780 Upgrade Path

[Thugginator]

INTRODUCTION{
Iv'e recently obtained an NVIDIA stock 780, and an FX-8350.
I got both of these for free.
I have the 780 core clock overclocked to a stable 1070 MHZ.
But the 780 doesn't perform as good as i had hoped it would. I mainly play FO4 on ultra and I'm getting between 30-60 FPS (Mainly between 45-60).
So I've decided i wanted to upgrade from the current 780.
But through all my research im pretty much stumped.
}

RESEARCH{
MY ORIGINAL GPU BUDGET WAS UNDER 400$.
after buying the GPU I would save up more and buy a better processor (i7-4790k or an 6700k/6600k)

GTX 970 {
My first idea : I thought id just upgrade to a 970.
What i found out :The 970 only performs around the 780 doing better in some category's and also worse in others. But the card overclocks very well(So thats the main selling point for the 970 to me). So if i upgraded I might not see a boost in performance(at first) but i will have the ability to overclock the card better than the 780 and not be a generation out of the loop.
}

GTX 780 IN SLI {
Second Idea :Then i thought i should just get another 780 and put them in SLI.
What i found out :Putting them into SLI CAN produce results like that of the 980ti.
BUT, The results from graphics cards in SLI is very dependent on how much the game/application supports SLI in the first place. So while you can get amazing results, not everything supports it which can result in poor performance, crashing, and bugs. AND, ill still be one generation behind so while i might get good performance i could be missing out on new nvidia technologies. (also the 780 is discontinued so id have to find a used one or get a refurbished one)
}

980/980ti OR 390/390x {
FINAL OPTION :I just upgrade out of my price range. I would upgrade to a 980/980ti or an 390/390x. But id like to stay in my 400$ range.
}
}

CONCLUSION {
So, after all my research I'm pretty much stuck. I either play it safe and get a 970, or take a gamble with putting two 780's in SLI. Im sorry for the short essay but i do alot of research before i purchase something to make sure i make the right choice.
So yea, If you can help, Thanks so much.
}

-Cheers!

 

[geofelt]

I think your problem is the slow individual core speed of the FX-8350.
You need to overclock as high as you can.
Intel i3-4130 does about as well.
Here are some tests showing cpu scaling:
http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2182-fallout-4-cpu-benchmark-huge-performance-difference

Your $400 budget might be better spent on a cpu change.

Here are some tests you can do to validate your option.
------------------------------------------------------------
To help clarify your CPU/GPU options, run these two tests:

a) Run YOUR games, but lower your resolution and eye candy.
If your FPS increases, it indicates that your cpu is strong enough to drive a better graphics configuration.
If your FPS stays the same, you are likely more cpu limited.

b) Limit your cpu, either by reducing the OC, or, in windows power management, limit the maximum cpu% to something like 70%.
Go to control panel/power options/change plan settings/change advanced power settings/processor power management/maximum processor state/
This will simulate what a lack of cpu power will do.
Conversely what a 30% improvement in core speed might do.

You should also experiment with removing one core. You can do this in the windows msconfig boot advanced options option. set the number of processors to less than you have.
This will tell you how sensitive your games are to the benefits of many cores.

If your FPS drops significantly, it is an indicator that your cpu is the limiting factor, and a cpu upgrade is in order.

It is possible that both tests are positive, indicating that you have a well balanced system, and both cpu and gpu need to be upgraded to get better gaming FPS.
-------------------------------------------------------------

If you want a graphics upgrade, I would avoid dual cards if possible. They are more prone to stuttering and poor gameplay. FPS is not all, outlying frame times are annoying.
I would imagine that the proceeds from selling a GTX780 and $400 would buy you a GTX980ti. There is nothing better today.

If you go the cpu upgrade route, a Intel i5 of some sort would do the job.
You may not quite have the budget for a skylake i5-6600K which is as good as it gets.
If not, a lesser i5 or even a i3-6320 would be a reasonable starting point.

 

[Eggz]

I was in a similar spot with a 780 ti. It has the same amount of VRAM as the 780 but performs as fast as the 980. So the only Nvidia cards that were faster were the 980 ti and the Titan X. The thing is that they were (are) both significantly faster. It's pretty much the same for you, since the 970 sin't an upgrade from the 780 in any meaningful way.

The only GPU update you can do to create a path for yourself would be to get the current flagship, which is either the 980 ti or the Titan X. I personally went for the Titan X because I found a deal on it that made it cost only $50 more than the 980 ti (i.e. about a $350 discount). But unless you should not do that if unless you find a similar deal. The 980 ti is basically 95% as fast as the Titan X. Even though it has half of the VRAM, 6 GB will be plenty for the life of that card. You'll also be able to do SLI later if you'd like because I don't see the 6 GB buffer being a limitation, and improvements from DirectX 12 may enable the cards to share VRAM for a total of 12 (currently SLI doesn't increase VRAM).

A lingering issue, though, is your CPU. I don't think it would do a very good job of supporting SLI with two 980 ti cards or two Titan X cards (or something newer if you wait until the next flagship to come out). You'll just want to get the newest chipset and CPU when you can.

But all that costs money. For now, I'd just sit tight. You have a very capable machine for free!

Save some money for the next flagship CPU and GPU. With a budget around $400, you essentially can't afford anything better than what you currently have. Consider lowering some settings in Fallout 4. I play that too, and it seems to take up more GPU power than it really should. The graphics are less impressive looking than the GPU usage would indicate when everything is maxed out. I know for me, one of the biggest lag spikes occurs when I'm running around areas with a lot of buses and trees, so decrease the quality of those things at least.

Basically to get a better computer for gaming you'll have to spend a lot more money than you're looking to spend. You lucked out getting those parts for free! Have fun with them for a while 🙂

 

[drinkingcola86]

My experience with FO4 is this, while playing the game, my processor is only at 20-45% utilized (AMD-8320 O.C. 4.3-4.4). The part that is different between yours and mine is I run a 7950 which shouldn't play to differently on it but I'm running on medium and an fps of 60+. I don't worry to much about running on ultra for most things, in all honesty, FO4 was the first game that I couldn't run on at least high settings and stay above 60 fps.

However, I do believe you might have issues playing at Ultra and if that is the setting that you are driving for, look at the I5 which should boost you to the performance you are looking to get.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/qBs7vK

 

[wh3resmycar]

fo4 favors strong single core performance much like skyrim

 

[Thugginator]

I think your problem is the slow individual core speed of the FX-8350.
You need to overclock as high as you can.
Intel i3-4130 does about as well.
Here are some tests showing cpu scaling:
http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2182-fallout-4-cpu-benchmark-huge-performance-difference

Your $400 budget might be better spent on a cpu change.

Here are some tests you can do to validate your option.
------------------------------------------------------------
To help clarify your CPU/GPU options, run these two tests:

a) Run YOUR games, but lower your resolution and eye candy.
If your FPS increases, it indicates that your cpu is strong enough to drive a better graphics configuration.
If your FPS stays the same, you are likely more cpu limited.

b) Limit your cpu, either by reducing the OC, or, in windows power management, limit the maximum cpu% to something like 70%.
Go to control panel/power options/change plan settings/change advanced power settings/processor power management/maximum processor state/
This will simulate what a lack of cpu power will do.
Conversely what a 30% improvement in core speed might do.

You should also experiment with removing one core. You can do this in the windows msconfig boot advanced options option. set the number of processors to less than you have.
This will tell you how sensitive your games are to the benefits of many cores.

If your FPS drops significantly, it is an indicator that your cpu is the limiting factor, and a cpu upgrade is in order.

It is possible that both tests are positive, indicating that you have a well balanced system, and both cpu and gpu need to be upgraded to get better gaming FPS.
-------------------------------------------------------------

If you want a graphics upgrade, I would avoid dual cards if possible. They are more prone to stuttering and poor gameplay. FPS is not all, outlying frame times are annoying.
I would imagine that the proceeds from selling a GTX780 and $400 would buy you a GTX980ti. There is nothing better today.

If you go the cpu upgrade route, a Intel i5 of some sort would do the job.
You may not quite have the budget for a skylake i5-6600K which is as good as it gets.
If not, a lesser i5 or even a i3-6320 would be a reasonable starting point.

Thank you so much for your well detailed respond.
I will try these tests when im at my desktop(currently working).
But, I forgot to mention that if i upgrade my cpu id have to get an intel motherboard.
So id like to stick with an GPU for now. But if you firmly believe my CPU is bottle-necking my GPU than i will definitely consider a cpu upgrade.
Its just that i dont want to a get CPU that will just benefit Fallout 4 because of its massive hit on single cores. The upgrade needs to benefit everything.
-----
Are you fairly certain that SLI is a bad idea, because i could only pay 320 for a possible double in performance AND have money set aside for a new motherboard/CPU. Im aware of most of the issues with SLI but im a huge tinkerer, so i have no problem tinkering with nvidia inspector and other programs to get SLI to work properly. Im very frugal, so even though it might not always work, the prospect of double the performance is very attractive to me.

 

[Thugginator]

I was in a similar spot with a 780 ti. It has the same amount of VRAM as the 780 but performs as fast as the 980. So the only Nvidia cards that were faster were the 980 ti and the Titan X. The thing is that they were (are) both significantly faster. It's pretty much the same for you, since the 970 sin't an upgrade from the 780 in any meaningful way.

The only GPU update you can do to create a path for yourself would be to get the current flagship, which is either the 980 ti or the Titan X. I personally went for the Titan X because I found a deal on it that made it cost only $50 more than the 980 ti (i.e. about a $350 discount). But unless you should not do that if unless you find a similar deal. The 980 ti is basically 95% as fast as the Titan X. Even though it has half of the VRAM, 6 GB will be plenty for the life of that card. You'll also be able to do SLI later if you'd like because I don't see the 6 GB buffer being a limitation, and improvements from DirectX 12 may enable the cards to share VRAM for a total of 12 (currently SLI doesn't increase VRAM).

A lingering issue, though, is your CPU. I don't think it would do a very good job of supporting SLI with two 980 ti cards or two Titan X cards (or something newer if you wait until the next flagship to come out). You'll just want to get the newest chipset and CPU when you can.

But all that costs money. For now, I'd just sit tight. You have a very capable machine for free!

Save some money for the next flagship CPU and GPU. With a budget around $400, you essentially can't afford anything better than what you currently have. Consider lowering some settings in Fallout 4. I play that too, and it seems to take up more GPU power than it really should. The graphics are less impressive looking than the GPU usage would indicate when everything is maxed out. I know for me, one of the biggest lag spikes occurs when I'm running around areas with a lot of buses and trees, so decrease the quality of those things at least.

Basically to get a better computer for gaming you'll have to spend a lot more money than you're looking to spend. You lucked out getting those parts for free! Have fun with them for a while 🙂

Thank you for your response!
Youre right, i do have a very nice computer that i mostly obtained as a gift. Its just that before i got the current parts my main specs on my desktop were a AMD-6770, and an AMD Phenom Thurban II 2.8ghz 6-Core. Than i got a laptop that runs an 870m and an i7-4810MQ. I'm very very impatient. Ive been wanting to make it to the top line for a very long time. So i might just get a 980ti or wait. but ill decide that soon.

 

[geofelt]

Be careful about looking at task manager utilization.
If you see all cores used, but only 20% utilization, you might conclude that you have plenty of cpu left. But, that is a strong indicator that you are single threaded and cpu limited.
The reason is that windows spreads the activity of a single thread across all available threads.

And, yes. Going Intel will require a new motherboard and perhaps ram if you buy skylake.
Your parts do have a resale value on ebay to recoup some of the price difference.

 

[Eggz]

Be careful about looking at task manager utilization.
If you see all cores used, but only 20% utilization, you might conclude that you have plenty of cpu left. But, that is a strong indicator that you are single threaded and cpu limited.
The reason is that windows spreads the activity of a single thread across all available threads.

And, yes. Going Intel will require a new motherboard and perhaps ram if you buy skylake.
Your parts do have a resale value on ebay to recoup some of the price difference.

Single-thread bottlenecks will show up in the view showing each core. If you have one core or thread maxed out but the others aren't doing much work by comparison, then you have a single-core bottleneck even though the overall CPU utilization is low. For instance, if you have an i5 CPU with 4 cores, each core contributes up to 25% of the total CPU utilization. If just one is maxed out and the other three aren't doing anything at all, you'd have a bottleneck because one core running as fast as it can isn't enough, despite the fact that only 25% utilization of your CPU is reporting. The moral of the story is to look at how each core is reporting, not just at the overall utilization. But, from what I know about Fallout 4, it's threaded properly and doesn't overload a single core to the exclusion of the others. That was more of a DirectX 9 problem.

Thank you for your response!
Youre right, i do have a very nice computer that i mostly obtained as a gift. Its just that before i got the current parts my main specs on my desktop were a AMD-6770, and an AMD Phenom Thurban II 2.8ghz 6-Core. Than i got a laptop that runs an 870m and an i7-4810MQ. I'm very very impatient. Ive been wanting to make it to the top line for a very long time. So i might just get a 980ti or wait. but ill decide that soon.

Yeah, I think that if you overclock the CPU, it will be able to feed a 980 ti or Titan X in almost all cases, though not always perfectly. Here's a video of someone running a bunch of benchmarks with your CPU and a 980 ti to see whether the GPU was fed fast enough. It looks like you'll be okay almost always. It's enough for me to think that upgrading the GPU first would give the most benefit. You'll be able to sell the 780 for more than the CPU, and that will increase your budget enough to get a 980 ti. Even if it isn't going as fast as what you see online, it will be noticeably faster than your current setup.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8XK1y_jVhc

 

[Thugginator]

Be careful about looking at task manager utilization.
If you see all cores used, but only 20% utilization, you might conclude that you have plenty of cpu left. But, that is a strong indicator that you are single threaded and cpu limited.
The reason is that windows spreads the activity of a single thread across all available threads.

And, yes. Going Intel will require a new motherboard and perhaps ram if you buy skylake.
Your parts do have a resale value on ebay to recoup some of the price difference.

Single-thread bottlenecks will show up in the view showing each core. If you have one core or thread maxed out but the others aren't doing much work by comparison, then you have a single-core bottleneck even though the overall CPU utilization is low. For instance, if you have an i5 CPU with 4 cores, each core contributes up to 25% of the total CPU utilization. If just one is maxed out and the other three aren't doing anything at all, you'd have a bottleneck because one core running as fast as it can isn't enough, despite the fact that only 25% utilization of your CPU is reporting. The moral of the story is to look at how each core is reporting, not just at the overall utilization. But, from what I know about Fallout 4, it's threaded properly and doesn't overload a single core to the exclusion of the others. That was more of a DirectX 9 problem.

Thank you for your response!
Youre right, i do have a very nice computer that i mostly obtained as a gift. Its just that before i got the current parts my main specs on my desktop were a AMD-6770, and an AMD Phenom Thurban II 2.8ghz 6-Core. Than i got a laptop that runs an 870m and an i7-4810MQ. I'm very very impatient. Ive been wanting to make it to the top line for a very long time. So i might just get a 980ti or wait. but ill decide that soon.

Yeah, I think that if you overclock the CPU, it will be able to feed a 980 ti or Titan X in almost all cases, though not always perfectly. Here's a video of someone running a bunch of benchmarks with your CPU and a 980 ti to see whether the GPU was fed fast enough. It looks like you'll be okay almost always. It's enough for me to think that upgrading the GPU first would give the most benefit. You'll be able to sell the 780 for more than the CPU, and that will increase your budget enough to get a 980 ti. Even if it isn't going as fast as what you see online, it will be noticeably faster than your current setup.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8XK1y_jVhc

Is the 980ti really my only option? Im not in the position to sell the parts as they were a gift/lend kind of situation, is my 780 sli idea really that bad??

 

[Eggz]

There's nothing wrong with 780 SLI. The chips are fast, and having two of them would give you plenty of processing power. But they only have 3 GB of VRAM. A lot of games will fill that up (and increasingly more), and when it's totally full, it doesn't matter how much extra processing power you have in the chips - they stop and wait for the VRAM to flush out. The result is very choppy even though your cards could go faster. Running out of VRAM sucks. Having enough doesn't speed anything up. It just prevents slow downs, and current technology doesn't add VRAM when you add additional cards in SLI. They way it works now is that all of the same information gets written to each cards' VRAM. So if you're using 2 GB of VRAM, SLI puts 2GB of the same stuff on both cards. It's always mirrored, so you can't benefit from having the extra VRAM installed. Just a fact of life, I'm afraid.

But the 980 ti is almost as fast as two 780 cards in SLI, and it has twice as much VRAM. That's why I suggested it. Like I said before, the 970 isn't faster than your 780 in any real way, and the 980 is only a little faster. If you want a real upgrade, the 980 ti is the best option right now.

 

[jerdle]

Also Consider the R9 Fury / R9 Nano @ $510

They strike above the 980 and under the 980ti

 

[Eggz]

Also Consider the R9 Fury / R9 Nano @ $510

They strike above the 980 and under the 980ti

Good point. I should have mentioned those as well. Those are great cards, and the faster Fury X is about $600 while performing on par with the 980 ti a lot of the time. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131675

Only drawback of those is having only 4 GB VRAM.

 

[Thugginator]

There's nothing wrong with 780 SLI. The chips are fast, and having two of them would give you plenty of processing power. But they only have 3 GB of VRAM. A lot of games will fill that up (and increasingly more), and when it's totally full, it doesn't matter how much extra processing power you have in the chips - they stop and wait for the VRAM to flush out. The result is very choppy even though your cards could go faster. Running out of VRAM sucks. Having enough doesn't speed anything up. It just prevents slow downs, and current technology doesn't add VRAM when you add additional cards in SLI. They way it works now is that all of the same information gets written to each cards' VRAM. So if you're using 2 GB of VRAM, SLI puts 2GB of the same stuff on both cards. It's always mirrored, so you can't benefit from having the extra VRAM installed. Just a fact of life, I'm afraid.

But the 980 ti is almost as fast as two 780 cards in SLI, and it has twice as much VRAM. That's why I suggested it. Like I said before, the 970 isn't faster than your 780 in any real way, and the 980 is only a little faster. If you want a real upgrade, the 980 ti is the best option right now.

There's nothing wrong with 780 SLI. The chips are fast, and having two of them would give you plenty of processing power. But they only have 3 GB of VRAM. A lot of games will fill that up (and increasingly more), and when it's totally full, it doesn't matter how much extra processing power you have in the chips - they stop and wait for the VRAM to flush out. The result is very choppy even though your cards could go faster. Running out of VRAM sucks. Having enough doesn't speed anything up. It just prevents slow downs, and current technology doesn't add VRAM when you add additional cards in SLI. They way it works now is that all of the same information gets written to each cards' VRAM. So if you're using 2 GB of VRAM, SLI puts 2GB of the same stuff on both cards. It's always mirrored, so you can't benefit from having the extra VRAM installed. Just a fact of life, I'm afraid.

But the 980 ti is almost as fast as two 780 cards in SLI, and it has twice as much VRAM. That's why I suggested it. Like I said before, the 970 isn't faster than your 780 in any real way, and the 980 is only a little faster. If you want a real upgrade, the 980 ti is the best option right now.

The VRAM was what i was afraid of. I thought maybe it would combine but i guess not. 3gb's of vram is a downer.
I should add that at around 320-450$ i could get a 390/390x with 8gbs of vram.
I've been hearing things about DX12/MANTLE vram stacking but im pretty sure it only works on games that use SPR (split frame rendering).
As of right now the SLI option is still pretty strong because of the price to performance total ill be getting. But im still deciding.

 

[Thugginator]

There's nothing wrong with 780 SLI. The chips are fast, and having two of them would give you plenty of processing power. But they only have 3 GB of VRAM. A lot of games will fill that up (and increasingly more), and when it's totally full, it doesn't matter how much extra processing power you have in the chips - they stop and wait for the VRAM to flush out. The result is very choppy even though your cards could go faster. Running out of VRAM sucks. Having enough doesn't speed anything up. It just prevents slow downs, and current technology doesn't add VRAM when you add additional cards in SLI. They way it works now is that all of the same information gets written to each cards' VRAM. So if you're using 2 GB of VRAM, SLI puts 2GB of the same stuff on both cards. It's always mirrored, so you can't benefit from having the extra VRAM installed. Just a fact of life, I'm afraid.

But the 980 ti is almost as fast as two 780 cards in SLI, and it has twice as much VRAM. That's why I suggested it. Like I said before, the 970 isn't faster than your 780 in any real way, and the 980 is only a little faster. If you want a real upgrade, the 980 ti is the best option right now.

There's nothing wrong with 780 SLI. The chips are fast, and having two of them would give you plenty of processing power. But they only have 3 GB of VRAM. A lot of games will fill that up (and increasingly more), and when it's totally full, it doesn't matter how much extra processing power you have in the chips - they stop and wait for the VRAM to flush out. The result is very choppy even though your cards could go faster. Running out of VRAM sucks. Having enough doesn't speed anything up. It just prevents slow downs, and current technology doesn't add VRAM when you add additional cards in SLI. They way it works now is that all of the same information gets written to each cards' VRAM. So if you're using 2 GB of VRAM, SLI puts 2GB of the same stuff on both cards. It's always mirrored, so you can't benefit from having the extra VRAM installed. Just a fact of life, I'm afraid.

But the 980 ti is almost as fast as two 780 cards in SLI, and it has twice as much VRAM. That's why I suggested it. Like I said before, the 970 isn't faster than your 780 in any real way, and the 980 is only a little faster. If you want a real upgrade, the 980 ti is the best option right now.

The VRAM was what i was afraid of. I thought maybe it would combine but i guess not. 3gb's of vram is a downer.
I should add that at around 320-450$ i could get a 390/390x with 8gbs of vram.
I've been hearing things about DX12/MANTLE vram stacking but im pretty sure it only works on games that use SPR (split frame rendering).
As of right now the SLI option is still pretty strong because of the price to performance total ill be getting. But im still deciding.