680SLI = Horrible Performance

[SugarJ]

If he's already OC'd to 4.0, he'd be running 5.0 if he could.

xnikx, I'd be looking at a board that can run dual slot PCI-E 3.0 x16 lanes. That's an LGA2011, or a Z77 board with a multiplex/NF200 chip in it.

[dandelioneater]

Originally Posted by xnikx

well i haver two 680s because im trying to run 5760x1080, three 27in monitors.

@skymtl, what direction should i go for a new cpu? z77 and a 3770k? or lg2011?

Z77 and 3570K if you just do games. There isn't any benefit of going with a 3770K for games

[SKYMTL]

Originally Posted by xnikx

@skymtl, what direction should i go for a new cpu? z77 and a 3770k? or lg2011?

Your resolution is quite low and you are not running at optimal SLI resolution. Essentially, your GPUs are overpowering you monitor as well.

Take a newer DX11 game, max out the MSAA and everything else. I can almost promise you that even at 1080P, you'll be running near 100% on the GPUs.

IMO, no upgrades are necessary.

[Phill]

Z77 3570K or 3770K if you like!!

[xnikx]

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Your resolution is quite low and you are not running at optimal SLI resolution. Essentially, your GPUs are overpowering you monitor as well.

Take a newer DX11 game, max out the MSAA and everything else. I can almost promise you that even at 1080P, you'll be running near 100% on the GPUs.

IMO, no upgrades are necessary.

im running 5760x1080, i was just using 1920x1080 so i can get maximum sli performance.

i just bough planet side 2 and cant even play it because my cards refuse to be used more than 40% in that game, getting an average of 30 fps.

there is a thread on another forum, not sure if i can post the link here, with a good amount of people experiencing the same issue. they all seem to be convinced it is a driver issue, but im not believing that anymore.

here is a quote from the topic
"got the same here. even with 3770k@4.6ghz"
so this is what worries me about upgrading, hes experiencing the same issue with the cpu im considering upgrading to.

they all claim they cannot get more than 60% gpu usage. this also happens in crysis 2 with all settings maxed with dx11 and high res textures.
in crysis 2 and bf3 i experience fps drops into the 40s, even seen 38. That is unacceptable for two 4gb 680s, if you ask me.
This is on a single monitor, 1920x1080, but when i play 5760x1080 on basically the lowest settings in crysis 2 i get great gpu usage and avg 70fps.
i can also run bf3 on 5760x1080 on mostly medium settings, some settings on ultra, with better performance than i get running it 1920x1080 on ultra.

i just dont see how, on a single monitor, my old 1gb 460s performed better than my 680s.

And i don't think i can overclock anymore than 4ghz stably.

ill run 3d mark 11 tonight and post my gpu and cpu usage.

[Masteroderus]

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Your resolution is quite low and you are not running at optimal SLI resolution. Essentially, your GPUs are overpowering you monitor as well.

Take a newer DX11 game, max out the MSAA and everything else. I can almost promise you that even at 1080P, you'll be running near 100% on the GPUs.

IMO, no upgrades are necessary.

^what this guy said.

[SKYMTL]

The issue you are having is that some games don't have working SLI profiles yet (Planetside) or just don't NEED that amount of GPU horsepower (L4D2).

Are you playing with VSYNC off? Are there adaptive performance presets enabled in the NVIDIA control panel? Has PhysX been turned on?

[xnikx]

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

The issue you are having is that some games don't have working SLI profiles yet (Planetside) or just don't NEED that amount of GPU horsepower (L4D2).

Are you playing with VSYNC off? Are there adaptive performance presets enabled in the NVIDIA control panel? Has PhysX been turned on?

so than why is l4d2 using 98% but more demanding games wont?

vsync is off, prefer maximum performance is on, phsyx is on.

this is my bf3 performance, cpu usage is in the high 40s or low 50s.
stock ultra settings, so 4x msaa, 16x aa, hbao
5760x1080

1920x1080

[headsh0t]

I had issues running crossfire with Planetside 2 and seemed to get better performance from a single card, so that game probably just has a lack of driver support at the moment. It should be fine when the full game is released (it is in beta).

[SKYMTL]

Originally Posted by xnikx

so than why is l4d2 using 98% but more demanding games wont?

It depends on which settings you are referring to. First and foremost, Source games are partially multi-core aware, which many other (even newer) games aren't. This means they are better able to utilize the CPU's given resources across multiple threads to speed up performance. While L4D2 may NOT need all of that horsepower, it is better able to MAXIMIZE the given resources.

this is my bf3 performance, cpu usage is in the high 40s or low 50s.
stock ultra settings, so 4x msaa, 16x aa, hbao
5760x1080

This is once again another game that is multi-core aware. For an indicator of where performance should be check out our latest multi card GPU review:

HD 7990 Review; PowerColor’s Devil 13

Figure that we got 70 FPS. Now, to even things out on a system to system basis factor in our overclock & architecture differences (-10%) and map variance (-5%) along with possible mobo differences (-2%) and at those settings, you should be getting ~55 to 60 FPS. It may be slightly more of a drop-off for you since certain maps will feature variable performance but us that as a benchmark.