gtx 980 ti GTX 980 Ti Crysis 3

[Tytan64]

Hello, everyone!

After I got my GTX 980 Ti I was confident enough to buy Crysis 3 (finally).

I expected this GPU to be able to deliver over 60fps or more without droping below 60 fps at 1080p with maxed out settings in Crysis 3.

Even if I go down to 4xMSAA I drop below 60fps very often. I first started to annoy me when I entered the liberty dome.

At first I thought it's my CPUs fault (i5 4690K) but it isn't.

Am I doing something wrong? Is Crysis 3 still a game too heavy for a single card in 2016?

Thanks for sharing your opinion! =)

[afyeung]

4 minutes ago, Tytan64 said:

 

Yes. MSAA is very taxing in the game. Most people bench with SMAA which if implement right, it almost free.

[bomerr]

Did you overclock the 980 TI to 1450+ Mhz?

To see if your i5 is botlenecking the system use MSI Afterburner to track the GPU usage, If it drops below 99% then your CPU is a bottleneck. Also did you overclock your CPU to 4.4+ Ghz? 

[Tytan64]

Just now, bomerr said:

Did you overclock the 980 TI to 1450+ Mhz?

To see if your i5 is botlenecking the system use MSI Afterburner to track the GPU usage, If it drops below 99% then your CPU is a bottleneck. Also did you overclock your CPU to 4.4+ Ghz? 

CPU runs at 4.5GHz and 1.200V.

Since I use VSync there will be times where the GPU isn't under full load.

The GPU is a reference design card. Giving it an additional 250MHz didn't change it really.

[VerticalDiscussions]

Im pretty sure it has to do with the game still very heavy requirements. The only way you could prevent such issue from ever or 95% of times happening "drop below 60 frames, that is", would be with SLI 980's ti... Even a 980 Ti Liquid Cooled and heavy oced wouldnt cut it out.

[App4that]

What resolution are you gaming in?

And it might be your 4690k, I had one myself and it bottlenecks my 290 in games, let alone my 980ti. 

[bomerr]

36 minutes ago, Tytan64 said:

CPU runs at 4.5GHz and 1.200V.

Since I use VSync there will be times where the GPU isn't under full load.

The GPU is a reference design card. Giving it an additional 250MHz didn't change it really.

So disable vysnc to check that your GPU is always under full load. 

Also 250 Mhz is huge. But was it stable or did it downclock because of power limits? You also need to overclock the memory to 3900/7800-4000/8000mhz

[Monarch]

Crysis 3 is both GPU and CPU intensive, and you have a mid-range CPU paired with a high end graphics card. I'm pretty sure your CPU is bottlenecking. Monitor your GPU usage. If it's below 98% when your framerate drops then it's your CPU bottlenecking.

[SteveGrabowski0]

The 4690k is your weak link, Crysis 3 loves moar corez.

[Tytan64]

It's not that I don't believe you ... but can you prove it? My CPU isn't maxed out while playing Crysis 3 though. It's not warm too. "Only" about 50°C

[SteveGrabowski0]

 

 

[ybriK]

46 minutes ago, Tytan64 said:

It's not that I don't believe you ... but can you prove it? My CPU isn't maxed out while playing Crysis 3 though. It's not warm too. "Only" about 50°C

Your CPU isn't meant to be 100% on all 4 threads for this game, or any other game at this very moment. Crysis 3 is one of those games that require both powerful multi-core CPUs and high-end GPUs. Yes your 4690K is a "bottleneck" for this game. MSAA is very taxing and pointless imho, stick to SMAA or TXAA.

 

 

 

 

[Glenwing]

Underclock your CPU back to 4.0GHz and see if the framerates go down. That will tell you if your CPU is the bottleneck. Crysis 3 is very CPU intensive though it depends on what part of the game you are in. Particularly outdoors, I can even max out an overclocked i7-2600K with dual 780 Ti, but that is without AA. With that enabled I'd expect you to be limited by your GPU, yes even with a 980 Ti. You should also use SMAA rather than MSAA as it is more efficient.

[Tytan64]

4xMSAA is what nVidia GeForce experience has suggested.

I even tried to disable Anti-Alaising and using DSR 2x and 4x. It was terrible (in therms of frames).

So what do you suggest? Why is SMAA so much better?

[App4that]

Well, my suggestion is you sell the 4690k while you can still get something for it and get a 4790k that will offer the performance you're looking for. 

Thats exactly what I did. 

Once everyone catches on that the 4690k can't keep up, good luck selling it.

[Tytan64]

7 minutes ago, App4that said:

Well, my suggestion is you sell the 4690k while you can still get something for it and get a 4790k that will offer the performance you're looking for. 

Thats exactly what I did. 

Once everyone catches on that the 4690k can't keep up, good luck selling it.

I knew you'd come back and hate on my i5

I'd like to have a real 8-core processor instead. Not what AMD is offering right now nor what Intel offers in my price range. 5 frames isn't worth upgrading for a lot of money imo

[App4that]

It's honestly a larger difference than 5fps. Hell, even my multitasking for my homework is improved. And I'm not hating on the 4690k, as I said I had one and it's a great CPU. But it's not a CPU for someone looking to use their PC like we do. I even hit the capabilities of my 4790k sometimes. So if I had something more powerful I could utilize it. Not that I'm limited by the 4790k like I was the 4690k though. 

[Tytan64]

Maybe I could get more frames than 60 in Crysis 3 with an i7 4790K but I wouldn't really notice since I only own a 60Hz panel. Man I'd give my soul for an eight-core i5 or i7

I dislike the IO shield of my mobo very much. That's why I'm looking foreward to change the whole system instead of just the processor

[App4that]

That makes sense. Though in a year Intel is moving on to the 10nm processors so I'd be wary of spending too much. Skylake is basically already a dead end. 

If you can limp along for a year might not be a bad idea. 

[Tytan64]

10 minutes ago, App4that said:

That makes sense. Though in a year Intel is moving on to the 10nm processors so I'd be wary of spending too much. Skylake is basically already a dead end. 

If you can limp along for a year might not be a bad idea. 

Well, maybe AMD offers something fitting for me with ZEN.

I doubt their processors will be more powerful than my current. But I can still dream ...

[App4that]

15 minutes ago, Tytan64 said:

Well, maybe AMD offers something fitting for me with ZEN.

I doubt their processors will be more powerful than my current. But I can still dream ...

My guess is that Zen matches or beats Skylake. Which is why Intel dumped Skylake so quickly. The new 10nm stuff should blow AMD out of the water. 

[Glenwing]

3 hours ago, Tytan64 said:

4xMSAA is what nVidia GeForce experience has suggested.

I even tried to disable Anti-Alaising and using DSR 2x and 4x. It was terrible (in therms of frames).

So what do you suggest? Why is SMAA so much better?

Well, DSR is an even less efficient form of AA, 4x DSR is the same as playing at 4K in terms of load on the GPU.

SMAA is a newer and more efficient form of AA compared to MSAA.

[Tytan64]

16 hours ago, Glenwing said:

Well, DSR is an even less efficient form of AA, 4x DSR is the same as playing at 4K in terms of load on the GPU.

SMAA is a newer and more efficient form of AA compared to MSAA.

Thank you very much for telling me.

I just thought about it because I run 4k DSR on Dark Souls II and it looks gorgeous on my 1080p panel

Maybe I should use SMAA on that too?