xFluing

Full specs in sig.

I was wondering if my 550W TX-M Corsair PSU is enough. I've had the card for almost 2 months and I haven't had any problems with it yet (except for a very very very specific scenario I'll get into later). PSU calculator even calculates a need for only 450w so I'm guessing I should be good right?

I also noticed that at least according to my RivaTuner overlay the total power used by CPU + GPU never goes above about 200 W, maybe 250 W in the worst case.

What brought this on is I noticed slight artifacts in a very very fringe scenario (a Portal 1 mod called Rexaura) and I heard that insufficient power can cause artifacting (but again the fringe nature of the situation makes me think it's just programming on the mod's part), though I highly doubt a mod of a 15 year old game would require THAT much power draw.

I just realised a good alternative would be upgrading my PSU and use the one I have now in the "steam machine"

However I still feel like I'd overspend as I've watched my power consumption (albeit through rivatuner) and cpu + gpu wouldn't consume more than 200W total so I still feel I'm way within spec of my current power supply, even in a very demanding game like Callisto Protocol (which I got for free with my card, however the game is too boring for me)

2 hours ago, PDifolco said:

Unless you live in a country/house/whatever with very clean power and UPS, cheaping out 20 bucks and risking to fry your setup seems to me a bad bet...

Chances are whatever im using wont need enough power to fry anything

I am trying to make pretty much a glorified steam machine that im gonna use purely for streaming games from my main pc and I dont want to spend that much on it.

Chances are it wont be needing too much horsepower and I already have an old athlon x4 860k which should be more than enough for this. I will also be using my old r7 250 as a display adapter.

I already used this setup with a cheap psu my old case came with and it didnt have issues, however its way too loud which is why i want to get a better one.

On 11/24/2022 at 6:32 PM, markers said:

Is 50$ for geforce gtx 1050 ti 4gb a good deal?

I'd stretch that budget to a 1060 3GB, as that's the real 1050 TI as opposed to what the name would suggest. You'll get way more for your money.

Just now, FieryOtaku said:

The issue happened before I used the riser with the 2080ti which I had plugged directly into the motherboard.  My display cable is DP to DP and HDMI to HDMI for my 2nds monitor.

The only other options left to check could be the cpu or motherboard, maybe even RAM. An overheating CPU tends to shut off your computer to save itself from burning.

Junction temp is only the temperature of the hottest spot. What is the regular (edge) temp?

Also maybe check the tension on the mounting screws so it's all even, even going as far as maybe replacing the thermal paste.

It could very well also be bad cooler contact. I know I had that issue with my old RX580 from XFX.

You could check the riser, that's what might be causing the issues.

And this is quite the shot in the dark, but do you happen to also be using a video cable adapter?

Me and many others have only lost video signal though, not quite the whole PC crashing but it's worth checking that too as it's a quite obscure issue.

On 11/22/2022 at 1:25 AM, adb push said:

before just disabling freesync try this and see if it helps. 

OK so if it is what I think it is - because I stumbled upon this previously - I JUST figured out right now that indeed it was because discord (which uses chromium) was open on my other monitor. I just didn't make the connection.

22 minutes ago, jaslion said:

Neither works as they need a pcie 6 pin.

 

The 6500 also sucks badly on pce 3.0.

 

As for op just get a LOW PROFILE gtx 1650 but keep in mind that i5 WILL hold it back. In half the games quite a bit even.

 

The 6500 and 6400 will perform flat out bad as you really need pcie 4.0 for them. No need to upgrade the psu with gtx 1650. Just make sure you get a LOW PROFILE card. That means a HALF HEIGHT pcie card.

The 1650 straight up is not worth the money. You're better off burning it than spending it on a regular 1650

While I was writing this I did some more experimenting and I found out my issues were caused by having freesync enabled on the monitor itself (probably an issue with the monitor firmware). After turning it off from the monitor everything seems to be working fine. If you want to keep freesync, disconnect the other monitor. It's a pick your poison situation so just pick the lesser of the evils befitting of your situation or needs.

I am leaving this here anyway even though it's solved just in case someone else stumbles upon an issue as obscure as this

Title says it all. In a select few games, when I have my 60 Hz monitor connected - it causes the main monitor to sort of stutter. The frame output from the game is fine, it says 140+ FPS in all these cases, but for whatever reason it acts as if it were a lower refresh rate - maybe it's a Windows thing and it tries to match the refresh rates together?

The monitor also correctly reports as being set to 144 Hz.

What I tried so far:

• Disabled full screen optimizations
• Disabling freesync (from the driver)
• Enabling V-sync in game

13 minutes ago, Pixelfie said:

Yes, but keep in mind that the 6400 will be bottlenecked a lot by PCIe 3.0 because it has only 2 lanes. Try seeing if you can find a 1650.

 

Another option is getting an RX 6600 with a new PSU, but knowing Dell that's probably not going to fit in the case. If it does, I recommend doing this.

A 1650 super I might add - 1650 non-super is a waste of money, or maybe even an RX 6500 (or second hand RX 580 if OP can afford to risk it)

Just now, Mel0n. said:

Was watching a video on my laptop (Precision M6700, I7-3840QM, HD 4000 + Quadro K4000M) when I got a memory management BSOD. Rebooted and noticed 3D applications were running horribly, so I checked Nvidia control panel but it... wasn't there. Checked Device Manager and the only card that showed up was the Intel HD one. Went into the BIOS and it's the only video controller detected. Before this point, the Quadro card ran as a GPU should, and it was cooled well (never went above the 65c mark). What happened here? Is it totally dead? It's an MXM card, so is it possible it just slipped out of the slot or something? I can open up the laptop and check but I have a feeling the failure won't be obvious. Could the laptop motherboard be the issue?

Edit: Nvidia folder disappeared from my C drive after this happened.

I mean you pretty much answered your own question - take apart the laptop see if it's one of those models that could come loose and come back. Maybe try installing the drivers again who knows what could have happened.

Otherwise I think it might be dead.

40 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

Merged to official video thread.

Thanks, had no idea this was a thing.

In the video they call the GK104 anemic compared to GP106, however tier-for-tier it's the GP-106 that's more anemic as it's a lower tier than GK104; imagine how much faster the 1060 (6gb the REAL 1060) would have been had it had the mid-range GP104 chip it should have had.

No, performance does not matter it's NOT mid-range performance, because it's not on a mid-range chip. The real midrange performance is on the 1070 and 1080 which do indeed have the GP104

7 minutes ago, Stahlmann98 said:

In most games where you can't turn it lower or off, it's a significant part of the experience or even game mechanics. I wouldn't recommend to run NVIDIA and AMD at the same time.

Well yeah that's exactly why I want to run physx discretely so that the essential part of the game doesn't chug the whole game because execution time is slow AF on the CPU.

Just now, Mateyyy said:

PhysX is done on the CPU anyway in most games nowadays.

You'd just be causing potential driver issues, extra hassle, losing a PCIe slot and adding in a small bit of extra power consumption.

Yeah because dropping my framerate to 15 because the game doesn't have an option to turn off physx is all I want (games such as antichamber)

I was wondering if it would be possible to get a low power nvidia card like a 1050 or something to use it for physx while also having an AMD card in the system.

I want to know two things with this:

• If I could tell NVCP to only use the card for physx and nothing else
• If having both nvidia and AMD would cause any driver issues or blue screens

1 hour ago, narrdarr said:

Ghostery 

And

No script

 

Neither of those help, I'm looking for an adblock / ublock origin filter.

I'm using ublock origin and I think I've narrowed it down to this

However, the number in the brackets keeps changing. Is there a way I could make the filter block all of the sponsored posts regardless of "nth-of-type"? Like a regular expression or something.

Also I can't just delete everything and have just ##div there otherwise it will delete all the posts.

I am using Windows 10, an RX 580 video card, and my main monitor (Viewsonic VX2458) is connected through Displayport, with a secondary one (Samsung Syncmaster) through a HDMI to VGA adapter.

Whenever I turn off the main monitor, the system acts as if I outright unplugged the monitor and moves everything to the secondary monitor. The same does not happen if I turn off the secondary monitor. Can I prevent this from happening?

8 minutes ago, AdvancedMicroDisapointment said:

If I had to guess likely cost or something like that. Maybe they didn't think enough people used it to justify the extra production cost. I can't think of reason that would prevent them from being able to do it now

I thought all monitors were like that, where they'd come with a cable that on one end it plugs into the PSU instead of a dedicated power cord.

I remember some really old PCs used to have a passthrough for plugging in the monitor. It seems very efficient as you wouldn't need to take up an extra plug with your monitor and I'm wondering what caused them to phase out?

I honestly liked this aspect ratio, I had two main monitors like that (unknowingly, i did not know aspect ratios back then) and I have to say it seems to be a very good aspect ratio, being the best compromise between 4:3 and 16:9. You get more vertical space, but also get the benefits of a wide monitor, and because there's more vertical space to work with I could argue that they have the potential of being a bit more immersive.