i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Here you can post your system specs and the kind of performance you're getting when running GRIP
User avatar
Broscar
Early Supporter 6
Early Supporter 6
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:35 pm
Location: ur mom #shrekt
Contact:

i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Broscar » Thu Jul 14, 2016 3:18 pm

Specs:
Win 7
GTX 1070
i5 2500k
12 gb DDR3 1600MHz

Settings:
Res: 1080p
AA: FXAA
AF: 16x
AO: on
Shadows: epic
Effects: epic
Textures: epic
Post Process: epic
Motion Blur: high

Performance:
Average fps: 114
Lowest fps: 90

NOTES:
Recorded a single lap of Yuri industrial. To be honest, I was first the entire time, so the lack of cars in sight boosted my fps by about 8.
Was recorded on patch 1.0.11.1

4K, exact same settings except AA turned off:
Average fps: 38
Lowest fps: 36
Need to turn down a few settings to hit 60 fps. I'm most likely CPU/RAM bandwidth limited hard here though.

User avatar
Ryu Makkuro
Posts: 390
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:46 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Ryu Makkuro » Thu Jul 14, 2016 3:21 pm

Try using TXAA instead of FXAA and lower the motion blur to low or off. I personally find that to provide a lot better visuals in general ;) Also, TXAA removes the jaggies like no other AA method.
Image


User avatar
Ryu Makkuro
Posts: 390
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:46 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Ryu Makkuro » Fri Jul 15, 2016 7:05 am

Broscar wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOStBqP6F3M

While TXAA does provide blur, given how you can't really recreate that scene on your own, I wouldn't take it that to myself. Sure, the moving objects will be blurred... just like in real life. When something is moving, it will be blurred for us, that's how our eyes work, which is why I do like TXAA as it provides a lot more realistic look.

Also, if you increase the resolution you're putting more strain on GPU, not really CPU or RAM. Especially none at RAM (VRAM is another story, but 1070 has enough of it for it to not be a problem, and the lack of it would result in stuttering, not less FPS). Honestly, if anything, the CPU may actually have less stress due to having to output less draw calls.

You're making the GPU compute 4 times more pixels after all. Given that you don't have 4 times less FPS, I'd say it's a very good result.
Image

User avatar
Broscar
Early Supporter 6
Early Supporter 6
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:35 pm
Location: ur mom #shrekt
Contact:

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Broscar » Sun Jul 17, 2016 2:20 am

With that logic, you're better off setting the game's resolution to 800x600.
I'm curious why you feel the need to shitpost in a performance report thread though. I never asked for anyone to give me feedback on which settings I use or for someone to defend their preference for a trash AA-solution.

The GTX 1070 is already limited by my CPU/RAM in 1080p and I'd imagine 4K to have additional overhead, at the very least bandwidth-wise. This is backed by the very low increases in fps I get if I turn various graphically intensive settings off.

User avatar
Ryu Makkuro
Posts: 390
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:46 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Ryu Makkuro » Sun Jul 17, 2016 1:49 pm

That lower resolution was a weak bait -_-

Honestly, why people have tendency to just twist my words? All I did was make a suggestion, to which you replied with a comparison that... well, already explained that. It's a forum, so expect people posting on threads they are interested in. Would be nice if you could switch the AA method and remove the motion blur and post the FPS readings then, but nope, had to go on the attack mode -_-

And naturally, in 1080p you'll be bottlenecked by CPU (not RAM though). However your statement about it was for the 4K resolution part and nowhere did you mention it being for 1080p.
Image

The Sudden Silent
Early Supporter 6
Early Supporter 6
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 11:35 pm
Location: Finland

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby The Sudden Silent » Sun Jul 17, 2016 1:53 pm

welcome to 1070 gtx club

User avatar
Broscar
Early Supporter 6
Early Supporter 6
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:35 pm
Location: ur mom #shrekt
Contact:

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Broscar » Fri Jul 22, 2016 4:24 am

Thanks man. I sorta regret it, as I have very little time to play games at the moment :p
I'll have more time after next week though, so I'm readying up to no-life a few games again.

PS: Crysis 1 still dips down to 32 fps all the time. Heavily CPU limited, but jeez, I doubt even an overclocked Skylake could run it well.

User avatar
Ryu Makkuro
Posts: 390
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:46 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Ryu Makkuro » Fri Jul 22, 2016 6:24 am

Broscar wrote:PS: Crysis 1 still dips down to 32 fps all the time. Heavily CPU limited, but jeez, I doubt even an overclocked Skylake could run it well.

I was running Crysis with a GTX460 at everything maxed (2xMSAA though) out at 1080p and the game rarely went down to 30FPS, mostly around 46FPS. That's with an i5-3570k. Given that LTT performed a test on how you would run it with modern hardware (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEwZQ6oLGWE), I highly suggest to check your system. Something is not right, as your i5, especially overclocked, will never be a bottleneck in that game.

In over 99% of games, your i5 will not be a bottleneck up to about 120FPS. Even nowadays, the utilisation of many cores is poor, and you're better off with less highly clocked cores, than more lower clocked ones. DigitalFoundry did a test on the Skylake CPUs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ_5p9wd2dk), and concluded that unless you're running on first generation of i5/i7, you won't be bottlenecked by a CPU. Benchmark scores prove that.

A typical thing to do would be to do a run of re-installing drivers. I highly advise DDU for removing the graphical drivers. Might also want to run chkdsk and sfc (command prompt).
Image

User avatar
Chris_CE
Grip Developer
Grip Developer
Posts: 2175
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Chris_CE » Fri Jul 22, 2016 12:52 pm

2500K is still a beast of a processor. I was going to get it, but opted for the 3570k

Your card beats out my 970 though ;)

As for TXAA, I must agree with the notion that it makes everything look blurry, even when not in motion
Game Director
GRIP

User avatar
Broscar
Early Supporter 6
Early Supporter 6
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:35 pm
Location: ur mom #shrekt
Contact:

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Broscar » Fri Jul 22, 2016 8:37 pm

Ryu, you need to fire Crysis up again if you think it's not CPU limited. The game's engine is a mess and some areas wreak absolute havoc on anything which isn't on this list. That, plus destroying a few huts will drop your fps hard, no matter the area. The price of great physics :(
You can run the game on the updated Warhead engine, but that's like putting a band-aid on a gaping hole. Still worth doing though.

Man, the 2500K was sick.
Can even run it passively at 4.9GHz, which is just... disgusting to say the least.

User avatar
Falkerz
Early Supporter 4
Early Supporter 4
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 7:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Falkerz » Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:12 pm

Broscar wrote:Ryu, you need to fire Crysis up again if you think it's not CPU limited. The game's engine is a mess and some areas wreak absolute havoc on anything which isn't on this list. That, plus destroying a few huts will drop your fps hard, no matter the area. The price of great physics :(
You can run the game on the updated Warhead engine, but that's like putting a band-aid on a gaping hole. Still worth doing though.

Man, the 2500K was sick.
Can even run it passively at 4.9GHz, which is just... disgusting to say the least.


Just grab a GTX970 and run it as a dedicated PyreX co-processor...

But seriously, if you can, try grabbing a 4th gen i5 or any i7 that's a 2600K or better, just to see if it's the CPU or not. I can't remember any specs on that part myself, but I do know it's several years old. Not that that's a bad thing, I know a guy with a dual socket Pentium 4 machine from when the P4 was purely designed for power. No energy saving measures, just a couple of unapologetically tireless 3+GHz quad core CPUs
"Tired are we, the few who battle endlessly, against the never ceasing sound, of inevitability..."

User avatar
Broscar
Early Supporter 6
Early Supporter 6
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:35 pm
Location: ur mom #shrekt
Contact:

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Broscar » Thu Sep 29, 2016 10:19 am

I don't know what PyreX is. If you mean PhysX; Crysis doesn't use PhysX, so adding another GPU to my system would literally have zero impact on the game (also: the 1070 is more than powerful enough to run anything PhysX related by itself, even on top of rendering jobs).

User avatar
Falkerz
Early Supporter 4
Early Supporter 4
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 7:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: i5 2500k 4.5GHz & GTX 1070 2GHz

Postby Falkerz » Thu Sep 29, 2016 5:58 pm

Broscar wrote:I don't know what PyreX is. If you mean PhysX; Crysis doesn't use PhysX, so adding another GPU to my system would literally have zero impact on the game (also: the 1070 is more than powerful enough to run anything PhysX related by itself, even on top of rendering jobs).


Getting so pissed off this week... It was supposed to be PhysX, but goddamn Android keyboard thinks that it knows better, WHEN CLEARLY I KNOW WHAT I WANT TO SAY, DON'T YOU DARE TRY CORRECT ME YOU PIECE OF SHI-

I need a holiday.
"Tired are we, the few who battle endlessly, against the never ceasing sound, of inevitability..."


Return to “Performance Reports”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron