I am stuck when it comes to upgrading my system for 3D Vision. I know I want better performance but I don't know how to go about it.
I game at resolution 1920 x 1080 and don't plan on going higher.
CPU wise I have an i5 2500 over clocked to 4.5Ghz. When it comes to upgrading a processor I keep reading that it is unnecessary to upgrade from the 2500 in order to improve gaming performance. The thing is I play a lot of fallout 3 and skyrim in 3D, which are said to be CPU bound, I noticed an improvement when over clocking so is there a way up from here making it worth upgrading? This is probably my biggest problem, I forever hear the argument that the CPU upgrade is pointless, then some guy says other games might benefit. No idea where to go on upgrading the famous i5 2500.
My graphics card is the GTX 780, just the one. I really don't want to go the SLI route to be honest. I guess most people would say that this is plenty but for 3D i think it struggles a bit, I cant get smooth game play out of the titles I play, or have to reduce quality and resolution. Would the Titan X solve a lot of my problems at 1920x 1080? Its a crazy purchase but I would go for it if it gave me decent performance in 3D lol.
Not that I am loaded but money isn't a big issue on this upgrade so I am willing to spend a lot in order to get a decent 3D experience, apart from the fact I don't want to go SLI. I know I like the effect as been using for around a year and cant imagine going back. I just want to improve the performance at this point. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Just to add, this forum has been invaluable since going the 3D vision direction :-)
I am stuck when it comes to upgrading my system for 3D Vision. I know I want better performance but I don't know how to go about it.
I game at resolution 1920 x 1080 and don't plan on going higher.
CPU wise I have an i5 2500 over clocked to 4.5Ghz. When it comes to upgrading a processor I keep reading that it is unnecessary to upgrade from the 2500 in order to improve gaming performance. The thing is I play a lot of fallout 3 and skyrim in 3D, which are said to be CPU bound, I noticed an improvement when over clocking so is there a way up from here making it worth upgrading? This is probably my biggest problem, I forever hear the argument that the CPU upgrade is pointless, then some guy says other games might benefit. No idea where to go on upgrading the famous i5 2500.
My graphics card is the GTX 780, just the one. I really don't want to go the SLI route to be honest. I guess most people would say that this is plenty but for 3D i think it struggles a bit, I cant get smooth game play out of the titles I play, or have to reduce quality and resolution. Would the Titan X solve a lot of my problems at 1920x 1080? Its a crazy purchase but I would go for it if it gave me decent performance in 3D lol.
Not that I am loaded but money isn't a big issue on this upgrade so I am willing to spend a lot in order to get a decent 3D experience, apart from the fact I don't want to go SLI. I know I like the effect as been using for around a year and cant imagine going back. I just want to improve the performance at this point. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Just to add, this forum has been invaluable since going the 3D vision direction :-)
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)
What kind of performance are you getting now? What kind of graphics settings are you running Skyrim and Fallout 3 at? What kind of framerate/performance settings would you like to be getting?
What kind of performance are you getting now? What kind of graphics settings are you running Skyrim and Fallout 3 at? What kind of framerate/performance settings would you like to be getting?
I have to play Fallout 3 and Skyrim on 1600 x 900 (native res is 1900 x 1080) otherwise the frame rate is erratic. In these games when fps dips below 50 - 60 fps you get severe slowdown so looking to maintain 60. I am now leaving Skyrim until I can address the problem as the slowdown becomes too frequent. Fallout 3 is playable because I have scaled down the object draw distance massively and its also in lower res. Ideally i would like to play these games 1080 with more draw distance.
I also tried out Far Cry 3, which played well in some areas but again lowered res to 1600 x 900 as it was just smoother, the problem performance wise is it lagged and stuttered in building or outpost areas so stopped playing, I cant exactly remember the fps but it sometimes went well below 30 in these areas.
I have to play Fallout 3 and Skyrim on 1600 x 900 (native res is 1900 x 1080) otherwise the frame rate is erratic. In these games when fps dips below 50 - 60 fps you get severe slowdown so looking to maintain 60. I am now leaving Skyrim until I can address the problem as the slowdown becomes too frequent. Fallout 3 is playable because I have scaled down the object draw distance massively and its also in lower res. Ideally i would like to play these games 1080 with more draw distance.
I also tried out Far Cry 3, which played well in some areas but again lowered res to 1600 x 900 as it was just smoother, the problem performance wise is it lagged and stuttered in building or outpost areas so stopped playing, I cant exactly remember the fps but it sometimes went well below 30 in these areas.
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)
In general, yes you are going to be CPU limited in 3D. It takes more horsepower to drive the 3D vision part of the equation. Since you lower resolution, and it helps, that also says you are GPU limited, not CPU limited though. Look at your GPU when the game is running and also check if it is not maxed out.
When people say a better CPU will help, that is unlikely. The 2500 at 4.5GHz is nearly as good as it can be at present. With Haswell you might pick up another 10% in performance, which might be worthwhile since it seems like the actual limit.
Check your temps- be sure you aren't getting throttling. And set power settings to high-performance, same as 'unparking' cores to make sure it doesn't drop to low power modes and make it erratic.
Are you running heavy mods with the games? 3G on a 780 will run out fairly fast with some Skyrim mods.
Edit: D'oh. Going too fast there. Edited it as RAGEdemon points out.
In general, yes you are going to be CPU limited in 3D. It takes more horsepower to drive the 3D vision part of the equation. Since you lower resolution, and it helps, that also says you are GPU limited, not CPU limited though. Look at your GPU when the game is running and also check if it is not maxed out.
When people say a better CPU will help, that is unlikely. The 2500 at 4.5GHz is nearly as good as it can be at present. With Haswell you might pick up another 10% in performance, which might be worthwhile since it seems like the actual limit.
Check your temps- be sure you aren't getting throttling. And set power settings to high-performance, same as 'unparking' cores to make sure it doesn't drop to low power modes and make it erratic.
Are you running heavy mods with the games? 3G on a 780 will run out fairly fast with some Skyrim mods.
Edit: D'oh. Going too fast there. Edited it as RAGEdemon points out.
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607 Latest 3Dmigoto Release Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
[quote="bo3b"]Since you lower resolution, and it helps, that also says you are CPU limited, not GPU limited.[/quote]
I'm not sure I agree with that bo3b. I would say it's the exact opposite. Maybe it's a typo? Resolutions take a toll on the GPU more than anything else. In fact, most review sites benchmark CPUs by setting the resolutions to low to ensure there is no GPU limiting.
Agreed on nothing noticeably better CPU wise comparing to a 4.5GHz 2500 though...
@OP I can confirm rock solid 60FPS in 3D Skyrim with all mods installed including 4k textures with my old 670 4GB SLi and i7-920 @ 4GHz. I am stuck on 800p however, due to 3D projector.
Why are you against SLi? In 3D it almost doubles the FPS. 3D Vision scaling is quite remarkable in SLi.
bo3b said:Since you lower resolution, and it helps, that also says you are CPU limited, not GPU limited.
I'm not sure I agree with that bo3b. I would say it's the exact opposite. Maybe it's a typo? Resolutions take a toll on the GPU more than anything else. In fact, most review sites benchmark CPUs by setting the resolutions to low to ensure there is no GPU limiting.
Agreed on nothing noticeably better CPU wise comparing to a 4.5GHz 2500 though...
@OP I can confirm rock solid 60FPS in 3D Skyrim with all mods installed including 4k textures with my old 670 4GB SLi and i7-920 @ 4GHz. I am stuck on 800p however, due to 3D projector.
Why are you against SLi? In 3D it almost doubles the FPS. 3D Vision scaling is quite remarkable in SLi.
Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.
If you have the room to add a second GPU, put a dedicated PhysX GPU in it. This will at least gain you extra performance in games that use it.
Volnaiskra did some tests that you can use as a guideline for expected gains.
http://www.volnapc.com/all-posts/how-much-difference-does-a-dedicated-physx-card-make
If more was known about Pascal, I'd tell you to wait until it releases. Provided that it still works with 3D Vision and Nvidia releases decent drivers, it might be a great solution.
Pascal will have "a lot" of memory on the GPU and will use new architecture that avoids a lot of the performance lost by transferring information back and forth across the PCIe bus to the CPU.
It will use NVLink, a chip-to-chip communication technology that should reduce bottlenecks and rendering time by having the graphics card do more of the processing.
Plus Pascal will be 16 nm, whereas Maxwell got stuck at 20nm.
If more was known about Pascal, I'd tell you to wait until it releases. Provided that it still works with 3D Vision and Nvidia releases decent drivers, it might be a great solution.
Pascal will have "a lot" of memory on the GPU and will use new architecture that avoids a lot of the performance lost by transferring information back and forth across the PCIe bus to the CPU.
It will use NVLink, a chip-to-chip communication technology that should reduce bottlenecks and rendering time by having the graphics card do more of the processing.
Plus Pascal will be 16 nm, whereas Maxwell got stuck at 20nm.
[quote="D-Man11"]If you have the room to add a second GPU, put a dedicated PhysX GPU in it. This will at least gain you extra performance in games that use it.[/quote] Fallout 3 and Skyrim don't use PhysX, so that's not going to help his specific situation much.
D-Man11 said:If you have the room to add a second GPU, put a dedicated PhysX GPU in it. This will at least gain you extra performance in games that use it.
Fallout 3 and Skyrim don't use PhysX, so that's not going to help his specific situation much.
I had a bit of time today to test performance of CPU and GPU in Fallout 3 as that's the only game I have installed at present. It seems the CPU is definitely the problem i think, the 780 ranges between 40 % to 50% useage according to MSI Afterburn. I had the i5 set to stock then overclocked it to 4.6 to push it a bit and there was a noticeable improvement but still a bit shaky at 1900 x 1080, I have to bring draw distance right down to make it playable. I will try a few other titles when I get more time as will be interested to see how the more GPU dependent games will perform at 1900 x 1080.
So it looks like a bad ass CPU is needed to make an upgrade worth while from the i5 2500 but doesn't appear to exist at the moment. Concerning SLI, its basically a headache I don't have time for, I think the compatibility and stuttering problems would bother me, it seems like support for 3D is waning as it is let alone SLI to go with it. Thanks for the input.
I had a bit of time today to test performance of CPU and GPU in Fallout 3 as that's the only game I have installed at present. It seems the CPU is definitely the problem i think, the 780 ranges between 40 % to 50% useage according to MSI Afterburn. I had the i5 set to stock then overclocked it to 4.6 to push it a bit and there was a noticeable improvement but still a bit shaky at 1900 x 1080, I have to bring draw distance right down to make it playable. I will try a few other titles when I get more time as will be interested to see how the more GPU dependent games will perform at 1900 x 1080.
So it looks like a bad ass CPU is needed to make an upgrade worth while from the i5 2500 but doesn't appear to exist at the moment. Concerning SLI, its basically a headache I don't have time for, I think the compatibility and stuttering problems would bother me, it seems like support for 3D is waning as it is let alone SLI to go with it. Thanks for the input.
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)
I'm running a 4690K @ 3.5ghz and SLI 970. If you send me a save and tell me your settings, I can check my framerate in the same area you're looking at (Fallout 3 or Skyrim). Assuming you don't have some crazy mod setup, that is.
I'm running a 4690K @ 3.5ghz and SLI 970. If you send me a save and tell me your settings, I can check my framerate in the same area you're looking at (Fallout 3 or Skyrim). Assuming you don't have some crazy mod setup, that is.
[quote="Ritchski"]
So it looks like a bad ass CPU is needed to make an upgrade worth while from the i5 2500 but doesn't appear to exist at the moment.
[/quote]
Yeah, wait for Skylake, which will be released by the end of the year, because what you need is a much higher per clock performace.
Haswell is faster than Sandy Bridge, but the speed gain is mostly big in emulators, and not that much in PC games, I heard. And paying for a new CPU and motherboard when 2 new Intel generations are going to be released later this year isn't a good move.
Ritchski said:
So it looks like a bad ass CPU is needed to make an upgrade worth while from the i5 2500 but doesn't appear to exist at the moment.
Yeah, wait for Skylake, which will be released by the end of the year, because what you need is a much higher per clock performace.
Haswell is faster than Sandy Bridge, but the speed gain is mostly big in emulators, and not that much in PC games, I heard. And paying for a new CPU and motherboard when 2 new Intel generations are going to be released later this year isn't a good move.
Alright, I'll throw in my two cents. A 4.5Ghz cpu and a 780 should be a pretty decent combination, just maybe not for 3D. I have always had an issue with high end games at ultra settings in 3D @ 1080p using a 4.5Ghz sandybridge CPU and dual GTX 680's. Switching to dual GTX 980's solved the problem. My first thought is that a 780 is simply not fast enough for the settings being used. Upgrading the CPU is definitely not worth the $ as others have pointed out. Adding a second 780 or a newer gen card would go much, much further towards getting playable framerates in my opinion with the info provided. Since software could also be causing a problem you might also throw in a spare hard drive/ssd and load a fresh copy of windows to see if that helps at all (probably not). Keep in mind that in order to render 1080p in 3D @ 60Hz you have to output double the framerate, that can have a large impact and in general you will need double the graphics horsepower that you would need in 2D.
Good luck!
Alright, I'll throw in my two cents. A 4.5Ghz cpu and a 780 should be a pretty decent combination, just maybe not for 3D. I have always had an issue with high end games at ultra settings in 3D @ 1080p using a 4.5Ghz sandybridge CPU and dual GTX 680's. Switching to dual GTX 980's solved the problem. My first thought is that a 780 is simply not fast enough for the settings being used. Upgrading the CPU is definitely not worth the $ as others have pointed out. Adding a second 780 or a newer gen card would go much, much further towards getting playable framerates in my opinion with the info provided. Since software could also be causing a problem you might also throw in a spare hard drive/ssd and load a fresh copy of windows to see if that helps at all (probably not). Keep in mind that in order to render 1080p in 3D @ 60Hz you have to output double the framerate, that can have a large impact and in general you will need double the graphics horsepower that you would need in 2D.
[quote="Ritchski"]I had a bit of time today to test performance of CPU and GPU in Fallout 3 as that's the only game I have installed at present. It seems the CPU is definitely the problem i think, the 780 ranges between 40 % to 50% useage according to MSI Afterburn. I had the i5 set to stock then overclocked it to 4.6 to push it a bit and there was a noticeable improvement but still a bit shaky at 1900 x 1080, I have to bring draw distance right down to make it playable. I will try a few other titles when I get more time as will be interested to see how the more GPU dependent games will perform at 1900 x 1080.
So it looks like a bad ass CPU is needed to make an upgrade worth while from the i5 2500 but doesn't appear to exist at the moment. Concerning SLI, its basically a headache I don't have time for, I think the compatibility and stuttering problems would bother me, it seems like support for 3D is waning as it is let alone SLI to go with it. Thanks for the input.
[/quote]
I've been running an i5 2500k at 4.3 for about 4 years now, and all my graphics cards during that time (single 580, sli 670 at 1080p, single 980 1440p) all my cards have been able to run at 100% capacity under ideal circumstances e.g. Crysis 3 on ultra settings, or the Metro series.
Once you have a "good enough" CPU you only have to worry about your GPU, and if you aren't getting full utilisation its probably an underpowered power supply, heat causing CPU or GPU throttling, drivers or SLI profiles, or just bad coding by the game devs causing the problem.
Ritchski said:I had a bit of time today to test performance of CPU and GPU in Fallout 3 as that's the only game I have installed at present. It seems the CPU is definitely the problem i think, the 780 ranges between 40 % to 50% useage according to MSI Afterburn. I had the i5 set to stock then overclocked it to 4.6 to push it a bit and there was a noticeable improvement but still a bit shaky at 1900 x 1080, I have to bring draw distance right down to make it playable. I will try a few other titles when I get more time as will be interested to see how the more GPU dependent games will perform at 1900 x 1080.
So it looks like a bad ass CPU is needed to make an upgrade worth while from the i5 2500 but doesn't appear to exist at the moment. Concerning SLI, its basically a headache I don't have time for, I think the compatibility and stuttering problems would bother me, it seems like support for 3D is waning as it is let alone SLI to go with it. Thanks for the input.
I've been running an i5 2500k at 4.3 for about 4 years now, and all my graphics cards during that time (single 580, sli 670 at 1080p, single 980 1440p) all my cards have been able to run at 100% capacity under ideal circumstances e.g. Crysis 3 on ultra settings, or the Metro series.
Once you have a "good enough" CPU you only have to worry about your GPU, and if you aren't getting full utilisation its probably an underpowered power supply, heat causing CPU or GPU throttling, drivers or SLI profiles, or just bad coding by the game devs causing the problem.
Thanks for the offer pirateguybrush, I'll have a look and see if mods are a problem, it would be interesting to hear how FO3 plays on your system.
I tried a couple more games out in 3d vision. Witcher 2 and alien isolation (great fix). It seems these games are a lot more GPU orientated than fallout and skyrim. In 3d vision my 780 is pretty much pushed to full usage. Alien isolation is playable but I get I lot of stuttering during movement (not looking). Witcher is a lot more demanding, Fps dips in the 30s in bigger areas, it's probably playable but the lacking frame rate would bother me.
So now I am wondering if a GPU upgrade would at least help for games like this. Would it be worth upgrading to a gtx980 or Titan x? Even through I won't be playing above 1900 1080 would the extra power of the Titan be utilised as its 3d vision?
Thanks for the offer pirateguybrush, I'll have a look and see if mods are a problem, it would be interesting to hear how FO3 plays on your system.
I tried a couple more games out in 3d vision. Witcher 2 and alien isolation (great fix). It seems these games are a lot more GPU orientated than fallout and skyrim. In 3d vision my 780 is pretty much pushed to full usage. Alien isolation is playable but I get I lot of stuttering during movement (not looking). Witcher is a lot more demanding, Fps dips in the 30s in bigger areas, it's probably playable but the lacking frame rate would bother me.
So now I am wondering if a GPU upgrade would at least help for games like this. Would it be worth upgrading to a gtx980 or Titan x? Even through I won't be playing above 1900 1080 would the extra power of the Titan be utilised as its 3d vision?
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)
Titan X is the next best (more expensive) step from SLi. Will it make a difference? Yes, huge, as long as the CPU is not the bottleneck.
There is a 3D Vision and Titan X thread here somewhere...
Thanks Vulcan that has given me something to think about. The Titan x is probably not the greatest idea for my purposes. The 780 definately doesn't quite cut it in 3d unfortunately but was a great card when I used it for 2d. I almost regret the day I got into 3d vision as I can't go back now! I am just happy with 1080 for now, so any upgrade that can give me decent 3d performance in that will do the job.
Thanks Vulcan that has given me something to think about. The Titan x is probably not the greatest idea for my purposes. The 780 definately doesn't quite cut it in 3d unfortunately but was a great card when I used it for 2d. I almost regret the day I got into 3d vision as I can't go back now! I am just happy with 1080 for now, so any upgrade that can give me decent 3d performance in that will do the job.
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)
I game at resolution 1920 x 1080 and don't plan on going higher.
CPU wise I have an i5 2500 over clocked to 4.5Ghz. When it comes to upgrading a processor I keep reading that it is unnecessary to upgrade from the 2500 in order to improve gaming performance. The thing is I play a lot of fallout 3 and skyrim in 3D, which are said to be CPU bound, I noticed an improvement when over clocking so is there a way up from here making it worth upgrading? This is probably my biggest problem, I forever hear the argument that the CPU upgrade is pointless, then some guy says other games might benefit. No idea where to go on upgrading the famous i5 2500.
My graphics card is the GTX 780, just the one. I really don't want to go the SLI route to be honest. I guess most people would say that this is plenty but for 3D i think it struggles a bit, I cant get smooth game play out of the titles I play, or have to reduce quality and resolution. Would the Titan X solve a lot of my problems at 1920x 1080? Its a crazy purchase but I would go for it if it gave me decent performance in 3D lol.
Not that I am loaded but money isn't a big issue on this upgrade so I am willing to spend a lot in order to get a decent 3D experience, apart from the fact I don't want to go SLI. I know I like the effect as been using for around a year and cant imagine going back. I just want to improve the performance at this point. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Just to add, this forum has been invaluable since going the 3D vision direction :-)
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)
I also tried out Far Cry 3, which played well in some areas but again lowered res to 1600 x 900 as it was just smoother, the problem performance wise is it lagged and stuttered in building or outpost areas so stopped playing, I cant exactly remember the fps but it sometimes went well below 30 in these areas.
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)
When people say a better CPU will help, that is unlikely. The 2500 at 4.5GHz is nearly as good as it can be at present. With Haswell you might pick up another 10% in performance, which might be worthwhile since it seems like the actual limit.
Check your temps- be sure you aren't getting throttling. And set power settings to high-performance, same as 'unparking' cores to make sure it doesn't drop to low power modes and make it erratic.
Are you running heavy mods with the games? 3G on a 780 will run out fairly fast with some Skyrim mods.
Edit: D'oh. Going too fast there. Edited it as RAGEdemon points out.
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
I'm not sure I agree with that bo3b. I would say it's the exact opposite. Maybe it's a typo? Resolutions take a toll on the GPU more than anything else. In fact, most review sites benchmark CPUs by setting the resolutions to low to ensure there is no GPU limiting.
Agreed on nothing noticeably better CPU wise comparing to a 4.5GHz 2500 though...
@OP I can confirm rock solid 60FPS in 3D Skyrim with all mods installed including 4k textures with my old 670 4GB SLi and i7-920 @ 4GHz. I am stuck on 800p however, due to 3D projector.
Why are you against SLi? In 3D it almost doubles the FPS. 3D Vision scaling is quite remarkable in SLi.
Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.
Volnaiskra did some tests that you can use as a guideline for expected gains.
http://www.volnapc.com/all-posts/how-much-difference-does-a-dedicated-physx-card-make
If more was known about Pascal, I'd tell you to wait until it releases. Provided that it still works with 3D Vision and Nvidia releases decent drivers, it might be a great solution.
Pascal will have "a lot" of memory on the GPU and will use new architecture that avoids a lot of the performance lost by transferring information back and forth across the PCIe bus to the CPU.
It will use NVLink, a chip-to-chip communication technology that should reduce bottlenecks and rendering time by having the graphics card do more of the processing.
Plus Pascal will be 16 nm, whereas Maxwell got stuck at 20nm.
So it looks like a bad ass CPU is needed to make an upgrade worth while from the i5 2500 but doesn't appear to exist at the moment. Concerning SLI, its basically a headache I don't have time for, I think the compatibility and stuttering problems would bother me, it seems like support for 3D is waning as it is let alone SLI to go with it. Thanks for the input.
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)
Yeah, wait for Skylake, which will be released by the end of the year, because what you need is a much higher per clock performace.
Haswell is faster than Sandy Bridge, but the speed gain is mostly big in emulators, and not that much in PC games, I heard. And paying for a new CPU and motherboard when 2 new Intel generations are going to be released later this year isn't a good move.
CPU: Intel Core i7 7700K @ 4.9GHz
Motherboard: Gigabyte Aorus GA-Z270X-Gaming 5
RAM: GSKILL Ripjaws Z 16GB 3866MHz CL18
GPU: Gainward Phoenix 1080 GLH
Monitor: Asus PG278QR
Speakers: Logitech Z506
Donations account: masterotakusuko@gmail.com
Good luck!
I've been running an i5 2500k at 4.3 for about 4 years now, and all my graphics cards during that time (single 580, sli 670 at 1080p, single 980 1440p) all my cards have been able to run at 100% capacity under ideal circumstances e.g. Crysis 3 on ultra settings, or the Metro series.
Once you have a "good enough" CPU you only have to worry about your GPU, and if you aren't getting full utilisation its probably an underpowered power supply, heat causing CPU or GPU throttling, drivers or SLI profiles, or just bad coding by the game devs causing the problem.
i7 4790k @ 4.6 - 16GB RAM - 2x SLI Titan X
27" ASUS ROG SWIFT, 28" - 65" Samsung UHD8200 4k 3DTV - Oculus Rift CV1 - 34" Acer Predator X34 Ultrawide
Old kit:
i5 2500k @ 4.4 - 8gb RAM
Acer H5360BD projector
GTX 580, SLI 670, GTX 980 EVGA SC
Acer XB280HK 4k 60hz
Oculus DK2
I tried a couple more games out in 3d vision. Witcher 2 and alien isolation (great fix). It seems these games are a lot more GPU orientated than fallout and skyrim. In 3d vision my 780 is pretty much pushed to full usage. Alien isolation is playable but I get I lot of stuttering during movement (not looking). Witcher is a lot more demanding, Fps dips in the 30s in bigger areas, it's probably playable but the lacking frame rate would bother me.
So now I am wondering if a GPU upgrade would at least help for games like this. Would it be worth upgrading to a gtx980 or Titan x? Even through I won't be playing above 1900 1080 would the extra power of the Titan be utilised as its 3d vision?
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)
There is a 3D Vision and Titan X thread here somewhere...
Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.
Windows 7
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.5GHZ
RAM - 16GB
GPU - Evga GTX 1080
Screen - Benq w1070 Projector 1280×720 res (edid override)