[Build Log] The Big Red "Devastator" CaseLabs THW10 - Custom Powder Coating - Page 54 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[Build Log] The Big Red "Devastator" CaseLabs THW10 - Custom Powder Coating

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #531 of 535 (permalink) Old 08-06-2019, 10:43 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Tolkmod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Posts: 63
Rep: 1 (Unique: 1)
Very nice build, love the detail on not only the case but everything surrounding it. People sometimes forget that part of it
Tolkmod is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #532 of 535 (permalink) Old 08-12-2019, 01:26 PM - Thread Starter
WaterCooler & Overclocker
 
Barefooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,448
Rep: 115 (Unique: 97)
Game Benchmarks

I have ten games currently installed that have built in benchmarks. I’m going to run through each of them to see how they perform. Most of these benchmarks would probably run with my 5.0 GHz benchmark profile, but I want these results to be real world and how I’m going to use the rig on a regular basis. So I’m going to run all of these benchmarks using my everyday 4.8 GHz CPU overclocking profile.

I’ll use Afterburner for overclocking the video cards maxing out the power limit to +130, with +100 on the Core Clock and +1040 on the Memory Clock. All of the other benchmarks I’ve done previously I used either +112 or +130 on the Core Clock depending on the benchmark. But this +100 Core Clock setting is what I will use for my gaming profile. That is the settings I’ve been using while playing around 35 hours of Far Cry New Dawn without a single crash.

Also note that most of the following benchmarks were run with a room ambient temperature of 85° F, with 80° F minimum. It’s the middle of summer here so this is the worst case scenario of conditions.

The benchmarks are all run on my Acer Predator XB271HU 27” G-Sync 2560 x 1440 resolution monitor with G-Sync enabled in the Nvidia Control Panel. I’ve had this monitor for over three years, and it’s really a great monitor! Although I do plan to do a monitor upgrade in the coming months.

I know a lot of people don’t like or don’t use the GeForce Experience program, but I really like the program and launch all of my games with it. With one button click you can optimize the game settings, and if you want more FPS all you have to do is drag the slider to the left and click apply.

I’m using the default “Optimal” settings on all of these benchmarks unless otherwise noted, and for most of the games it’s completely maxed out settings anyways.

I will also take a look at some DSR, DLSS, and Ray Tracing settings in some of these tests. I was originally going to go through all of these benchmarks in alphabetical order, but decided to use the games release date instead starting with the oldest to the newest.

Hitman Absolution released May 2014

This is kind of an older title at this point, but many video card reviews in the past have used this built in benchmark. I got over 107 FPS on this benchmark with maxed settings.




Middle Earth Shadow of Mordor released September 2014

I ran all of these benchmark tests at least three times. This one gets a crazy high score of over 243 FPS even with completely maxed out settings.




BioShock Infinite released March 2015

I really enjoyed this game! It exports the results to a spread sheet though so no screen shot, but here’s the picture of the spreadsheet with a whopping average of 292 FPS. Look at the max FPS!




Rise of the Tomb Raider released November 2015

Here’s a screen shot of the GeForce Experience showing the optimal settings just one notch below the max. Moving it up the last notch only changes one setting from 2x SSAA to 4x SSAA. I used the optimal settings here for over 118 FPS.





Next I used the DSR feature which renders in the 3620x2036 resolution and then down samples it. That dropped the FPS down to 91.






Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands released March 2017

This game gave me really inconsistent results. There’s a Ghost Recon Wildlands Bench-A-Thon thread where a guy had virtually the same hardware with the same settings as this and he was getting much higher FPS and much higher GPU% usage than I was. I never could figure out why.

Here I used the in game “Ultra” settings for 55 FPS.



This is with “Very High” settings for 77 FPS.



Now with the “High” setting and 86 FPS.




Assassins Creed Origins released October 2017

As you can see with maxed out settings it scored 77 FPS, however this is one of only two of the ten games tested here that does not support SLI. So that is just one card being used.





This is what I keep displayed on my second monitor while gaming or benchmarking. HWiNFO and the detached Afterburner monitor. The top portion of each column shows each video card. The red box in the right column shows the card in use, while the column on the left shows the unused card.




Assassins Creed Odyssey released October 2018

This is the second game that does not support SLI, and it is the most demanding game of all the games I tested here. The GeForce Experience is a few notches below the maximum and it still only gets 65 FPS!





I moved the slider half way down to see what the difference would be. You can see it changed the Fog from medium to low, the Shadows from ultra high to medium, and the Volumetric Clouds from high to medium, and there’s more settings below that we can’t see. That brings the FPS up to 77.





I won’t show you the GeForce Experience screen shot here, but this is after dragging the slider all the way to the left, and it only gets up to 84 FPS. This moved the Anti-Aliasing from medium to low. It’s unlikely that I would ever actually use these settings.



Now to look at the other end of the spectrum, I moved the slider all the way to the right to max out the settings, and I was surprised how many settings were changed. This game is just brutal! Even with an overclocked 2080 Ti it only gets 39 FPS! And look at the minimum FPS is only 23 which makes this game really unplayable with these settings.

Personally most of the time I can’t really tell a difference between a games “Ultra” settings and whatever is the next setting below that while I’m actually playing the game because I’m not standing there staring at the textures, I’m running around trying to survive and win the game! I would rather have more FPS than detail that I don’t really notice.




Far Cry 5 released March 2018

The Far Cry series of games are some of my favorite games! Besides a few hours here and there on a few different games, this is the only game that I actually played all the way through during my two plus years of building the “Devastator”.

This benchmark was done with just one notch down from max on the GeForce Experience and the only setting that changes with it completely maxed is the resolution scaling is slightly higher. Here we get a nice average FPS of 103.



This is also a Ubisoft title like the Assassins Creed titles and if fully utilizes SLI quite nicely. Here the red boxes on the Afterburner Monitor graph shows the area of the benchmark. Also this is the only game were the CPU Package temp crossed the 69° C mark and got to 70° C in this three plus minute run. The max the GPU temps got to in any game was 45° C.




Shadow of the Tomb Raider released September 2018

This game has optimal settings just one notch down from the max, and the only thing that changes going up the last little bit is it changes the “Nvidia RTX Ray Traced Shadow Quality” setting from High to Ultra, but first we’ll look at the default Optimal settings.



Not bad with average FPS of 115



Here I turned on the DLSS feature which is not affected by the GeForce Experience slider. This gave me eight more FPS for an average of 123 FPS. It looks like a good feature to keep on.



Now I turned the “Nvidia RTX Ray Traced Shadow Quality” up to Ultra and still it still gets 112 average FPS which is only three FPS less than the High setting. Still I doubt if I would notice a difference during game play.



This is with the same setting but with the DLSS feature turned on and it gets seven more FPS with an average of 119 FPS.




Far Cry New Dawn released February 2019

This is newest game tested, and the one I’m currently almost all the way through playing. It also has the Optimal setting just one increment down from the maximum, and that only ups the resolution scale from 1.7 to 2.0.



During most of my game play I’ve been getting mostly 90 to 120 FPS. The benchmark gets an average of 89 FPS here.




There it is ten games benchmarked with mostly maxed out or at least nearly maxed out settings. Once I do my monitor upgrade I may run through these again for comparison.

.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1 Hitman Absolution 108 FPS.png
Views:	40
Size:	52.1 KB
ID:	288508  

Click image for larger version

Name:	2 Middle Earth Shadow of Mordor 244 FPS.png
Views:	46
Size:	138.3 KB
ID:	288510  

Click image for larger version

Name:	3 Bioshock 2.jpg
Views:	40
Size:	28.4 KB
ID:	288512  

Click image for larger version

Name:	4 Rise of the Tomb Raider GFE.png
Views:	45
Size:	1.70 MB
ID:	288516  

Click image for larger version

Name:	5 Rise of the Tomb Raider 119 FPS.png
Views:	40
Size:	218.9 KB
ID:	288518  

Click image for larger version

Name:	6 Rise of the Tomb Raider GFE DSR.jpg
Views:	39
Size:	409.8 KB
ID:	288520  

Click image for larger version

Name:	7 Rise of the Tomb Raider 91 FPS with DSR.png
Views:	40
Size:	387.7 KB
ID:	288522  

Click image for larger version

Name:	9 Ghost Recon 55 FPS Ultra.png
Views:	43
Size:	4.85 MB
ID:	288524  

Click image for larger version

Name:	10 Ghost Recon 78 FPS Very High.png
Views:	38
Size:	4.88 MB
ID:	288526  

Click image for larger version

Name:	11 Ghost Recon 87 FPS High.png
Views:	38
Size:	4.90 MB
ID:	288528  

Click image for larger version

Name:	12 AC Origins GFE.png
Views:	38
Size:	1.64 MB
ID:	288530  

Click image for larger version

Name:	13 AC Origins 77 FPS.png
Views:	40
Size:	2.89 MB
ID:	288532  

Click image for larger version

Name:	14 AC Origns Graph.jpg
Views:	45
Size:	534.3 KB
ID:	288534  

Click image for larger version

Name:	15 AC Odyssey GFE.png
Views:	42
Size:	1.76 MB
ID:	288536  

Click image for larger version

Name:	16 AC Odyssey 65 FPS.png
Views:	37
Size:	2.61 MB
ID:	288538  

Click image for larger version

Name:	17 AC Odyssey GFE 3.png
Views:	43
Size:	2.38 MB
ID:	288540  

Click image for larger version

Name:	18 AC Odyssey 77 FPS 3.png
Views:	35
Size:	2.62 MB
ID:	288542  

Click image for larger version

Name:	19 AC Odyssey 84 FPS 4.png
Views:	37
Size:	2.61 MB
ID:	288544  

Click image for larger version

Name:	19.1 Assassins Creed Odyssey 39 FPS Maxed.png
Views:	37
Size:	2.50 MB
ID:	288546  

Click image for larger version

Name:	20 Far Cry 5 103 FPS.png
Views:	39
Size:	2.83 MB
ID:	288548  

Click image for larger version

Name:	21 Far Cry 5 Grapsh.jpg
Views:	38
Size:	527.9 KB
ID:	288550  

Click image for larger version

Name:	22 Shadow of the Tomb Raider GFE.png
Views:	42
Size:	2.44 MB
ID:	288552  

Click image for larger version

Name:	23 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 115 FPS.png
Views:	36
Size:	6.05 MB
ID:	288554  

Click image for larger version

Name:	24 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 123 FPS with DLSS on.jpg
Views:	34
Size:	713.7 KB
ID:	288556  

Click image for larger version

Name:	24.1 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 112 FPS Maxed.png
Views:	40
Size:	6.53 MB
ID:	288558  

Click image for larger version

Name:	24.2 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 119 FPS Maxed DLSS on.png
Views:	36
Size:	5.93 MB
ID:	288560  

Click image for larger version

Name:	25 Far Cry New Dawn GFE.png
Views:	35
Size:	1.61 MB
ID:	288562  

Click image for larger version

Name:	26 Far Cry New Dawn 89 FPS.png
Views:	41
Size:	3.39 MB
ID:	288564  




Devastator
(14 items)
Secondary Rig
(13 items)
CPU
i9-7900X
Motherboard
Asus Rampage Extreme VI
GPU
2x EVGA 2080Ti XC Gaming
RAM
G.Skill TridentZ Royal 32GB 3600 16-16-16-36
Hard Drive
Intel Optane SSD 480GB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 EVO 2TB
Hard Drive
2x Seagate Iron Wolf Pro 12TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 T2
Cooling
Hardware Labs Black Ice SR2 Radiators 4x 560mm + 2x 280mm
Cooling
Aquacomputer Aquaero XT + Aquaero LT
Cooling
2x Aquacomputer D5s with custom chrome plated Bitspower mod kits
Cooling
2x Aquacomputer Aqualis 880ml Reservoirs with Nano Coating & Aquabus Interface
Case
CaseLabs THW10 with Custom Powder Coating
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
CPU
Intel Core i7-4790K
Motherboard
Asus Maximus Extreme VI
GPU
EVGA GTX 980 ti Classified
RAM
G.SKILL Trident X Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR3 2400
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Pro 500GB
Hard Drive
Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNOVA 1300 G2
Cooling
EK 420 Rad + EK 280 Rad
Case
Corsair 750D
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Monitor
Acer XB271HU
Keyboard
Microsofte Natural Ergonomic 4000
Mouse
Logitech G502
▲ hide details ▲



Last edited by Barefooter; 08-12-2019 at 01:40 PM.
Barefooter is offline  
post #533 of 535 (permalink) Old 08-15-2019, 12:08 PM
Chief Over-Engineer
 
OCDesign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: England
Posts: 606
Rep: 44 (Unique: 32)
The only one I can really comment on - because it is the only game actually installed on here at present - but by chance I happen to be in the middle of replaying Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (to finally put my new-ish kit through its paces), noticed your post and out of curiosity couldn’t resist running the benchmark to compare. Slightly surprised your numbers aren’t higher.

At Ultra-High, x1.0 resolution multiplier, @ 5120x2160 native on my LG 5K centre screen it benches @ 44 FPS. Better in actual gameplay, enough to be perfectly playable – especially given how much of my game time consists of aimlessly wandering around enjoying the scenery…

I don’t use GeForce Experience myself, so the settings are changed manually in-game which may account for it. But turned down to match you at 2560x1440, tests run back-to-back, at each of the graphics pre-sets I get:

  • Low: 96 FPS
  • Medium: 91 FPS
  • High: 80 FPS
  • Very High: 76 FPS
  • Ultra High: 69 FPS
and despite it being an absolute killer

  • Ultra High with maximum resolution modifier (200%): 34 FPS

Performance is a lot less settled however; lower minimums, higher maximums, and all my graphs are consistently much spikier.

Considering this is all on my test bench at the moment (under water but vastly more limited cooling than yours, and therefore the Threadripper & the 2080 Ti XC Ultra are sitting unaltered on their stock out-of-the-box settings), on a monitor setup that is intended for CAD and not gaming, running the two 4K side screens as well as the centre screen on which AC is being played with a fair amount of other minor processes going on, I’d have expected Devastator to be way ahead in its scores?


Obsessive Compulsive Design...a chronic condition for which there is no cure.


The IRONBEAST Project
“Obsession is the Only Path to Perfection”

post-flame-small.gifASUS X99-E WS Owners Clubpost-flame-small.gif
NVIDIA GTX 980 Ti Owner's Club
OCDesign is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #534 of 535 (permalink) Old 08-19-2019, 10:09 AM - Thread Starter
WaterCooler & Overclocker
 
Barefooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,448
Rep: 115 (Unique: 97)
Quote: Originally Posted by Tolkmod View Post
Very nice build, love the detail on not only the case but everything surrounding it. People sometimes forget that part of it
Thank you! Yes the complete package is what really makes it. I just received a new set of wireless headphones that I'll be detailing here soon. Haven't even opened the box yet.


Quote: Originally Posted by OCDesign View Post
The only one I can really comment on - because it is the only game actually installed on here at present - but by chance I happen to be in the middle of replaying Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (to finally put my new-ish kit through its paces), noticed your post and out of curiosity couldn’t resist running the benchmark to compare. Slightly surprised your numbers aren’t higher.

At Ultra-High, x1.0 resolution multiplier, @ 5120x2160 native on my LG 5K centre screen it benches @ 44 FPS. Better in actual gameplay, enough to be perfectly playable – especially given how much of my game time consists of aimlessly wandering around enjoying the scenery…

I don’t use GeForce Experience myself, so the settings are changed manually in-game which may account for it. But turned down to match you at 2560x1440, tests run back-to-back, at each of the graphics pre-sets I get:

  • Low: 96 FPS
  • Medium: 91 FPS
  • High: 80 FPS
  • Very High: 76 FPS
  • Ultra High: 69 FPS
and despite it being an absolute killer

  • Ultra High with maximum resolution modifier (200%): 34 FPS

Performance is a lot less settled however; lower minimums, higher maximums, and all my graphs are consistently much spikier.

Considering this is all on my test bench at the moment (under water but vastly more limited cooling than yours, and therefore the Threadripper & the 2080 Ti XC Ultra are sitting unaltered on their stock out-of-the-box settings), on a monitor setup that is intended for CAD and not gaming, running the two 4K side screens as well as the centre screen on which AC is being played with a fair amount of other minor processes going on, I’d have expected Devastator to be way ahead in its scores?
Thank you for sharing your results. I always enjoy comparisons! That is quite the monitor set-up you have, would love to see a picture of it. I must admit I chuckled to myself that your "side screens" are merely 4K displays... the "low res" monitors of your set-up

Anyway I decided to rerun the Assassin's Creed Odyssey benchmarks without the GeForce Experience so I could match your settings. I think the GeForce experience was setting the Resolution Modifier to a higher setting on some benchmarks. I know for sure it did that with Ghost Recon Wildlands.

So I reran the all of the benchmarks using the in-game settings, and keeping the Resolution Modifier set to 100% except for the final run where I used the 200% setting like you did (yes a FPS killer), then ran through Low, Medium, High, Very High, Ultra High, and finally Ultra High at 200%.

I did find out this week while searching around that turning off SLI in the Nvidia Control Panel actually gives better performance when playing a game without SLI support than leaving it enabled so I gave that a try, and was really surprised that it made a HUGE difference. With SLI enabled the second card gets between 15% to 20% usage and the main card floats between 60% to 70% usage.

With SLI disabled the second card does nothing and the main card stays between 90% and 95% useage and the FPS are dramatically better!

Here's a screen shot of the Afterburner Monitor with SLI disabled.




I put together a spreadsheet showing the FPS with and without SLI enabled. I only ran each benchmark once except for oddly enough with SLI enabled I got one FPS more on the Very High setting as opposed to just the High setting, so I ran that a second time with the same results. Also I actually got two less FPS with SLI disabled when running the 200% Resolution Modifier settings which I also ran a second time with the same results.




I also re-ran Assassin's Creed Origins the only other game I had benchmarked without SLI support and it was the same scenario with far better FPS with SLI disabled. So if you are running SLI and are playing a game that does not support SLI, be sure to disable SLI in the Nvidia Control Panel to maximize your FPS.

Also I could not see any difference at all using the 200% Resolution Modifier, so there is no reason I can see for using that setting.


.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	ACO without SLI.jpg
Views:	21
Size:	267.4 KB
ID:	290188  

Click image for larger version

Name:	Assassins Creed Chart 24-2.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	498.4 KB
ID:	290200  




Devastator
(14 items)
Secondary Rig
(13 items)
CPU
i9-7900X
Motherboard
Asus Rampage Extreme VI
GPU
2x EVGA 2080Ti XC Gaming
RAM
G.Skill TridentZ Royal 32GB 3600 16-16-16-36
Hard Drive
Intel Optane SSD 480GB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 EVO 2TB
Hard Drive
2x Seagate Iron Wolf Pro 12TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 T2
Cooling
Hardware Labs Black Ice SR2 Radiators 4x 560mm + 2x 280mm
Cooling
Aquacomputer Aquaero XT + Aquaero LT
Cooling
2x Aquacomputer D5s with custom chrome plated Bitspower mod kits
Cooling
2x Aquacomputer Aqualis 880ml Reservoirs with Nano Coating & Aquabus Interface
Case
CaseLabs THW10 with Custom Powder Coating
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
CPU
Intel Core i7-4790K
Motherboard
Asus Maximus Extreme VI
GPU
EVGA GTX 980 ti Classified
RAM
G.SKILL Trident X Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR3 2400
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Pro 500GB
Hard Drive
Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNOVA 1300 G2
Cooling
EK 420 Rad + EK 280 Rad
Case
Corsair 750D
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Monitor
Acer XB271HU
Keyboard
Microsofte Natural Ergonomic 4000
Mouse
Logitech G502
▲ hide details ▲



Last edited by Barefooter; 08-19-2019 at 10:24 AM.
Barefooter is offline  
post #535 of 535 (permalink) Old 08-22-2019, 12:59 PM
Chief Over-Engineer
 
OCDesign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: England
Posts: 606
Rep: 44 (Unique: 32)
Yes, that looks more like it! The SLI-disabled numbers are much closer in line with the margin I’d expect those finely tuned overclocks to be delivering. Thought the earlier lot looked a little off somehow - underwhelming - given that our systems use the same card.

Must say I’m quite stunned how much the dual-GPU setup is holding both Odyssey and Origins back; I can understand NVLink not helping with something that doesn’t support it, but didn’t expect it to yielding worse performance. (The 39-37 with the 200% silly setting is in margin of error territory can probably be disregarded). Presumably, since it hits both titles but not Tomb Raider or Far Cry, it’s a quirk of the AC game engine?

Anyway, as requested, a quick picture of my monitor setup (spoilered for convenience):

Spoiler!


Obsessive Compulsive Design...a chronic condition for which there is no cure.


The IRONBEAST Project
“Obsession is the Only Path to Perfection”

post-flame-small.gifASUS X99-E WS Owners Clubpost-flame-small.gif
NVIDIA GTX 980 Ti Owner's Club

Last edited by OCDesign; 08-22-2019 at 01:09 PM.
OCDesign is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off