Nvidia 337.50 Beta Drivers

[Belexandor]

I too have a GTX 760 4GB VRAM. What resolution are you running at and what are you considering unacceptable? Currently I'm running at 1920x1080 with a full STEP:Extended install and rarely go below the capped 60FPS. So I'm curious how your frame rate would be unacceptable.

I'm running at 1920X1080 also. Up until last week I was running SR:LE with no deviation from Neo's instruction except:

using legendary textures optimized from the Nexus rather than DDSopting them myself

using Bethesda Hi Res optimized from the nexus rather than DDSopting them myself

 

Using ENB graphics disabled (using only ENBoost) I am able to maintain between 40-58 FPS

With the ENB enabled I drop down into the mid to low 30s and even into the high 20s in some places.

That's what I'm calling unacceptable. 

 

I should note that I'm running an AMD rig (FX6300@4.0 GHz).

Just ordered two SSDs so that I can do a fresh install using one for the OS and for a dedicated SKYDRIVE. I'm hoping it helps with load times considering the massive amount of texture replacers.

 

Edit: those FPS numbers are of course outdoors. Everything inside is like butter.

Edited April 9, 2014 by Belexandor

[TechAngel85]

Must be something in SE:LE that causes the FPS loss because with STEP:Extended it's a silky 60FPS almost everywhere for me. I'm running an Intel Core i5 4670K.

[Miguel]

one of the reasons you could have such low fps could be your amd cpu

have a look at this benchmark: https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/06/12/intel-core-i5-4670k-haswell-cpu-review/5

while it doesnt have your cpu benchmarked you can notice the performance improvement with a intel cpu is huge

that said i'm afraid to say your fps seems normal for your rig

[Tarikko1]

one of the reasons you could have such low fps could be your amd cpu

have a look at this benchmark: https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/06/12/intel-core-i5-4670k-haswell-cpu-review/5

while it doesnt have your cpu benchmarked you can notice the performance improvement with a intel cpu is huge

that said i'm afraid to say your fps seems normal for your rig

Well i get exactly the same FPS as Belexandor... With a I7 980x CPU oced to 4.4, a 780 Nvidia GFX card and an SSD, running at 1920 x 1080.

 

Indoors are smooth and my fps is in the 50s, outdoor and heavy demanding areas i dip to low 30s and even high 20s before I decided to OC my CPU.

 

I am doing a fresh re-install and will be trying the new Nvidia drivers once they are out of Beta. Hopefully this will give me a slight boost. Anything below 35 fps is kinda unacceptable tbh, specially with my system which can be considered high end.

[Mangaclub]

I also just tested out the latest beta. Wow, finally the Stuttering while turning around is gone and everything feels really smooth here with my GTX 670. Although no FPS boost.

[TechAngel85]

@Tarikko1,

 

Yours may be your CPU too. Those CPUs are older and were mainly developed for servers rather than desktops. I've explained this before but Westmere's were originally targeted to server implementations rather than desktops. There were a few offshoots that Intel aimed towards the desktop market as a marketing ploy for the fastest at the time. In truth they were; however, only a year later Intel released the Sandy Bridge-E processors which over took them at stock speeds. Each generation since has been better than those remarketed Westmere i7s at stock. And even at when overclocked, it started to make less of a difference with Ivy Bridge.

 

I don't know if those numbers are with or without ENB, but if they're without then my i5 Haswell (stock) and GTX 760 (stock) is getting better frame rates than your oc'ed Westmere and GTX 780 combo. If that is with ENB...well, I haven't installed an ENB to know what performance I get there.

[EssArrBee]

@Tarikko1,

 

Yours may be your CPU too. Those CPUs are older and were mainly developed for servers rather than desktops. I've explained this before but Westmere's were originally targeted to server implementations rather than desktops. There were a few offshoots that Intel aimed towards the desktop market as a marketing ploy for the fastest at the time. In truth they were; however, only a year later Intel released the Sandy Bridge-E processors which over took them at stock speeds. Each generation since has been better than those remarketed Westmere i7s at stock. And even at when overclocked, it started to make less of a difference with Ivy Bridge.

 

I don't know if those numbers are with or without ENB, but if they're without then my i5 Haswell (stock) and GTX 760 (stock) is getting better frame rates than your oc'ed Westmere and GTX 780 combo. If that is with ENB...well, I haven't installed an ENB to know what performance I get there.

Can confirm. My desktop has Westmeres and it is good but not great at gaming, even with monster cards hooked up. For compute purposes, they are amazing and just eat up simulations. If I wasn't so lazy, I'd just buy a new chip and motherboard and build a proper desktop instead of trying to game on a makeshift workstation.

[Belexandor]

In my case, I can confirm that it is Vividian that eats up the extra FPS. Without graphical enhancements turned on in enblocal, I gain 7-10 FPS back on average.

 

Concerning CPUs: It is well documented that I5 3500 and 4500 series owns nearly every other chip in terms of gaming. However, the AMD FX series is a great everyday computing chip and shines in applications that can make use of the extra cores. That's why I went with it. I think for me it would be more cost effective to simply add another 760 ($300) to get the frame rates up as opposed to going with and intel board and chip ($450 or so). Some time this year I might get around to turning my current rig into a server and building a true gaming machine. At that point...yeah, Intel all the way.

 

I fear I've led the discussion astray and speedily apologize before before Phazer comes in and hits me with a broom.

 

The new drivers seem to be getting good reviews from the community here and Neo's word counts for a lot as I'm using his guide so here's hoping for an improved Skyrim once my SSDs come in.

[Tarikko1]

My frame rates are with ENB enabled on High Settings.

 

 

Maybe i should replace my CPU, what do you guys suggest? How about the 4960?

[phazer11]

My frame rates are with ENB enabled on High Settings.

 

 

Maybe i should replace my CPU, what do you guys suggest? How about the 4960?

If you're just a gamer mainly get an i7 that doesn't cost $1K get a 4770k or similar (a 4930k at the most) and a good motherboard.

[Tarikko1]

I am purely a gamer :)

[WilliamImm]

I suggest very high end i5 (4670K is my recommendation). Typically, you don't really need the extra features of the i7 to game properly.

[Tarikko1]

Ok noted William thx for the feedback.

[TechAngel85]

I concur with William. Unless you have programs that take advantage of the features of an i7 (adobe photoshop, adobe premiere, etc) then the i7 isn't really worth it. The i5-4670K will save your around $100 and it can be overclocked nicely with the proper cooling.

[Tarikko1]

At factory speed will it offer a better performance than the i7 980x?