Strike105X

As someone that also had an overclocked FX (mine was an FX8300, which i kept at 4.7Ghz for most of the time i had it, but eventually i managed a 5Ghz oc) i understand your confusion, i dunno the technicality behind it but most games just aren't able to properly utilize FX cpu's, the only game i found to use it properly is Battlefield 1, although The Witcher 3 does a pretty nice job as well, Mass Effect Andromeda as well if i remember right, which is a shame, a 5Ghz properly overclocked FX 8 core can give performances close to my i7 6700 both in software and games (based on my BF1 results, i lost the gaming benchmarks but i still have the cinebench results) if used to its full potential (basically all cores/modules): Save yourself the frustration, there is no fix for this, as it is how games are coded, if you want to use that GTX 1070 to its full potential you will have to either stick to games that can properly use all its 8 threads, or change to a new platform.

For the 2-3 games that support cf properly it would work okay, but might need some tweaking, its somewhere at an 1070 level: So if you really want to do that i suggest selling your card and get something better.

I honestly dunno which to choose, Anthem seems more to my liking but content wise leaves a lot to be desired, battlefield 5 i guess i could have some fun online but the sp doesn't seem like it would hook me up much... So i dunno which to choose.

Imho apart from a cheap emulation rig which doesn't need more then basic driver support this cards are more popular then they should... For day to day usage and general gaming it seems to cumbersome.

No use DDU right from the start, as for how to use, its easy just boot into safe mode and run DDU it will do everything automatically.

Upon reading again your post it seems we both misunderstood each other. I said the second gpu will render its own desktop environment and that remains true. But i also said that unless an application has the option to specify which gpu to use even if its shown on the secondary screen that app will be rendered by the main gpu. In the case of your example while the desktop is rendered by the second gpu the game window itself will be rendered by the main gpu and only shown on the secondary screen via buffer. But if the game supports graphics card selection you could play it only using the secondary gpu. Problem is not much supports it.

Actually you need to check your facts, it shows both gpu being utilized in windows 10, i do admit that i had no idea that xp also had this feature but it did came back with windows 10. This works with both with igpu and dedicated graphics card, the problem is as i said this days few things support multiple gpu usage. Edit: And yes this did not work with vista, 7, 8, 8.1, it only came with 10.

This is wrong, windows 10 is the first windows to properly support multiple gpu configurations, this is also a major feature of directx 12, which goes one step beyond and can utilize two different cards to render the same thing (to bad devs don't implement it though). Windows wise each card will render its own desktop environment and is capable to each render things independently from one another. But, and here comes the ugly but, software wise your not going to find many that utilize this feature, even if the 770 will rend its own desktop, programs such as browsers, photoshop, etc. will still use the main card the 1080 TI to render themselves (even if your working on the 770 screen). There's very few apps that take advantage of multiple gpu configurations (folding and minning ones are the only ones that come right at the top of my head). This is why unless there's a very specific need/case for it unfortunately its useless. I suggest just hooking a second screen to the 1080 TI. PS: the way this works both cards don't even have to be the same brand, in theory you can mix any amd, nvidia or intel and amd igpu's with a dedicated gpu, from what i heard, appart from the dx12 features i mentioned the technology was developed mainly for letting laptops use external gpu's.

I was at work and i just skimmed through it, mainly at the power draw, now that i had the chance to properly look at it i call bs... First of the power draws are given as averages which is down right stupid to take that as reference, energy consumption readings can't be given the same as FPS where you can look at averages and you have an idea where its at, low values aside, peek value really matters in this cases, second thing, overclock aside that is for sure no modded vega board, if you take those values as "good" they correspond more to the actual default vega 56 power consumption, not one that uses the mod, third your calculating your PSU values wrong, you take your base system consumption and you need to add to that 20-40% so if we look there while for a total system draw of 475w you would be okay with a good 650w psu i do feel that the sweet spot would be a decent 750w one. That out of the way here is a proper review comparing the cards, as i said there's something fishy about the values given there: And here is again a proper video about the vega 56 mod, which yes it is impressive but also very taxing on the PSU: Oh that's a great PSU, you can get an RX vega without issues, same for overclocking it, but i wouldn't recommend the mod in the video above, if your still curious about the Asus ROG Strix RTX 2060 there's a nice review here:

No, what i meant was more in the line that you need a decent 750w to run that mod.

Yes, but at what power draw...

The exact brand and model is important. If its 650w and not one of better ones you could find yourself underpowered for the vega.

I recommend the asus to, better quality, better costumer service.

I usually ddu twice to be honest when it comes to amd drivers, yes i had instances when i had to do it twice. My recommendation is as the others said, for just 5-7 minutes max of effort it takes to use ddu its not worth the hassle such conflicts could bring, use ddu.