2560x1440 resolution
 

Hi.

Anyone here playing this game in 2560x1440 resolution?

Im thinking about getting the gtx 680 for this, i currently have the 580 and close over the terrain i get about 25-30fps with high settings, i have overclocked the card as well but gains from this is minimal, maybe 2-3fps on average.

I was hoping with the 680 i could get 50-60fps with same settings, anyone using this setup?

Hi,

How much VRAM does your 580GTX have on it? 1,5Gb or 3Gb ?

~S~

My 580gtx card have 1.5gig. The game runs very smooth in 1920x1024 but i have a 2560x1440 monitor, and to use 1920x1024 on a 2560x1440 monitor dosent look as crisp and clear.

Thats why i want to get a new card, but its a lot of money if you will only gain 10fps from 580 to 680.

I think, that this target on such a resolution wouldn't be possible. It depends on vram bigger 2 gb (better 2,5 or 3 gb) to reduce stutters from texture loading), but it also depends on the rest of the system.

1.) The game uses streaming engine and so, the landscape loads frim hdd at some point. So an SSD would be helpful to reduce stutters as well.
2.) At sone point the CPU gets the bottleneck and this could happen here, too. The game do not use multicore very well (just 2 cores effectively, if I am right?)
-> These 2 points are main focus. Later on it is also depending on small things like normal ram, the vram interface on the graphics card (which is quite slow for a top edge card like the 680 -> ati has a larger interface), etc.

I personally say: A high resolution and a streaming engine game is ATI strength. High vram, good interface and better performance on higher resolution beginning at your intended resolution upwards.

So, just to throw it in this thread: Did you also have an eye on hd7970 card?

Opinions and corrections appreciated. I try to learn more and more on this. :)

Last word: I think, that constant 60+fps is hardly reachable with current situation with highest settings.

That is the most important point (besides all the rest that is correct, too)


if you get 25-30 fps at this resolution near the ground you are doing excellent!

The GTX680 (or any ATI equivalent) will not be of great help I am afraid. you may get 20% better performance I believe but that will be all. The problem of this card is the 2Gb VRAM limit and this will reach quickly its limits when you start using high quality textures at high resolutions.

Unfortunately the GPU to enjoy this flight sim has not been invented yet.

You may be happier I think if you try to trade your GTX580 1.5GB with a GTX580 3Gb

~S~

Hmm i see your points.
But i never get stutters, only low fps.

Would be so nice to run this game in 2560x1440. But maybe its not possible, i read there is problem with SLI as well so gtx690 is out of the question and to expensive as well.

Maybe im better off getting a 24 inch monitor and just play this game in 1920x1024, just buy a decent one. Im very picky and want a crisp picture so dont want to play in lower resolution than the native 2560x1440.

Just change screen when i want to play. :)

Eheem...

Actualy, why don't you try to play CoD in 1920x1024 window mode in the centre of your 2560x1440 monitor?

This should be enough and spare you the pain of switching monitors.

I run my CoD as 1024x768 window on my 3840x1024 desktop.

~S~

yes i guess i could try that, thanks for the tip :)

Never thought about that before thx

Hmm, i see there is a 4gig version as well of the gtx 680.

Maybe this could be the best option for high res.

Indeed!
And here is the link to the benchmark which explains how performance drops on a 2Gb GTX680 card when the VRAM is overfilled:
http://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php....html?start=16
Using the game SKYRIM they increased MSAA & SGSSAA in order to fill the VRAM (they could have just easily fired up CoD and flown over London... :D )
2560x1600 res & 4xSGSSAA 1918 MB VRAM
2560x1600 res & 8xMSAA & 2xSGSSAA 3100 MB VRAM
2560x1600 res & 8xMSAA & 4xSGSSAA 3127 MB VRAM
2560x1600 res & 8xMSAA & 8xSGSSAA N/A MB VRAM

The drop in fps of the 2Gb GTX680 is impressive!


Keep in mind though that the same effect you will probably achieve with a GTX580 3Gb!
So your real issue is how to get a card with more Gb VRAM than the 1,5Gb you have now.
For sure the GTX680 is more performant than the GTX580 but how much is the price difference you only can decide.
I still stay on my recommendation that you try to trade in your currect GTX580 for a GTX580 3Gb as the best value for money.

~S~

PS. I still think that the GTX680 is not the real card for CoD because of the "lousy" memory interface of 256bit... ;)

Nice and good but it also has a disadvantage just to add some more vram onto a originally designed 2 gb card as already seen in the 3gb version of the 580. Furthermore there is still an over 5 year old small interface for this and the 4gb version also suffers from that.

Fact is that a 7970 ghz edition is currently in most cases as fast as a 680 and the review shows, that this overall is currently the fastest single card. Sure the pace is often only marginal, but we have several 680 users bite in their asses, that they bought it, because it is unfinished and expensive.

The 7970 users are quite happy now with the new drivers. 680 users not always. Just our impression of a small clan comunity with about 100 people. Some are benchmarkers as well and now tried out for months. It has a reason, why the review of the 7970 changed places in many cases in the race of the best single card.

I must say, that we are still waiting on a big kepler. If that hits markets somehow, ati will have quite a big problem. But for now the ati is more than just an alternative card for the 680. My opinion and the opinion of many.

Hmm im more a nvidia guy, i have had some ati cards before but i like nvida better. So i think it will be a gtx 680 4gig. But thanks for tips.

Have any of you tried SLI in CLOD, i read in some other post that it isnt realy supported.

I will come back to this post and update if i buy the 680, tell you frame rates etc.

Y E S! P L E E E A S E! :D


I have SLI, yes it works but no it does not. You get a good boost in fps but, there is a kind of stutter that can not be explained by words, it makes the movement unsmooth. Subsequenly most sane people drop the sli and use a single GPU only. Less fps but smooth game.

FPS is not what you should be going for (after you have reached above the 30fps of course).

~S~

I have 2560 x 1440, 2 x 580s in SLI and get similar to you.

apparently when Nvidia release proper, tuned, drivers for CLOD on SLI we should get higher rates, I'll wait and see. I have no problems with 20-30 FPS near the ground, its the collapse to < 10 when sprites are shown (grass, dust, smoke etc) that concerns me. Using FRAPS is also a FPS drain thus no more videos from me until performance improves.

.

do you think i could run smoothly cliff whit my résolution mates ?:rolleyes:

And your resolution is??? :)

~S~

You can wait on your proper sli support, but as I think, you will get higher fps and stutters stay or even get more, since you are not using a faster hard drive to reduce it and perhaps you run into problems with the small ram interface. I can only repeat and repeat: It is streaming engine with high vram load and high viewing distances. Currently no system is really capable to run this totally sufficient in all topics.

After you upgraded to a 680 (with a way too small ram interface) and to an ssd, you will perhaps still suffer the bottleneck of your i7 940 @ 3,6 GHz ( which is by far too less raw cpu power -> you should overclock at least to 4 GHz, but you will possibly only get up to 3,8GHz stable, depending on your steppibg of the i7 -new or old stepping-!!)

Sorry, but this is currently also a major disadvantage of your pc. On a game which turns out to be also very cpu consuming, your cards are just waste of time for that game.

So foxl: It would be necessary to have a look over your whole pc, because in grathos pc, it would not help only to buy a highend gfx card. You will simply do not get rid of the other hardware priblems.

In fact i wanted to know if my configuration would be enough strong to work in hight settings with a 2560x1440 screen. sorry 335th_GRAthos:-P

Quite good rig, when u left out your graphics card. :)

And for this I do not know enough to say, how much frames u get. All other parts are good for sure and the fact, that u have a ssd and the fact that u have enough vram on your card should help u as well .

I can just guess, but you won't have a problem to run it one such a screen. Perhaps you should try to overclock your cpu to avoid him to become the bottleneck. It should be an easy overclock to 4.2 with air cooling. The current intels are easy going into this region. Just have a look, that one core isn't running on 100%. Than u can be quite sure that he is not limiting your performance. I cannot give you a hint on a real number when the cpu limits and at which GHz raw performance it is solving the problem in your configuration and your resolution. But here are some guys, who were more into detail in suuch a topic. Perhaps these guys can precise it for you.

thak you very much for your advises, but i still don't know what to think about buying such a screen according to my configuration. I did not know my graphic's card could be a bottleneck in such spec ( it was a quite expensive component last year :mad:). I know i would get better and shaper images with a 2560x1440 resolution screen but if i become stutters i don't want to buy another graphics card ( a new single card or by adding a second GTX 580 wich cost 600 euros and induce all performances problems with SLI drivers and clod).Any ideas how my pc would run in maxed out settings ? Thanks in advance.

I think you have a very good rig and your video card is one of the best thanks to its 3Gb VRAM (which is usualy the most common reason for low fps in CoD) so, my first answer would be yes, you have one of the best rigs to run CoD at this resolution.

Do not even think about SLI and CoD. It is a waste of money (unfortunately).


~S~

thak you very much for your advises mates :-P

Hi U505

Do you play in 2560x1440 now, i would love to know what frame rates you get with that 3gig card.

I get very low fps with my gtx 580 1.5 gig, in 2560x1440 and looking to get a new graphics card.

My specs:

Intel Core i7 Quad Processor i7-2600K 3,4ghz
ASUS Maximus IV Extreme B3, Socket-1155
Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600MHz 12gig
Corsair SSD 115GB
ASUS GeForce GTX 580 1536MB PhysX CUDA
Dell u2711 2560x1440 27" monitor

no sorry i don't play with that resolution. I play now in 1900x 1200 and look to buy a 2560 x 1440 screen for christmas or before :-P

Ok, then i can recomend te dell u2711. im very happy with this screen. its only CLOD thats not happy with the resolution hehe.

Battlefield 3, starcraft 2, diablo, rise of flight they all do well and the picture this screen deliveres is amazing, its ips panel that deliveres very good colors, but it has a great amount og anti glare coating. But its only visible on bright background, and im used to it now but many dont like the screen because of it.

You are welcome :) Perhaps another guy with a 580 and 3 gb here? I cannot give u advice. Important is, that you run steam and clod on your ssd, but I think you know that. But I don't know, how much effect the resolution increase will have on your card. Sorry

But second big advice is just to overclock your cpu as clod is getting cpu bottlenecks fast. My i7 is currently running on 3,8 ghz and still sometimes bottlenecks. As you have new generation it would be very easy for you to reach 4 - 4,4 ghz without much knowledge of overclocking. Sometimes your mainboard helps you to achieve higher clocks easily too

I've been following this thread and if I can ask what problems specifically does CLOD have with this res? is just low fps or something else?

I ask as I'm getting a new 27" monitor at this res for my new computer, it's pretty a beasty rig with an overclocked 3930k and duel 680's but the 680's only have 2Gb of ram a piece, which might prove to be the bottle neck for CLOD, I'm on holidays atm so I cant test it all out myself.
I wish they would just release a proper SLI profile, I live in hope that the next Nvidea driver set will have CLOD listed in the new SLI profiles list.
fingers crossed.

Yeah, first you will have problems with sli as usual.

It has nothing to do with that specific res, but it is proven, that ati cards can maintain higher fps in higher resolutions and the nvidia cards are better able to max out the lower end of the fps, which can also be good. But higher resolutions mainly mean, that ati becomes better and better. And as you can see in all benchmarks, the 7970 is the fastest gpu and smashed nvidia this year by no doubt.

It is not only important, how big the vram on the card is, but also how fast the interface us. As far as I know a 660 only has 192bit interface, while ati has 384bit. It is double. And especially in the field of streaming engines, it has a clear advantage in shovelling data fast.

2gb cards at your res could be enough, but stuttering can be still a problem.

Also think of getting an ssd. It is worth it in my opinion. Not only for the game, but for overall rig perfirmance.

I spoke about even higher resolution. Triple screen setups demand so much, that an sli setup with 680's is simply too slow. It demands too much from a card, which is only on the market as quick solution against ati and not as a well planned card. That is, what makes me even more angry about nvidia this year. You get a quick shot card, which is underperforming. Kepler is good, but the rest of the card and the vram interface is just to laugh at. It is a big boy casual gamer card and not a core gamers choice.

Thanks for the reply Stub, yeah i knew from that start I was gunna have problems with SLI and CLOD, I guess we're all in the same boat with that one until 1C/Nvidia get their fingers out and sort it all out.

I used to be an an ATI guy then switched to Nvidia a few years ago and have generally found that their drivers and interface are a lot easier to get my head around were as Catalyst Control Center always felt like it was always a hassle to get around and set a decent profile with. Perhaps its time I look at ATI seriously again, the computer's very new so I'm gunna keep the duel 680's for now but in a year's or so time I might look to replace them if they're not pulling their weight.

I've yet to really test the computer to be honest, I only had it for a day before I went on holiday so I don't really know hows it runs anything yet, although apart from CLOD I'm hoping it should smash pretty much everything else I throw at it, I tend to play a lot of sims ( FSX, ROF ARMA, iRacing ect ) I don't think any of those will really have a problem with that res except maybe FSX, but I guess until I try it I won't really know. I've also got a 240 Gb SSD for the OS so it should generally run well and I've just ordered a Western Digital VelociRaptor 1TB HD for games so I don't think I'll have any real problems in that area.

again cheers for the help Stub, still I am starting to wonder if that higher res is worth the potential trouble it could be, more research is in order I guess :/

I.must admit, that this is a rig, that I would also like to have, except the 680s. ;)

You have everything you need. I also have veloci raptors and a samsung 830 series ssd. Played Arma 2 and clod on both storage types and I have a performance increase from the veloci raptor to the ssd, which I can really feel (also compared to a raid of 2 veloci raptors).

The 830 really does a great job in every day life behaviour. Much better than some other ssd of that time. The driving technology is great. I do not know, if the other chips are now performing as well as the samsung but when the 830 came out it was unbeatable in this price range because of its new concept. Just wanted to mention that. Perhaps you should read some recent reviews of tests, which are not just counting maximum read and write performances. I saw several big internet sides had really tested completely wrong! Be careful on eye washers. ;)

yeah I was soo close to gettin an ssd for games, the price was just a touch too much, although it sounds like it could of been worth it, it'd be a hassle for CLOD though as I'd need a whole one just for steam, anything less then 480Gb wouldn't fit all my steam games, that I said I might look at getting one for DCS and arma 3 when it comes out ( how good does that look! ) possibly even FSX which I've heard benefits greatly from a ssd. I'll definitely be doing some research on those over then next few months, like you said I'll be reading a lot about it so I don't get a bum steer, sheesh it never ends with pc's eh, worth it though!

decisions decisions, although I think I will go for the larger res monitor, worse case scenario I can run things in a window if the higher res is giving me grief, it'd be a bit of a waste of screen space but the the games that can handle it will make it worth it no doubt:

It wouldnt worry about running out of space on the SSD for your steam games, its easy to move the less played games to another drive and use junction links to make steam think its still installed in the original location.

I already do that for my games and it works flawlessly.

Take a look at this utility I use that integrates with windows shell (explorer) to make it easy as point and click!

http://schinagl.priv.at/nt/hardlinks...kshellext.html

Hi again.

I have now upgraded with new grapichs card after i started this post and would like to share my findings.

I first got the EVGA 670 superclocked 4gig. I was very disapointed with this card, all the way from the box to the performance. It came with out anti static bag wrapped around it and was inside a big plastic container, and it almost fell to the floor when i finaly got it open. Also the big bright sticker that goes along side the card fell off :mad:
In game over london with all settings max i got about 35-40 fps almost no improvement over my old card. I returned the card next day and got my money back.

Then i ordered the Asus 680 2gb DirectCU II. And WOW. I have to clamp vertical sync over london now with same settings, this is just crazy i never thought such perfomance, im at 50-60 fps constant over london max settings 2560x1440 and have not tried overclocking it still.

And for Vram usage as someone says you neeed 4gig to this game its not true, i use around 1500mb of my screen card ram when i monitor over london, next test will be multiplayer with over 50players.

Wall of text here, but wanted to share my findings if others is thinking about about getting a new card.

50 - 60 fps over london with no action, right? Because none really gets stable 50-60fps in this game all the time --> With no card and not in that resolution. Sounds to me, that something is missing. Explosions,multiplayer etc. Sorry, but there is something missing.

2gb ram could be enough, but not for future and not with that interface and not for sli with triple screen.
Just test, if you set also everything to highest detail in your driver! Then play sime while and report again.

Never saw any rig doing clod constantly over 50fps with that resolution and with highest settings.

Btw: your card should be already overclocked if i am informed right! So... :)

Yep just tested online and more quick mission, bomber intercept over london and other missions,no problem 50-60fps constant im getting screen tearings now because this is a 60hz monitor. But there is one thing that takes massive hits to my fps and that is the clouds, even at medium effect settings flying through the clouds gets me down to 40fps and even lower.

I also tested the black death track, sometimes down to 40 but mostly in the 60 range, but remember i have everything set to high i can sacrifice something for even more fps.

And yes it is *factory* clocked to 1201mhz, but this is not a reference model geforce card so i can clock it even further and i will, but have not done so yet, but overall im very impressed with this card.

I did not test performance recently, but as far as I know, there is a scene in black death, where it goes down to 20fps for me. And that was awesome. I just want to express.my doubts, but cannot fully go for it. ;) Normally no pc you can buy is able to perform that good in clod. But I am not familiar with the current state that well. Some see the stutters and some not. No matter...do not want to talk about the 680 topic anymore. I have noone in my clan with a 680 and noone entries our clan with this card ;) Had enough to explain to other 680 players, so that they know, why their card sucks.

Ok, i just wanted to share my findings if others want to play this game in 2560x1440 at highest settings. But to say the gtx 680 sucks i find that a little bit of an extreme statement. I play other games as well and its impressive results in all my games, DCS-A10 runs perfect now.

It is not the case that you can't play with it. It is the case, that they sell more broken 680 than ati sells his good card this year. It is just so many dumb people not seeing, that nvidia is laughing at all customers with this card, knowing now, that most gamers really buy everything from them.

Even the 580 has a better hardware (except the graphics chip). They sold you a fast produced card without any good features, except the chip. The rest is crap and that is proven.

Just saying that! I had several requests about what to buy and they hear everything and bought a crappy 660. I said to them: Why do you ask for the better card and what to buy, if you do not hear? Do you all hear on nvidia gaming newspapers (nearly every big newspaper is paid by nvidia)?

I don't understand them, but sure they haven't bought a totally bad card. But they bought something, which was not ready for release. We also did so with clod, I must admit! :)

Well i have not recived a broken 680. And all the reviews and benchmarks i have seen proves you wrong, you say nvidia *pays* off everyone to write good reviews, where do you have this information from.

But im not here to argue witch is better ati or nvidia, because this is a discussion that has been going on for as long as i can remember. Both cards are good and in some games ati have better performance and in other games nvidia have the best performance.

I just wanted to share my findings and improvements as i promised in the first or second page of this thread.

No!!! ;) I just argued as you said something about impressive results. Compared to what? Have you seen actual benchmarks with ghz edition vs 680, which is a more suitable comparison than normal edition vs 680, because nvidia clocked their card nearly to the max to compete with ati. Now, with new 12.11 driver the ati proves in nearly all games to be faster, even in games explicitly mentioned as nvidia game.

Just wabted to say, that nvidia lost the battle this time and even the big newspapers reviewed and set ati as the fastest card. And additionally the bad interface and hardware components (especially in the 660 and 660ti), which are even behind their older brothers makes me wonder, why somebody really buy a 6x series. It is just the bad knowledge of that fact. NVidia is laughing behind the scenes as they proved better than ever before, that you can save component money, set up a quick released card and they still sell it to most of the kids! ;)

The cards performance overall is not bad. It is a high end card, so what do you expect? But they sold you this card and that is, what they aimed for. But they will winder themselves and get a smule in the face, that this quickly released card is so successful. If I were NVidia, I would continue selling crappy cards for 2 more years and safe development money for a big bang, if needed.

Just my opinion, which is the opinion of most enthusiasts with knowledge out there. :)

Results compared to my previous setup and evga 4gig card.

Can you plz link me the reviews, benchmarks etc so i can read, new drivers comparison and all that. All the reviews i read when i google says nothing about this so i just want to learn more.
Is it the HD 7970 3GB GDDR5 you are talking about that is so much better?
Seems to me the more Ram the cards have the slower the clock speed is. So as long you dont use up the ram you will get better performance with higher clock speeds.

I just want the best.

Thank you.

Ati can have higher clocks. I run mine not as a ghz edition. I run it on 1,3ghz watercooled (1,2 to 1,25 generally possible with air cooling in most cases). That adds another 10 - 15% increase to the ghz edition benchmarks. A little tweaking of the vram, dual bios usage and possibly (hopefully) a new bios from another card manufacturer would do another trick! Google 7970ghzedition with 12.11 driver vs 680...

Quick search on google for english language: Never saw tgis test before btw, but alsi shows the comparison of other cards.
http://m.hardocp.com/article/2012/11...ison_roundup/3

Please note: general oc potential: 680 = 10-15% and 7970 ghz edition = 10-20% (due to higher stock clocks) and other 7xxx series 20-30 % --> That shows another advantage to ati. And the vram interface gives this the rest for the 6x series!!!

And when we come back to topic "2560x1440 res" and additionally talking about a game, which demands fast vram + enough vram + a fast vram interface, we do not have to discuss, what the result is! Streaming engined games would generally run better with fast interfaces, if the textures are high detailed. For all other games a 384bit interface is oversized, but good to have (just think on cry engine, which is currently the engine to beat in many topics -> my personal favorite as it has a lot of potential in different genres and looks great).

Ok, thanks, going to do a bit of reading about this tonight :)