Regarding Lucid logix Virtu MVP Software performance on my PC!

[AniChatt]

First of all thanks to all for helping me for my previous threads. I have bought my new custom rig with this following configuration:

Asus P8Z77V Motherboard
Core i5-3450
Gskill RipjawsX 8GB 1600MHz
Palit GTX 660 Ti JetStream 2GB
Segate Barracuda 2TB HDD
Cooler Master GX550W PSU

This motherboard supports Lucid logix Virtu MVP technology. Now my question is in this configuration is it really worth to buy the latest standard version of this software ($45)? Does it really help me to gain better fps during gaming?
I will never use SLI in my rig. Please help...............
If any additional information is required then please ask me.

 

[osamabinrobot]

i dont think its worth it, i havent seen any articles or benchmarks that make it look desirable with high powered gpus. maybe if you had a budget card.

 

[ur6beersaway]

It been my experience it does help (not in every case) but most. The free mvp version will work just fine. Try it out first:
http://lucidlogix.com/driverdownloads.html

 

[k1114]

Your mobo comes with virtu mvp already (it's acutally the pro version with all features). You can download the updated versions if you want. You don't have to buy them either, you have a license to use it. Also virtu does not increase actual fps. It is for improving response times.

 

[AniChatt]

Your mobo comes with virtu mvp already (it's acutally the pro version with all features). You can download the updated versions if you want. You don't have to buy them either, you have a license to use it. Also virtu does not increase actual fps. It is for improving response times.

Thanks.
But I can't update the virtu MVP because in its site all are paid versions. I have downloaded a standard version 30 days trial from their site and installed it. Regarding FPS in their demo they claims that 'HyperFormace' increases game fps. Is it not true? please help.

 

[osamabinrobot]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/z77-express-virtu-mvp-benchmark,3174.html
slight advantage with video encoding, otherwise looks worthless.

 

[k1114]

Because you are looking at 2.0 which is for people whom it didn't come with their mobo. http://www.lucidlogix.com/driverdownloads-mvp.shtml

Point out where is says "increases fps," it only says responsiveness. http://www.lucidlogix.com/technology-hyperformance.html

 

[ur6beersaway]

Because you are looking at 2.0 which is for people whom it didn't come with their mobo. http://www.lucidlogix.com/driverdownloads-mvp.shtml

Point out where is says "increases fps," it only says responsiveness. http://www.lucidlogix.com/technology-hyperformance.html

Virtual-VSync



Virtual Vsync™ - Resolve the everlasting debate between quality and performance
Lucid's Virtual Vsync technology takes visual quality and performance to the next level. A proprietary solution for Virtu Universal and Virtu MVP, Virtual Vsync enables games to run at any FPS, with no image tearing, stuttering, lags and latency artifacts. •Enhanced performance - when system has dGPU and iGPU
•Unlimited frame rates - beyond traditional in-game Vsync
•Flawless visual quality without tearing
•Up to 250% better responsiveness vs. standard Vsync

 

[k1114]

I might as well explain both. That doesn't say an increase in fps. The performance they refer to is responsiveness. V-vsync works in the same way vsync works by syncing the monitor to the gpu but instead of telling the gpu to not render extra frames like regular vsync, v-vsync just doesn't show them. There is no increase in fps, it is the "same" as if vsync were off but with the benefits of no tearing and better responsiveness vs regular vysnc. If you were to never go above your monitor's refresh rate, or have no tearing, then any type of vsync is useless and increases input lag. If responsiveness isn't a concern if you don't play fast paced games, then I'll take normal/adaptive vsync for the decrease in power/heat (because the gpu is being told not to render the extra frames; less work).

Now for hyperformance. This only works above your monitor's refresh rate which means no increase in actual fps. What the tests' fps shows is an increase of "virtual" fps which can be any useless number you want, you are still getting the same fps shown on screen. However, with a higher virtual fps you get better responsiveness. The virtual fps "increase" is a result of the gpu not actually rendering some frames but fps counters still count them because the frame call was still made (so in essence is cheating the frame count). However, test shows it stutters so is not favorable.

Every review is going to show average fps so is misleading; one reason Tom's has been including frame render times with fps counts on all benchmarks. Also if you were to take a look at reviews, you will actually see a decrease in fps when below the monitors's refresh rate for both features. This is because there is an increase in latency from sending info to igpu and then back to the gpu. This lessens the effectiveness of both features. It would be nice if the discrete gpu could do v-vsync, then it would be more worthwhile.

 

[AniChatt]

I might as well explain both. That doesn't say an increase in fps. The performance they refer to is responsiveness. V-vsync works in the same way vsync works by syncing the monitor to the gpu but instead of telling the gpu to not render extra frames like regular vsync, v-vsync just doesn't show them. There is no increase in fps, it is the "same" as if vsync were off but with the benefits of no tearing and better responsiveness vs regular vysnc. If you were to never go above your monitor's refresh rate, or have no tearing, then any type of vsync is useless and increases input lag. If responsiveness isn't a concern if you don't play fast paced games, then I'll take normal/adaptive vsync for the decrease in power/heat (because the gpu is being told not to render the extra frames; less work).

Now for hyperformance. This only works above your monitor's refresh rate which means no increase in actual fps. What the tests' fps shows is an increase of "virtual" fps which can be any useless number you want, you are still getting the same fps shown on screen. However, with a higher virtual fps you get better responsiveness. The virtual fps "increase" is a result of the gpu not actually rendering some frames but fps counters still count them because the frame call was still made (so in essence is cheating the frame count). However, test shows it stutters so is not favorable.

Every review is going to show average fps so is misleading; one reason Tom's has been including frame render times with fps counts on all benchmarks. Also if you were to take a look at reviews, you will actually see a decrease in fps when below the monitors's refresh rate for both features. This is because there is an increase in latency from sending info to igpu and then back to the gpu. This lessens the effectiveness of both features. It would be nice if the discrete gpu could do v-vsync, then it would be more worthwhile.

Thanks a lot..... I have updated this driver and I'm definitely not buying this sw. Thanks again for helping me.
Also thanks to all others for providing me web links and valuable information.

 

[Maikel van Hoof]

for me, and my single HD7870 and 3570K, it works great.

both overclocking discrete gpu, and intergrated gpu help framerate, but that is not the key point, in very heavy games at very high settings, it just smooths everything out.
it doesnt make the framerate peak that much higher, but it takes the fps drop out alot..

i have crossfire now, so MVP has to be turned off. Currently i feel the cost/reward of the 2nd card is worse then using mvp and an intergrated gpu that well.. you already have anyway..

getting a z77 for ivy bridge seems to be a no-brainer to me, your paying for the IGP, wich is the biggest part of the processor, might aswell use it!