4870x2 8.54 drivers = Wow Performance in COD4!!!!

Dan_D said:
For the longest time I couldn't find those drivers. However NVIDIA's 177.92 drivers do actually enable 3-Way SLI support for the D5400XS motherboard. So I can now run three cards in 3-Way SLI mode if I want to. I do have a 3-Way SLI bridge from my Striker II Formula that I can use for that since the D5400XS doesn't come with a 3-Way SLI bridge.

There are pros and cons to doing this. The Geforce GTX 280's cause me cold boot issues. It takes two or three attempts to start the system. Note: I haven't had that problem with any previous video cards I've used on the board such as the NVIDIA 8800GTX, 9800GX2, 8600GTS, etc. The other issue is the onboard sound fails to initialize and shows up as not installed in device manager occasionally. Lets' not forget that all my expansion slots would be gone at that point.

The ATI cards do not cause me the cold boot issues. They do however prevent me from using my LSI MegaRAID because the option ROM configuration of those boards is terrible just like the 9800GX2. So while there are dual GPUs on the card, the design isn't much more elegant than the NVIDIA GX2 style cards are. I couldn't use my LSI MegaRAID with the 3-Way SLI setup either, but only because all the slots will be taken by the cards. At least with the 4870 X2's I can get myself a PCI-Express sound card which is an appealing idea.
Click to expand...

Forgive the stupid questions I'm about to ask. I don't own a Skulltrail and from the sounds of the problems your having I wouldn't get one even if I had the money.

If you go down to 2-280s in SLI, how much of a preformance hit do you see on games that DON'T go over 60 FPS all the time, maxed graphic settings.

What kind of OCing are you getting out of the skulltrail? Since it seems your diong more gaming on that system than anything else, how high are you pushing your quad cores? Or are you using 2 Dual Cores?
 
vengence said:
Forgive the stupid questions I'm about to ask. I don't own a Skulltrail and from the sounds of the problems your having I wouldn't get one even if I had the money.

If you go down to 2-280s in SLI, how much of a preformance hit do you see on games that DON'T go over 60 FPS all the time, maxed graphic settings.

What kind of OCing are you getting out of the skulltrail? Since it seems your diong more gaming on that system than anything else, how high are you pushing your quad cores? Or are you using 2 Dual Cores?
Click to expand...

Actually the problems I've had with the board are minimal. The only thing is the cold boot issue with the Geforce GTX 280's. With the ATI cards I don't have any of that. Yet there are performance issues with the ATI cards. Yet, those performance issues have been experienced by others on totally different systems. So I tend to think that these are driver related issues.

Dropping to two Geforce GTX 280's in SLI would actually improve my experience for the most part but only because of the issues I'm having. I'd take a MASSIVE performance hit in Age of Conan and I'd take a huge increase in Call of Duty 4. In Crysis, I'd get a massive boost as well. UT3 is about the same for the most part. I'd get PhsyX with the NVIDIA cards though if I did that. The power envelope is similar, but definitely worse with the 4870 X2's. It would sway the other way going with three Geforce GTX 280 cards. I'm just wondering if going with two Geforce GTX 280's and a sound card would eliminate the audio issues I'm have where the onboard audio doesn't initialize. In which case I'd simply have to deal with the cold boot issues. I'd really like to have the ATI cards working properly. That way I'd get the best of both worlds. I should see a hit in Crysis, but nothing earth shattering. Every other game I've got should be the same or faster. I just wish I could experience these cards in all their glory.
 
Dan_D said:
Actually the problems I've had with the board are minimal. <snip>
Click to expand...

I've never understood why the most expensive systems have the most headaches. I mean I know why they do, but if your paying that much money for them they should be flawless right?

Seems like it is allways coming down to drivers. I had some problems with my 8800GTS 512s (why do I have to type 1/2 a page do uniquely identify my graphics card :mad: damn your crappy naming Nvidia!) in CoD4, but the latest drivers have made those go away. Hopefully there will be a magic driver fix soon, but I have to agree with your move that if it doesn't happen before your trade period ends then I'd go to the 280s. Hopefully it won't turn into something like the 7950 which just got forgotten about.

AoC... From the looks of the 4870x2 REVIEW, (not preview) they seemed to have fixed SLI scaling.

I asked this the first time, and you didn't answer it and I'm not sure if it was intended or not, I do understand you may have CPUs on that board that are under NDA, so I won't ask this again if you don't answer it now, but what are you running as far as CPUs on that thing?
 
Well after a lot of reading and more reading in regards to the Skulltrail reviews and otherwise it is evident that ATI does not have this board on its short list for driver support priority.

Im sure it will come at some point but not soon enough for your self or others who own the board. If i did read this thread right you did try your setup on another Skulltrail other then yours but with the same results? Only thing left that i would do is trade out Skulltrail for another one if you have not already or take another look at that RAM and the last being sure to reinstall the intel chipset drivers for this board.

I find it interesting that Video card mfg's take such a beating on beta drivers from the consumer yet Motherboard mfg's have made beta drivers the norm:D
I own MB'S that have not seen updates in months.

I hope you find the answer your looking for and the card does not beat you but at this point the score is ATI-1 Dan-0 :D
 
decapitator said:
Well after a lot of reading and more reading in regards to the Skulltrail reviews and otherwise it is evident that ATI does not have this board on its short list for driver support priority.

Im sure it will come at some point but not soon enough for your self or others who own the board. If i did read this thread right you did try your setup on another Skulltrail other then yours but with the same results? Only thing left that i would do is trade out Skulltrail for another one if you have not already or take another look at that RAM and the last being sure to reinstall the intel chipset drivers for this board.

I find it interesting that Video card mfg's take such a beating on beta drivers from the consumer yet Motherboard mfg's have made beta drivers the norm:D
I own MB'S that have not seen updates in months.

I hope you find the answer your looking for and the card does not beat you but at this point the score is ATI-1 Dan-0 :D
Click to expand...

Well D5400XS motherboards don't grow on trees. I do not have another one I can use, nor do I know anyone else who has one.

RAM is fine, system stability is top notch. I've reset to stock settings to be sure, temps are fine. I've reinstalled my OS several times, I've changed hard drives, power supplies, updated the BIOS, changed BIOS settings, I've done dual channel and quad channel testing. I've messed with latencies, PCI-Express frequencies etc.

I've even made a ghost image of my hard drive with the OS loaded, and no drivers. I've loaded different Intel chipset drivers, audio drivers, RAID drivers, I've changed the mode from RAID, to AHCI, to IDE. I've also tried all three Catalyst versions. 8.7, 8.8 release, 8.9 beta. I've also tried Windows XP Professional 32bit with SP2 and SP3. I've tried no Windows updates, all Windows updates etc. Driver sweeper has been run in between every driver load before I ended up reghosting the machine in between tests. I've tried different PCI-Express x16 slots.

I've made sure that cooling wasn't the issue. I've also tried single card and CrossfireX modes in all three drivers. I even tried an evaluation board with an earlier BIOS. None of those things solved the issues. If I put the card into a different machine then its' all good. So yeah, some odd compatibility between my motherboard, or its' drivers and the card or the cards' drivers. I've tried trouble shooting steps suggested by people that didn't even make a whole lot of sense. Such as plugging the machine directly into the wall because someone had a UPS that couldn't output enough wattage to power the system under load or something along those lines. (My UPS doesn't either, but I've worked around that for now.) I've made AMD/ATI aware of the problem. Kyle and I E-Mailed them. We'll see where it goes.

I haven't given up yet.
 
You can not rma the board? I would spend some serious time on extremeSystems and put them to the task,
 
decapitator said:
You can not rma the board? I would spend some serious time on extremeSystems and put them to the task,
Click to expand...

I'm not going to RMA something that works. I get excellent results with the Geforce GTX 280 cards and their performance is where it should be. I can see no reason to RMA the board when it does what it is supposed to.

I'm fairly certain this is a driver issue. This is further evidenced by the fact that in some games such as Age of Conan, I get outstanding performance with the 4870 X2. The 4870 X2's performance is exactly where it should be in some games but not in others. CoD4 MP works fine, but SP doesn't. I don't see how this could be a hardware issue.
 
Ok get another copy of COD4, hell who knows could be that one copy that has corrupted files on the SP side :confused:
 
decapitator said:
Ok get another copy of COD4, hell who knows could be that one copy that has corrupted files on the SP side :confused:
Click to expand...

That doesn't sound logical. If I throw in my Geforce GTX 280's I get a minimum of 66FPS at 2560x1600 with 4xAA and 16xAF on the Bog mission. I get an average FPS of 135 or so and it maxes out at around 200.
 
Half-Life 2 Episode 2 appears to be running right. Most of the benchmarks have it near 100FPS much of the time and then some. It seems to be more or less in line with what some of the reviews are saying. Granted I don't know what parts of the game they are talking about, but here is what my resutls were near the beginning of the game. If I enable V-sync the game can drops below 30FPS once in a blue moon but 99% of the time it's locked in at 60FPS all the time and never moves from there.

ATI Radeon 4870 X2 CrossfireX (Catalyst 8.8 Official)

Half Life 2 Episode Two 2560x1600 8xMSAA, 16xAF, V-sync disabled

Minimum 51
Maximum 275
Average 150.919

Crysis is sucking though. It's a slideshow. It doesn't feel nearly as smooth as it does on the NVIDIA cards regardless of what FRAPS says. The 8.9 betas gave me better results than I got out of the 8.8 official drivers. Just something to bear in mind.

ATI Radeon 4870 X2 CrossfireX (Catalyst 8.9 beta)

Crysis v1.21 Crossfire Results: 1920x1200 4xAA, V-Sync Disabled

Minimum 10
Maximum 45
Average 27

So basically Call of Duty 4 single player sucks, Call of Duty 4 multi-player is fine, UT3 is more or less fine, Crysis sucks, Half-Life 2 kicks major ass and that's all I've tried so far.
 
Its a good thing Crysis is a crappy game and as useful in measuring performance as 3dMark.
 
Dan_D said:
Half-Life 2 Episode 2 appears to be running right. Most of the benchmarks have it near 100FPS much of the time and then some. It seems to be more or less in line with what some of the reviews are saying. Granted I don't know what parts of the game they are talking about, but here is what my resutls were near the beginning of the game. If I enable V-sync the game can drops below 30FPS once in a blue moon but 99% of the time it's locked in at 60FPS all the time and never moves from there.

ATI Radeon 4870 X2 CrossfireX (Catalyst 8.8 Official)

Half Life 2 Episode Two 2560x1600 8xMSAA, 16xAF, V-sync disabled

Minimum 51
Maximum 275
Average 150.919

Crysis is sucking though. It's a slideshow. It doesn't feel nearly as smooth as it does on the NVIDIA cards regardless of what FRAPS says. The 8.9 betas gave me better results than I got out of the 8.8 official drivers. Just something to bear in mind.

ATI Radeon 4870 X2 CrossfireX (Catalyst 8.9 beta)

Crysis v1.21 Crossfire Results: 1920x1200 4xAA, V-Sync Disabled

Minimum 10
Maximum 45
Average 27

So basically Call of Duty 4 single player sucks, Call of Duty 4 multi-player is fine, UT3 is more or less fine, Crysis sucks, Half-Life 2 kicks major ass and that's all I've tried so far.
Click to expand...

don't feel too bad, I am having a hell of a time with my new GTX280. And crysis is the only thing that does well. LOL, I think I am going to send this back
 
Dethred said:
Its a good thing Crysis is a crappy game and as useful in measuring performance as 3dMark.
Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more. Despite its' faults Crysis is an actual GAME. 3D Mark is completely abstract and means nothing.
 
Crysis is a game developed specifically for Nvidia cards, and advertised for Nvidia cards. Using a game that was one of the biggest duds in PC gaming and has other terrible drawbacks, in any kind of comparison between video cards, is no more useful than 3dmark. People "bench" it because it is poorly coded and stresses video cards. If Crysis had the same performance as FarCry with the latest generation of cards, it wouldn't even be in performance reviews. Sure, it is the visual pinnacle of PC graphics, but I think 3dmark looks good too, In other words, Crysis is about as useful in gauging a card's performance as 3dmark is.
 
Dan, I am seeing nearly the same exact results as you in the games you have listed.

My computer is different, but my X2 CrossfireX results are nearly spot on.

HL2 is exceptional, COD4 is a conumdrum, and Crysis stinks.
I was beginning to think it was the cards, now I think it's just drivers; which should get better with time.............I hope.

Have you heard anything from ATI???
 
magoo said:
Dan, I am seeing nearly the same exact results as you in the games you have listed.

My computer is different, but my X2 CrossfireX results are nearly spot on.

HL2 is exceptional, COD4 is a conumdrum, and Crysis stinks.
I was beginning to think it was the cards, now I think it's just drivers; which should get better with time.............I hope.

Have you heard anything from ATI???
Click to expand...

Yeah same here. HL2 is exceptionally excellent, Call of Duty 4 single player is BAD and Crysis results are the suck.

I haven't heard anything new from ATI. I have however made progress on my own.

Call of Duty 4 workaround for CoD4 single-player

Make sure the CoD4 1.7 patch is installed and everything else is up to date.

If you want to make Call of Duty 4 single player playable and even kind of decent I can tell you how to do it. You need to follow BigCactus's guide to setting the max FPS to 60 in the configuration file. Then you need to rename iw3mp to iw3mp2 or something similar. Then rename iw3sp.exe to iw3mp.exe and run the executable. Set all your graphics settings, and turn V-sync to on. You'll now experience gameplay (or you should) at 50-60fps with few drops or changes in frame rate. This makes it more or less playable and enjoyable. If you actually turn off V-sync and the FPS limit to 60 in the configuration file you'll notice similarly crappy performance but better than you will with the executable named to iw3sp.exe. I think its' a screw up with the Crossfire profiles to be honest. Since you can't edit them like you can with NVIDIA drivers we are shit out of luck until ATI addresses the problem.

Try Call of Duty multi-player. It should run fine. You may not get results any better than mine, but it should be VERY playable and enjoyable. That's how it is for me. MP is fine but SP sucks. At least on the bog level.

Mr. Cactus things that it's a game problem and maybe it is but I think it's an ATI driver issue that causes the issue. The above workaround is exactly what he probably did minus the executable renaming. I don't think he resolved his issues but rather he masked them. The 8.9 beta drivers don't work worth a shit in my opinon and have some issues on their own. I get monitor signal loss changing resolution occasionally with those and the card's fan speed throttling doesn't work at all. On my machine I have a manual profile keeping the cards' fans at 40% idle. They correctly throttle up to 80% on thier own with the 8.8 official drivers. Plus the installer works well and I've got no other issues aside from CoD4 and Crysis sucking.

UT3 is actually quite smooth with control panel defaults. For some reason though with AA and AF set to 4xAA and 16xAF I get occasional micro-stuttering. Agian I believe these are driver issues and ATI just hasn't got the software for these cards dialed in yet. I've got nothing when it comes to Crysis. I'm seeing results well below those everyone else is experiencing in terms of reviews.
 
Dethred said:
Crysis is a game developed specifically for Nvidia cards, and advertised for Nvidia cards. Using a game that was one of the biggest duds in PC gaming and has other terrible drawbacks, in any kind of comparison between video cards, is no more useful than 3dmark. People "bench" it because it is poorly coded and stresses video cards. If Crysis had the same performance as FarCry with the latest generation of cards, it wouldn't even be in performance reviews. Sure, it is the visual pinnacle of PC graphics, but I think 3dmark looks good too, In other words, Crysis is about as useful in gauging a card's performance as 3dmark is.
Click to expand...

I compare Crysis to Farcry. Bear in mind that Farcry was launched when the 9800XT was king and using that card Farcry was barely playable. Even with the 6800 Ultra and X800XT-PE the game couldn't be viewed in all its' glory. The 7800GTX 256MB couldn't do the game in its' full glory either unless you went SLI and even then HDR and AA wasn't possible. I don't really remember a whole lot of people bitching about Farcry's coding. Even if they did no one would really say that now given the performance achievable in that game today.

So right there you had a game that put the hurt on three generations of video cards. Crysis is no different. The 8800GTX couldn't power through it, the 9800GX2 couldn't power through it, and the Geforce GTX 280's can't even in 3-Way SLI. I'd say by the next generation (beyond a refresh of course) Crysis will be conquered at 2560x1600 with some AA and AF to boot. So while Crysis is a pig, and it may not be the best coded, I still think that comparisons using it are no less valid than comparisons with Farcry were. Indeed that's much more relevant to me than 3D Mark ever was.

Even if the game isn't all that great, or even popular its' still a game which is more than 3D Mark will ever be.
 
Latest Beta Drivers posted Sept 5 on Rage3d, these are dated Aug 20:

Vistax86/64

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=OV07MYYQ

WinXP x86 / x64

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=SNHWHC6G



INF below, its 8.53 but released from a different driver team I believe

;----------0809031643-8.53-080820a-068929C-ATI
;-----------------------------------------------
; ATI Display Information file : atiilhag.inf
;
; Installation INF for the ATI display driver.
; Copyright(C) 1998-2006 ATI Technologies Inc.
;-----------------------------------------------
; PX - PX Proxy mode
; PR - PX Proxy Ready

[Version]
Signature="$Windows NT$"
Provider=%ATI%
ClassGUID={4D36E968-E325-11CE-BFC1-08002BE10318}
Class=Display
DriverVer=08/20/2008, 8.530.0.0000
;;LayoutFile=layout.inf
CatalogFile=CH_68929.CAT
 
everyone having problems with cod4 single player but good multiplayer, have you tried renaming the filename of the singleplayer game to the multiplayer name iw3mp.exe or something (can't check, not at home). If it is a driver issue, i guess it would recognize the game by the name of the exe. Sorry if you have already tried it, if not give it a shot, can't hurt.
 
I've tried that and I outlined that above. It helps but it doesn't totally correct the issue. That's why I'm certain its' a driver thing.
 
kadozer said:
Latest Beta Drivers posted Sept 5 on Rage3d, these are dated Aug 20:

Vistax86/64

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=OV07MYYQ

WinXP x86 / x64

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=SNHWHC6G



INF below, its 8.53 but released from a different driver team I believe

;----------0809031643-8.53-080820a-068929C-ATI
;-----------------------------------------------
; ATI Display Information file : atiilhag.inf
;
; Installation INF for the ATI display driver.
; Copyright(C) 1998-2006 ATI Technologies Inc.
;-----------------------------------------------
; PX - PX Proxy mode
; PR - PX Proxy Ready

[Version]
Signature="$Windows NT$"
Provider=%ATI%
ClassGUID={4D36E968-E325-11CE-BFC1-08002BE10318}
Class=Display
DriverVer=08/20/2008, 8.530.0.0000
;;LayoutFile=layout.inf
CatalogFile=CH_68929.CAT
Click to expand...

I'm going to give these a shot and see what happens.
 
Well, I have been playing through SP call of duty 4 at 24xEDCSAA 16xaf 1920x1200 w/ everything maxed and Textures extra. I have vysnc off, and I never feel a drop in frames, its smooth as butter. I can benchmark bog like this if someone would like to see. It is a gorgeous game, and I never remember it looking this good the last time I played through on my 2 8800 GTX's.

Crysis, I actually decided to give the first mission a try again. I was playing

1920x1200 64bit - 4x aa 16x af everything Very High

Game ran beautifully. It was more smooth like above then it was on my 9800GX2 or my 8800 GTX on less settings.

The best I could get out of my 2 GTX's was 1680x1050 w/ 2x aa and even that was choppy here and there. I also had to take some things off of very high, I think the only things I had on very high where shaders and textures.

My massively overclocked 9800GX2 (750/1900/2200) had even more issues w/ crysis. I could do 1920x1200 @ 2x aa w/ everything on high. Very high and I noticed big drops in FPS, and if I tried 4x aa it was practically unplayable cause of such a low FPS.

Sure I dont have a TRI SLI 280GTX, and yes, maybe that or even SLI 280 would run faster, and smoother, im not doubting that. However, I dont think you can get this playability for 469 bucks. I am amazed and crysis and how smooth it is right now, and cant wait to see how warhead and farcry 2 play.
 
That's absolutely screwy. With dual 8800GTX's I could get 2560x1600 2xAA and 16xAF all in game options maxed smooth as butter. 4xAA was playable on them but it chunked badly in a couple of areas or when there was a lot of smoke. With three 8800GTX's I could run the game at 2560x1600 4xAA and 16xAF smooth as butter. With the 9800GX2 Quad-SLI setup I could only do 2560x1600 2xAA and 16xAF all in game settings maxed. The reason for the drop in AA to 2x most likely had to do with the 256bit bus and 512MB of memory being inadequate for the textures of the game at those settings. 2560x1600 with 4xAA and 16xAF was totally unplayable on my 9800GX2 Quad-SLI setup. Otherwise it was even smoother than the 8800GTX 3-Way SLI setup was.

Anyway with these 8.53 drivers Call of Duty 4 is a little better. Meaning that I no longer have to set the seta_maxfps value to 60 in the control panel to smooth out the gameplay. If I use V-sync the game smooths out like it should but the performance is still all over the place. I get the exact same FRAPS results as I did with the 8.54 beta and 8.8 release drivers. To get the game above 30FPS I have to rename the executable to iw3mp.exe from iw3sp.exe. From what I'm seeing based on these numbers I think I've figured out what is going on. The 4870 is slightly slower than a Geforce GTX 280. The 4870 X2 is essentially two of those cards put together in one package. When I start the bog mission keeping the executable file name its' default and not using V-sync I get a minimum of about 22-27FPS at the very beginning of the level. When I set the dual card option this has no effect. It looks to me like at that point only one of my four GPUs is actually working. When I rename the executable from iw3sp.exe to iw3mp.exe two GPUs work in SP mode and this is evidenced by the fact that my FRAPS results are identical to what some sites report as the results for a single 4870 X2 working properly on their test systems in the same level using the same settings. For whatever reason, probably due to the extreme fluctuations in FPS performance from one set of frames to the next is the reason why V-sync is a must to smooth out CoD4 and that's why it feels choppy much of the time. That beginning part of the bog mission is actually quite stressful for the game as is the part where the tank gets over run.

So I'm thinking this is a Crossfire profile issue. Most of the time a single GPU is working and if you screw with it you can get a second GPU to work, but the only way you'll get all 4 GPUs working in a CrossfireX system is if ATI gets their drivers up to snuff or if its' a problem with the game itself, then the game will need to get patched in order to resolve these issues. Why these problems effect some and not others with radically different system configurations I do not know.

I'm going to check out Crysis with these new drivers are report back. But I suspect that at least with previous drivers something similar is going on as my results seem to mirror those of a single 4870 and not a 4870 X2.
 
Well I just checked out Crysis 1.21 with the new drivers. Still sucks. Same slideshow I was seeing before. I'm not even remotely getting anywhere near the results found in the 4870 X2 Preview article using the exact same settings. It's unplayable at 1920x1200 for me even with 0AA and 0AF.
 
Dan_D said:
Well I just checked out Crysis 1.21 with the new drivers. Still sucks. Same slideshow I was seeing before. I'm not even remotely getting anywhere near the results found in the 4870 X2 Preview article using the exact same settings. It's unplayable at 1920x1200 for me even with 0AA and 0AF.
Click to expand...

If you run the crysis benchmark in game

DX10 - 64bit - 1920x1200 - very high everything - 4xaa - 16xaf - GPU test

what average FPS do you get from 3 loops?
 
I know it probably wouldn't be worth it, but is there a way that you can start swapping components from the machine in which the cards worked well, into the current setup and start eliminating possible hardware problems?
 
Dethred said:
I know it probably wouldn't be worth it, but is there a way that you can start swapping components from the machine in which the cards worked well, into the current setup and start eliminating possible hardware problems?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that isn't possible. Memory, processor(s), motherboard, are all incompatible between the two systems.

Xenozx said:
If you run the crysis benchmark in game

DX10 - 64bit - 1920x1200 - very high everything - 4xaa - 16xaf - GPU test

what average FPS do you get from 3 loops?
Click to expand...

I can try it, but regardless of the results the actual game isn't playable at those settings.
 
Xenozx said:
If you run the crysis benchmark in game

DX10 - 64bit - 1920x1200 - very high everything - 4xaa - 16xaf - GPU test

what average FPS do you get from 3 loops?
Click to expand...

I cannot believe for 1 minute you can get that performance. I'd have to see a screen shot.

I had a triple Sli with 8800 GTX and got maybe 35 FPS on very high.@ 1920 x 1200.

My rig with two X2s is a slideshow on very high. The GPU tests might average in the 20s also using Vista x64.
I have an OCd Quad Core and Oc'd Ram and my system is rock solid on Orthos X 4 for 24 hours.

I'm sorry but I'd have to call shens on your data.
 
These are the results I got using the test.

1920x1200, Very High, 4xAA, DX10, 64bit

Average 15.17FPS
 
Dan_D said:
These are the results I got using the test.

1920x1200, Very High, 4xAA, DX10, 64bit

Average 15.17FPS
Click to expand...

Dan, I get exactly double your FPS at those exact same settings. I will run the test now and screenshot to show you. Something is up w/ your rig man.
 
Dan_D said:
Nope. There is nothing wrong with the machine. If you read the thread I've pretty much covered all the bases on that. It works with Geforce GTX 280 cards in SLI and works well. This is not a hardware or software issue that's under my control.
Click to expand...

ya, I didnt specify hardware or software :p Im just amazed that your having so many issues. I am on the 8.54 drivers, but even w/ the 8.8's, I got double your performance at those settings. Like I would almost say, only one of your 2 cards is working. I get double your FPS in COD4, and double your FPS in Crysis. It just seems to me the logical answer to that, is only 1 of your 2 cards are working, but the real question is why?
 
Xenozx said:
Dan, I get exactly double your FPS at those exact same settings. I will run the test now and screenshot to show you. Something is up w/ your rig man.
Click to expand...

Nope. There is nothing wrong with the machine. If you read the thread I've pretty much covered all the bases on that. It works with Geforce GTX 280 cards in SLI and works well. This is not a hardware or software issue that's under my control.
 
Your settings, but 8xaa added into the mix, still doulbed your FPS w/ 8x aa.

crysis8xaa.jpg
 
ya, theres definately a problem. Im just pointing out I dont think its the 4870x2. Like I said above ive been able to play crysis with this card like I could never play it in the past. I mean this vista 64 install is a fresh install, so maybe thats your issue. sorry I didnt read back to see if you already tried that. Whats funny is I get these kind of results on an nvidia chipset (780i) you would almost think it would perform better on an x48....

EDIT: I dont know wtf is up w/ the times, but I respond to you, and yet it appears above your post?
 
Xenozx said:
Your settings, but 8xaa added into the mix, still doulbed your FPS w/ 8x aa.
Click to expand...

Again I am not sure what the deal is with the drivers, but I'm not the only one experiencing a slide show in regard to Crysis. I've got other games that are kicking ass on these cards but Crysis just isn't one of them.
 
DanD
just thinking outloud here.. But do you think it could have something to do with your pcie speed.. Or even a pcie problem? Have you tried another motherboard?(its 230am here im not reading 14 pages of stuff lol)...

Also-- have you sent your x2 to kyle to see if he could run your board on his system.. The same system he did the x2 test on.. We know what he got on that system with his x2-- lets see what he can get with yours.. Will validate or eliminate a problem with your x2..

If it comes back ok -- then time to try another mother board?

Also--i had problems with my x2 when i had both 6 and 8 pin plugged in on the same rail.. I then plugged them into sep 12v rails and that seemed to help a bit.. Not sure if thats good or bad to do-- but i did it-- and it helped..
 
I just can't believe what I'm seeing.

I have two cards and I can't get those framerates on "high" with no AA.
My system is very stable, the Vista install is fresh, drivers are the 8.54 and if I'm lucky in Crysis I get high 20s and in heavy traffic it looks like shit.

If you all get these great FPS, maybe it's a CrossfireX issue, it has to be. I should at least get 25% more than a single card.:eek:
 
Tried pulling one of the cards to see what happens? Either that or turning Crossfire off?

Just for the sake of accuracy this is my crysis bench jobber screenshot, I suspect it'd be higher if my memory was running higher than 800mhz, but having some stability issues with vista :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top