MorganX Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Are the GTX970-980 cards native DX12 cards? The nvidia website says yes but it seems way too early. From what I've read of DX12 so far, I see no reason that DX 11 cards wouldn't' be able to support it (speaking only of the parallelism, know nothing about DX12 exclusive hardware features). I believe them. Won't hurt to go 970, won't hurt to wait. You can probably pick up a 770 on the cheap somewhere to tide you over. If you're gaming at 1080p, that'll do you for now. Nope. They'll support the software features, but not the hardware ones. Can you elaborate? I'd be interested in that as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinetheo Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Hello! I've been wondering lately, should I get a new gaming PC since the new games are so demanding in PC requirements? Such as Dragon Age, Watch Dogs, Assasin's Creed and especially The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt I have this rig for gaming at the momment: CPU: Intel Core i7 920 @2.67 Ghz (stock clocked) M/B: MSI X58A-GD65 RAM: 3x2GB OCZ Core i7 8-8-8-24 @1600 Mhz (Memory Profile 1, stock clocked) GPU: 1x ASUS nVidia Gefore GTX 760 2GB DirectCU II OC O/S: Windows 8.1 x64 (fully updated) HDD: 1x500GB Western Digital Blue Sata 2, 2x1TB Western Digital Black Sata 3, 1x1TB Western Digital Black I'm not interested in getting an SSD, I don't care so much about faster loading times . I just wanna know if I need an upgrade. Thanks a lot Edit: I'm playing at 1920x1200 Resolution, I won't ever switch to 4K because I do not need a larger monitor than 24 inches. It is fine except I would upgrade your Ram and consider an SSD. The games listed all work fine on a crappy XboxOne with an intel atom like cpu and integrated graphics. You can't do full screen of course. But your CPU is more powerful and with hyperthreading turned on can match 8 virtual threaded cores which newer games use more. So get a new nvidia 970 and get 16 gigs of ram with an SSD and it is fine. Your cpu is about as fast as a low end i5 today which is average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinetheo Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Tom's Hardware says your wrong: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-raid-benchmark,3485-3.html PC World Article: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2365767/feed-your-greed-for-speed-by-installing-ssds-in-raid-0.html The speed in benchmarks is different than load times in the OS and in games. I know from experience. My system boots in 14 instead of 15 seconds since raid 0 :-). In load times in games IOS and not bandwidth is the bottleneck as lots of assets need to be loaded then processed by the CPU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorganX Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 The speed in benchmarks is different than load times in the OS and in games. I know from experience. My system boots in 14 instead of 15 seconds since raid 0 :-). In load times in games IOS and not bandwidth is the bottleneck as lots of assets need to be loaded then processed by the CPU. If you went from single drive to raid 0 and your boot only improved from by 1s from 15s to 14s then I would say there's a hardware issue or anomaly. I would guess you have a peripheral that is taking a long time to enumerate. Eliminate that and you should notice a difference in boot and all read times. It physically is twice as fast and unless you have an old processor the CPU should not be the bottleneck. ZakO 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc2k Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Any news that confirm that? I was skeptic too but I read the cards support both the 11.3 and 12.0 feature sets, it's even written on Wikipedia. Can you elaborate? I'd be interested in that as well. Seems that my statement might be outdated as I couldn't find any post 900 series article supporting what I said. Although, there's nothing I'd consider clear confirmation either. I had assumed that DX12's hardware features aren't yet finalised since it's still a few months off. Anyway, here's a paragraph from the wiki about potential hardware features: Some new hardware features are also being considered for DirectX 12,[89][101][102] including Volume Tiled Resources, Typed UAV Load, Conservative Rasterization, better collision and culling with Conservative Rasterization, Raster Ordered Views (ROVs), swizzled resources and compressed resources,[103] additional blend modes,[104] programmable blend and efficient Order-independent transparency(OIT) with pixel ordered UAV.[105] MorganX 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorganX Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Anyway, here's a paragraph from the wiki about potential hardware features: Thanks. I don't know enough about it technically, but if they add those features, it may be possible that existing hardware would be a be able to accelerate those functions. I am looking forward to DX12. The 900 series is so fast, I can only imagine what can be done with more efficiency through DX12. I think more devs, who are artists at heart, will return to the PC. Ninja Theory is bringing Hellblade to PC alongside the PS4 timed exclusive. Some of the reasons hint at creative flexibility, modding, community support, etc. http://www.hellblade.com/?p=17852 There is so much power in desktops now (and that's not even going Haswell-E and DDR4) that I can't imagine game devs being able to resist the freedom and capability they have to realize their craft on the platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre S. Veteran Posted January 11, 2015 Veteran Share Posted January 11, 2015 Can you elaborate? I'd be interested in that as well. They don't support the 12.0 profile, and if I understand correctly they support all features in 11.3 and 11.2 but doesn't yet officially report support for these profile levels as such. If you take a dxdiag it'll show 11.1 as the highest supported profile. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/4 MorganX 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T3X4S Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I think there are a lot of people in here that rely on info they read, some dumb benchmark that doesnt equate to real world scenarios and overall bad info. A lot of people have commented with things that are not necessarily wrong, but they arent really helpful or meaningful in real world scenarios - hell I even read where someone did in fact mention overclocking to help with performance.... really ? The Evil Overlord 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I think there are a lot of people in here that rely on info they read, some dumb benchmark that doesnt equate to real world scenarios and overall bad info. A lot of people have commented with things that are not necessarily wrong, but they arent really helpful or meaningful in real world scenarios - hell I even read where someone did in fact mention overclocking to help with performance.... really ? and this post was ? if you're going to say people are "wrong"point out what is wrong and why it's wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo1911 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I thought Nvidia's GTX 970 and 980 are DX12 compatible. Bummer!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T3X4S Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 and this post was ? if you're going to say people are "wrong"point out what is wrong and why it's wrong. Sorry Hawk. It wasnt anything you said for sure, I usually agree with everything you post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZakO Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I think there are a lot of people in here that rely on info they read, some dumb benchmark that doesnt equate to real world scenarios and overall bad info. A lot of people have commented with things that are not necessarily wrong, but they arent really helpful or meaningful in real world scenarios - hell I even read where someone did in fact mention overclocking to help with performance.... really ? Why are you so against overclocking? It's fine to be against it, but to repeatedly say it doesn't improve performance is plain misinformation. Overclock your CPU and then do any CPU intensive task: encoding, rendering, compiling, compressing, playing a CPU-intensive game (e.g. BF4 MP), etc. and you will see a noticeable increase in performance. When I had an i7 920 overclocking it to 4GHz allowed me to stream at 720p / 60fps while gaming rather than the 720p / 30fps I was able to stream with at stock clocks. That's a real world performance improvement. MorganX 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T3X4S Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Why are you so against overclocking? It's fine to be against it, but to repeatedly say it doesn't improve performance is plain misinformation. Overclock your CPU and then do any CPU intensive task: encoding, rendering, compiling, compressing, playing a CPU-intensive game (e.g. BF4 MP), etc. and you will see a noticeable increase in performance. When I had an i7 920 overclocking it to 4GHz allowed me to stream at 720p / 60fps while gaming rather than the 720p / 30fps I was able to stream with at stock clocks. That's a real world performance improvement. Its for synthetic benchmarking (bragging rights) & testing - thats it. If you have to OC something to try and squeak 3-4 fps to make a game playable - time to get new hardware. Im sure things like encoding - compiling/compressing where it is heavily CPU dependant and you do a 25% OC - yes you will see an improvement - but that is not what this thread is about & 9 times out of 10 - it is not helpful for the person that is looking for help/advice. I look at it this way. If someone is saying "hey I dont know what to do here" - a simple solution is far more helpful than a complex probable solution. Besides most people dont encode/compile/etc all the time or at all. So for the masses, suggesting something that will not solve their problem - isnt worth suggesting. I am not against OCing, I am against OCing as a solution to improve performance - because although that is a possibility in some remote instances, it is not a solution for most people. Of course, this is my opinion binaryzero 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 OCing can bring so many other potential problems as well, even when heat isn't an issue. With the power of todays computers, OC'ing should only be a solution of you have old hardware and need more performance but can't afford a proper upgrade T3X4S, binaryzero and NeoWind 3 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorganX Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Just FYI, Intel CPUs overclock themselves nowadays, or should I say, turbo boost themselves. If you can keep it cool, you can overclock for the life of your CPU without issue. Of course it adds performance. So does buying the next highest performing CPU. Overclocking RAM is more of a hobby IMO. GPUs overclock and are sold overclocked. It's the same silicon, some perform more stably and higher ratings and that's how they are binned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyLarry Veteran Posted January 12, 2015 Veteran Share Posted January 12, 2015 I was all set to build my new gaming PC this month but I am holding out for Oculus to be released to consumers. I then want to see benchmarks of games using it, and build the best gaming PC I can, at the time, to support Oculus, as that is going to be one of my primary focuses for this particular PC itself. I realize I may be quite some time from when this happens, and I am fine with that. I also realize one can always play the waiting game with technology, but in this case I have a very specific reason for waiting, and I do think in this instance patience will wind up ultimately paying off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra.Xtreme Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Astra, you do not lose Trim with Raid 0 anymore. Intel has supported Trim in Raid zero since the series 7 chipsets. If you have a series 7 or higher, it supports trim. I have verified this with trimcheck: http://www.thessdreview.com/daily-news/latest-buzz/trimcheck-does-your-ssd-really-have-trim-working/. You are correct about the lack of protection but this is the same level of risk as a solo drive, if a drive dies you los everything. That's what Macrium Reflect free edition and File History is for ;>. At 1GBs R/W I say go for it! You're right for those chipsets, but I was more so responding to his PC (2x 840 Evo), which I don't believe use Intel chipsets. And regarding the RAID breaking, I wasn't referring to the drives failing. There are a lot of things that can break the array, which gets annoying. I had things like BIOS updates and virtual machines screw it up, and it just got old after a while, so I upgraded to a single SSD. The larger capacity drives generally get higher IOPS too, which is beneficial across the board. But like I said, it's no longer cheaper to buy 2 smaller SSDs, so there's basically no reason to do such a thing anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patseguin Global Moderator Posted January 12, 2015 Global Moderator Share Posted January 12, 2015 I could swear that I read somewhere that you shouldn't run SSD's in a RAID configuration. I used to run my 480 Pro's in RAID but I never felt the performance was that great so I just put them in single drive mode and they seem way faster. If I'm not mistaken, the reasoning behind not using RAID though is the excessive amount of disk access. I could we wrong though, wouldn't be the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorganX Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I could swear that I read somewhere that you shouldn't run SSD's in a RAID configuration. I used to run my 480 Pro's in RAID but I never felt the performance was that great so I just put them in single drive mode and they seem way faster. If I'm not mistaken, the reasoning behind not using RAID though is the excessive amount of disk access. I could we wrong though, wouldn't be the first time. They would actually split the disk access across two drives as opposed to one. The primary reason was that prior to the 7 series Intel chipset, trim is not supported for SSDs in a RAID configuration. If you have a current 7, 8, or 9 series chipset, this is a non-issue. Not sure what's going on with those that say they notice no significant performance increases with Raid 0. With Raid 1 you will see basically the same performance. With Raid 5 you will see significant increased read and maybe slower writes. With Raid 0, everything should close to double. This is the case with SSDs and physical drives. And that's only if we're talking a two disk array. As you add more disks to the array, performance should increase exponentially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorganX Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 You're right for those chipsets, but I was more so responding to his PC (2x 840 Evo), which I don't believe use Intel chipsets. The chipset is the Intel motherboard chipset. Specifically the IO controller. All above IHC6R support trim for Raid 0. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Matrix_RAID Since release 11.2.0.0000, TRIM commands can be read by the RAID controller in 7 series chipsets. There is no TRIM support in older chipsets.[19] Intel states that RST support has been added for the X79 chipset in RST version 11.6.0.0000 and after. Contained in the RST Production Version Release Notes, contained here.[20] On some 6 series chipsets there is a modification which will add a modded ROM to the BIOS which will allow TRIM support on the 6 series chipset, contained here.[21] Astra.Xtreme 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoWind Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Maxwell will help you gain more fps which could be around 5-10% depending on which game such as Watch Dogs that can cripple any high end card despite being a gamework for Nvidia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patseguin Global Moderator Posted January 13, 2015 Global Moderator Share Posted January 13, 2015 They would actually split the disk access across two drives as opposed to one. The primary reason was that prior to the 7 series Intel chipset, trim is not supported for SSDs in a RAID configuration. If you have a current 7, 8, or 9 series chipset, this is a non-issue. Not sure what's going on with those that say they notice no significant performance increases with Raid 0. With Raid 1 you will see basically the same performance. With Raid 5 you will see significant increased read and maybe slower writes. With Raid 0, everything should close to double. This is the case with SSDs and physical drives. And that's only if we're talking a two disk array. As you add more disks to the array, performance should increase exponentially. Maybe that was it. I don't think the Samsung 840 Pro does trim in raid mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorganX Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Maybe that was it. I don't think the Samsung 840 Pro does trim in raid mode. It does. The drive either support trim or it doesn't. The 840 pro does. The issue is whether or not the raid controller does. Most people at home use the Intel Matrix Raid Controller built into the IO controller on motherboard chipsets. If you have a series 7 or higher it does support trim for Raid 0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra.Xtreme Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 The chipset is the Intel motherboard chipset. Specifically the IO controller. All above IHC6R support trim for Raid 0. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Matrix_RAID Since release 11.2.0.0000, TRIM commands can be read by the RAID controller in 7 series chipsets. There is no TRIM support in older chipsets.[19] Intel states that RST support has been added for the X79 chipset in RST version 11.6.0.0000 and after. Contained in the RST Production Version Release Notes, contained here.[20] On some 6 series chipsets there is a modification which will add a modded ROM to the BIOS which will allow TRIM support on the 6 series chipset, contained here.[21] Nice, I didn't know it worked that way. Thanks for the info. MorganX 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patseguin Global Moderator Posted January 13, 2015 Global Moderator Share Posted January 13, 2015 It does. The drive either support trim or it doesn't. The 840 pro does. The issue is whether or not the raid controller does. Most people at home use the Intel Matrix Raid Controller built into the IO controller on motherboard chipsets. If you have a series 7 or higher it does support trim for Raid 0. I don't know. I had poor performance with RAID and when I researched it I found articles stating that the 840 Pro doesn't support TRIM in RAID mode. I was running in RAID 1 mode though. I wonder if RAID 0 is the way to go if in fact TRIM will be supported. Here is what I am reading: #2 01-07-2011, 09:08 PM Blue Falcon The Geek Redneck, 12.6 Years Status: The Intel RST drivers have supported the ATA TRIM command since March of 2010. It's important to note that TRIM is supported for SSDs in a NON-RAID configuration, meaning if you have multiple SSDs in a RAID configuration then the TRIM command isn't passed onto the drives. __________________ www.bbpix.com - Free image hosting for the [H] Intel i5-2500k @ 4.9ghz on a Gigabyte Z68XP-UD3 Mobo 16GB (4x4GB) Corsair XMS3 1600 Asus STRIX Geforce GTX 970 4GB 2x Crucial MX100 256GB (RAID0) + 1 x 2TB Seagate ST2000DM LG 8X BD-R/RW Corsair 750TX V2 750w PSU (Recent RMA replacement for my OG 750TX - thanks Corsair!) "Only thing that really turns me off is odor If the vagina stinks I get turned off quick. " - rkatapt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts