Monster Build Box 4xTitans only does 15-50FPS in rF2

With the 680's I try everything you can imagine but the bottom line is if the game your playing isn't coded well for SLI your wasting your time. WHen I got the titan I just installed it and didn't have to do a damn thing. Worked like a dream right out of the box. The 680's in SLI worked fine in many other games including AC but...I wanted a system that would run rF2 good and the single Titan GPU was the ticket. No more being at the mercy of the developers SLI coding

 

I'm getting like 90-140 now and getting ready to turn off a bunch of services... I'm pretty happy.

I think it is either something left over and not working in the old install or it's moving the install to the main drive.

152FPS here.

View attachment 16951

 

Come on. Titan X doesn't even top SLI 970's or the 295x2 and even 7970 crossfire is competitive to the new Titan X....its not a wonder card....its just good/really good by itself.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan_X/16.html

 

These aren't Titan X's... These are plain Titans. First Gen. Which is a suped up 780.

 

I know only this Titan X and I own also one.

GTX TITAN X Engine Specs:
3072CUDA Cores
1000Base Clock (MHz)
1075Boost Clock (MHz)
192Texture Fill Rate (GigaTexels/sec)
GTX TITAN X Memory Specs:
7.0 GbpsMemory Clock
12 GBStandard Memory Config
GDDR5Memory Interface
384-bitMemory Interface Width
336.5Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec)
GTX TITAN X Technology Support:
Yes (4-way)NVIDIA SLI® Ready
YesNVIDIA G-Sync™-Ready
YesNVIDIA GameStream™-Ready
YesGeForce ShadowPlay™
2.0NVIDIA GPU Boost™
YesDynamic Super Resolution
YesMFAA
YesNVIDIA GameWorks™
12 API with Feature Level 12.1Microsoft DirectX
4.5OpenGL
YesCUDA
PCI Express 3.0 Bus Support
Windows 8 & 8.1, Windows 7, Windows Vista, Linux, FreeBSD x86OS Certification
Display Support:
5120x3200Maximum Digital Resolution*
2048x1536Maximum VGA Resolution
Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 Standard Display Connectors
4 displaysMulti Monitor
YesHDCP
InternalAudio Input for HDMI
GTX TITAN X Graphics Card Dimensions:
4.376 inchesHeight
10.5 inchesLength
Dual-widthWidth
Thermal and Power Specs:
91 CMaximum GPU Tempurature (in C)
250 WGraphics Card Power (W)
600 WMinimum System Power Requirement (W)
6-pin + 8-pin

After running FireStrike, I lost ~3000 marks. The card runs consistently 30fps slower and a good 20 degrees hotter than the SLI - despite what I've seen in the reviews. I expected to pick up a couple of thousand 3D marks.
Titan X is only marginally better than a 780 ti in many of the games I have tested, the difference is only a few fps, with both beating the 980. My 3dMark score though is ~1500better with 1 Titan X than it was with one 780GTX ti.
Remember that my claim is not about 4k.

You do not have to agree with me, my purpose is only share my experience as Titan X and 780ti owner and 980 which I only have tested.

 

Well, his are the 6gb versions. The first Titan... He scored 21000 on his first run of 3D Mark. And he did muich better with just one. He had 3 GTX 780's before this.

 

The 780 Ti is a beast, I'm regretting selling all of mine.

I'm looking to buy a 970 until I see used 980 Tis for decent prices but the 970 comes out to only $25-$40 less than what I sold the the 780 Tis for and the 970 get's it's ass kicked by the 780 Ti and the gap between them grows even more with higher resolutions (i.e. triple screens) because of the 970's and 980's (non-Ti) stupidly slow memory bandwidth compared to the 780 Ti.

It blows my mind how so many buy 970s when, for just $25-$50 more, a 780 Ti can be had. It's only because one starts with a "7" and one a "9" and is "current gen", lol! Then you have the insane price gap between the 780 Ti and 980, yet 980s are selling tons. Lol!

The 980 Ti and Titan X are a different story though as they're a totally different GPU than the 970 and 980. They (980 Ti and TiX) annihilate the 970 and 980 (as-well as the 780 Ti).

 

I have 780 ti 3 way SLI, I am going to wait to next gen. before I buy new GFX cards and build new PC, no 980ti to me.
If ISI does not fix SLI problems I simply don`t play rF2 there are loads of other games out there with SLI support as new gen of games should have. Many of third party and ISI tracks does not work with SLI, HDR and multiview etc.(14-30 fps).
I have top of the line PC with 34" curved triple screens. Why the hell should I turn off my SLI or play with no HDR, Multiview etc, nooooooooo that is not going to happen. rF2 SLI problem is old theme and in every SLI theread ISI devs are not present . I do not think that ISI is never going to upgrade SLI support.

 

EVGA has B stock for $470... They're proud of it huh?

http://www.evga.com/products/Produc...ily=GeForce+700+Series+Family&chipset=GTX+780

I know where you can get a 780 with a water block for a good price right now. freind of mine is selling this.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/321779610067?&autorefresh=true

 

Sli is finally address with this fix that Spinelli found.

http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/25620-Perfect-SLI-Scaling-w-rFactor-2-Great-Job-ISI!

 

Thanks for the mention, but I found the Lego bits from other RF2 users post-b982. If f it wasn't for them, I would never have known

 

SLI Issues in Build 982 Are Not Addressed

The fact that sli compatibility bits meant for another game worked at all is a complete accident and not due to any profile tuning on the part of ISI. The profile has to be produced by Nvidia as per the following:

"The NVIDIA driver supports application-specific SLI profiles that select the best mode for SLI performance scaling, and allow the driver to use heuristics to avoid certain forms of inter-GPU communication or CPU-GPU synchronization. By sending your application to NVIDIA we can create a profile for your application, which will obviate the need for some of the common changes suggested in this document to handle SLI configurations. In some cases, however, driver profiles may not be the most optimal solution, and application changes may be recommended. Once we have created a profile for an application, the profile is added to our next driver release, making it available to the end users as soon as they install the updated driver." ISI does not appear to have submitted the rF2 executable to Nvidia for an updated profile since 2011 (according to the timestamp on the profile).

While scaling may have improved as a result of some optimizations ISI made to the executable code, stuttering and irregular frametime events are still common for multi-gpu multi-monitor setups at high resolutions.

As Nvidia mentions in their SLI best practices guide, it is a combination of the game developer's programming and an up to date profile created by Nvidia that results in smooth sli scaling and framerates.

"In the absence of an SLI profile that prevents the inter-GPU transfer of render targets, there is a way in which the application can to avoid this performance penalty: clearing the render target each frame before using it by calling the appropriate Clear() function. This applies to all render targets, whether used as color or depth-stencil buffers. If the application clears render targets in this fashion, the driver will assume that data does not need to be preserved and forego the need to copy the render targets between GPUs.

It is important to keep in mind that Clear calls should continue being used where important for performance either on single GPU or in SLI configurations, independently of the existence of a SLI profile for your application. Clears are important for good performance on depth buffers and multisampled surfaces (either color or depth), and should always be preferred over full-screen quads that fill the surface with a constant value. At the same time, while clearing such surfaces once per frame before they are used is a good practice, Clears should be used judiciously, such that redundant Clear calls are avoided."

While the improvements coded by the developers are welcome, an updated profile created specifically for rF2 by Nvidia would likely reduce the stuttering still present. That requires an up to date executable from ISI for Nvidia to test.

In conclusion, its way too early to declare victory on solving sli issues; it could all change with the next build. The compatibility bits that work today may not work tomorrow as was the case from B946 -> B982.

 

I get true scaling with the bits and it's for more than just one game. when nVidia finds out it works for other games they add that game to the list. And I get no stuttering in full rez all the way up.

 

To be honest with you, otta - with regards to your very last paragraph - I found all the SLI profiles people claimed to work (prior to LEGO and b984) to be absolutely rubbish. The ones that did work would only do so with HDR off, or reflections off, or high amounts of supersampling AA (which can mask poor SLI scaling), etc. The LEGO bits + b982 is the first time SLI just seems to work with no "ifs", "ands", or "buts".

With Nvidia GPUs + RF2, I've used 2 motherboards, two sets of RAM, and 7 GPUs, so I doubt it was a case of the "everybody's system acts differently" claim that some tend to make.

 

Atleast that's a possitive attitude (possibly unintentional)