Jump to content

jimithebear

Member
  • Posts

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards

This user doesn't have any awards

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

jimithebear's Achievements

  1. The Spectre BIOS fix supplied by Asus doesn't appear to affect performance? Notice I disabled Meltdown protection (via a registry setting) and restarted. The Meltdown fix is software based and was provided by Microsoft (in my case for Windows 7). That's what causes the slow down (although I haven't noticed it?). I can't comment for Windows 8.1/10 though.
  2. Here is Asus list of motherboards with updates incoming. The Z97 line only appeared recently? https://www.asus.com/News/V5urzYAT6myCC1o2 Your Asus Z170I Pro Gaming is among them. Was released a few weeks ago? https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/Z170I-PRO-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/
  3. As of today Asus have started rolling out BIOS updates to fix the Spectre flaws on their Z97 series motherboards. At least in some regions such as in the UK. e.g. https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/Z97A/HelpDesk_BIOS/ https://www.asus.com/uk/supportonly/SABERTOOTH Z97 MARK 2/HelpDesk_BIOS/ Someone needs to tell their support staff. Source https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?98738-SPECTRE-and-MELTDOWN-Bug-rocks-Intel-ARM-CPUs/page60#post715845 Anyhow, these are currently in beta so update at your own risk. I've successfully updated my Sabertooth Z97 Mark 2. InSpectre confirms my Haswell CPU is finally protected. Just need Microsoft now to supply a decent Meltdown patch for Windows 7 that doesn't hamper performance.
  4. I was hoping for a more difinitive guide but I understand the severe time constrants. I referred to this guide when deciding on my fan setup last year; http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/02/10/the-big-cooling-investigation/ The guide's a bit old and uses a Fractal Design Define R3. Everything was tested though including fans on the side, bottom, top (exhaust) etc. Temperatures on the motherboard chipset were also monitored.
  5. A very good point Sauron. So perhaps it's specific to the game itself as MrPix later wrote; I have just tested in some DX11 games/simcades/sims and there is no such increase, in fact < 1% in most cases. rF2 however seems to benefit greatly at the high end with 1080p resolutions and less so with higher resolutions. Strange... a programming or compiling issue then? Is that even possible? Would be nice if a rFactor 2 dev would take a look.
  6. I've found the two other system's DrR1pper was comparing his GTX 970 / i5-2500K @ 4.3GHz stats with; 1227mhz core/1753mhz mem Min: 100 - Max: 149 - Avg: 126.399 (86.7% your Sentri's performance) 1316mhz core/1753mhz mem Min: 103 - Max: 154 - Avg: 130.022 (87.8% your MJP's performance) So you two are getting correct relative performance scores per your clock speed settings to one another but i'm losing out 12-13% performance. Hmmm Sentri's running an I7 4790k 4Ghz. MJP - i5-3570K @ 3.6GHz. Right, so technically we could dismiss the above comparison based on the differentiating hardware being used? Still doesn't explain MrPix's findings though?
  7. Same system/components for MrPix; I'm on I7-3820... I have to force PCIe3.0 100% sure on 3.0 @ x16 (after applying with force gen3 executable as admin, rebooting and checking in AIDA64 Engineers edition! I believe he's referring to this patch? http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3135/~/geforce-gen3-support-on-x79-platform
  8. Many thanks and agreed, those are some pretty high numbers. The minium FPS DrR1pper reported for his affected GTX 970 is a little more relevant I guess? Although 12% isn't as much of a drop in performance? GPU: MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G (manual overclock) - 1489 core/1847 mem (+311/+95) Time: 67564ms - Min: 108 - Max: 165 - Avg: 138.121 Note, I don't know whose other GTX 970 he's comparing his results with? If you could hammer the card further (like enabling ShadowPlay for instance?) plus utilise one or two extra PCIe cards, could it spell more danger I wonder?
  9. Source; http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/22009-Massive-FPS-gains-in-rf2-using-PCI-e-3-0-x16-with-higher-end-cards! Is this story an Intel plant hoping this will go viral in an effort to force users off Sandy Bridge? Will AMD be forced to 'rush' a chipset supporting PCIe 3.0 to market?! The general consensus up until now is that there are almost negliable performance gains running GPUs over PCIe 3.0 x16 versus x8 / PCIe 2.0 x16, especially at lower resolutions. TechAde on the rFactor 2 forum however has pointed the finger at the PCIe bus as to the reason a performance disparity exists benchmarking the game on identical GPUs. And he appears to be correct?! I've posted MrPix's benchmarking results below; PCIe 2 vs 3..... with desktop and game at 1080p and scaling on Display not GPU... GPU: EVGA GTX 980 SC OC #1 (1550MHz, Mem 1900MHz, TDP < 88%) PCIe 2.0 @ x16 Time: 67875ms - Avg: 145.655 - Min: 113 - Max: 176 PCIe 3.0 @ x16 Time: 67627ms - Avg: 187.975 - Min: 153 - Max: 216 so a 29% average increase, 22% max, and the most important ... 35% min increase on a single card! Pasted from; http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/21983-Live-Performance-Benchmarking-Comparison-for-rFactor-2?p=311380&viewfull=1#post311380 DrR1pper reports his GTX 970 suffers a 12% performance drop due to PCIe 2.0 x16 - thanks to his Sandy Bridge processor. But don't take their word for it, run the benchmark for yourselves! Download the free demo, all the settings you need are here; http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/21983-Live-Performance-Benchmarking-Comparison-for-rFactor-2 Credit to TechAde, DrR1pper and MrPix on the ISI Forum!
  10. Bottlenecks, bottlenecks, bottlenecks! Cunning how Samsung's pushing a new SSD using a 5 year old bus interface to consumers whilst servicing OEMs with a more up-to-date solution - their XP941 M.2 PCIe SSD. £400 for 512GB in the UK at the mo. Plus they've already announced the successor to that - the SM951. Apple will probably gobble all of those up as well? There are no excuses for those with older motherboards. Grab a cheap £15 adapter like the Lycom DT-120 and you're good to go. Hmm... except I forget one minor detail. You may not be actually able to boot from the device?! Support only started with some Z97 boards upwards? Okay I get it Samsung... A side note. How about a Techquickie on PCIe lanes? How many do we actually need and what happens when a system overloads?
  11. Thanks for the video Linus. Instead of modding the case to allow for more intake fans, why not recommend the PC-Q18 instead? SilentPCReview show off some tasty pics; http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1272-page2.html Tek Syndicate also reviewed it; It comes with a 140mm intake fan with a cut out/filter to add an additional 140mm at the bottom. The exhaust fan is also 140mm. Surely a superior alternative for improved airflow? There's even an aftermarket silencing kit courtesy of Zone Mods/King Mod with pre-cut foam pieces; http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CA-168-OP I wish Fractal Design would minaturise their Define Mini further to compete with the super-minis? Using bigger 140mm fans to boot.
×