - the 980 Ti could not be $800 because 970 SLI would get the same performance for much cheaper. When they removed SLI from the 1060 they could suddenly jack up the price of the 1080 to $699 when you could have theoretically bought 2x 1060's for $400-$500 and beaten it by ~10%. And they did the same with Turing: instead of being able to spend ~$1200 for 2x 2070's to handily beat the 2080Ti your only option is spend the same money on a 2080Ti. 1080 SLI beats the 2080ti and 2070 SLI would have done better. Also worth noting that SLI gains double the benefit of overclocking for obvious reasons.

It's not dead. People don't know what the fuck they are talking about. I got 80-90% scaling on my SLI 980 rig in the vast majority of games that needed the extra GPU power for 4k/60 FPS. Crossfire has less support and 90-95% scaling. There are some games that either artifact heavily with SLI or won't utilize it at all and there are a few more of those every year, but you can still play most AAA titles with it. The key is running the game at higher fidelity/resolution rather than trying to push high FPS. You will reach CPU limitations if you're using SLI at 1440p with most cards.

Download Display Driver Uninstaller and do a clean reinstall and see if that fixes it.

Looks like the GPU is performing normally there. One other thing I would recommend is to enable Exclusive Fullscreen while gaming (not Borderless mode) Otherwise nothing looks terribly wrong. As others have suggested the next step would be to use the MSI Afterburner On Screen Display to monitor the Clockspeed, GPU utilization and frametimes.