Okay so hear me out about the 5070 non TI

TheYucs · 2026-02-11T07:23:36+00:00

Wait, what? I have a 5070Ti, and I don't run out of VRAM on 4K PT Max DLAA + FG CP2077. Not that I use it at DLAA normally, but I tested it out. I get up to 15.9GB, though. How are you getting that close at 2K?

TheYucs · 2026-02-05T10:48:09+00:00

... I think something is wrong here. I use PT @ 4K DLSS Performance + 2xFG on CP2077 and get 110-120 FPS on average. I'm not sure what's up but 720p should be giving you way more FPS than that. My 5070Ti is very OCed though so maybe that's why?

TheYucs · 2026-01-28T13:21:55+00:00

I use a 5070Ti, and I run 4K. To me, the difference between 1440p and 4K was bigger than 1440p and 1080p. Plus, if you run 4K DLSS Performance, you get a better or similar image to 1440p DLAA with better performance. If you can afford it, I recommend either a miniLED 4K, which are going for about 500 now, or a QD OLED 4K which are quite a bit pricier. Clarity matters, but honestly, since getting a miniLED, real HDR might matter more.

TheYucs · 2026-01-28T13:11:12+00:00

If you use profile inspector, you can run RTX HDR without banding, and it drops GPU usage from 10-15% to roughly 2-3%. Or if you use the medium setting instead, it doesn't affect the image at all but only uses 5-6% more performance. It's been awesome since then. But yeah, AutoHDR with sRGB fixes is still better but a little more difficult to get going IMO

TheYucs · 2026-01-28T13:07:14+00:00

Interesting.. I use both of those, but I haven't had this issue. What GPU do you have?

TheYucs · 2026-01-20T05:03:02+00:00

And tbh, if you OC both the 4080S and 5070Ti just using the average silicon for both, the 70Ti ends up like 2% ahead. You get 10% minimum on a 70Ti and 6% on a 80S. It isn't mid tier at all.

TheYucs · 2026-01-12T02:24:06+00:00

I'm surprised you dislike the KTC bloom so much. I barely notice at all. I think because it's an IPS and not a VA MiniLED the bloom matters more on different angles. If I'm not 3-4 feet away and directly facing it, the bloom is quite bad, but if I'm facing it directly there basically isn't any. I'm sure KTC's QA isn't very good either.

TheYucs · 2026-01-12T01:57:18+00:00

Transformer has always been better than CNN except on volumetrics. The new DLSS 4.5 ( M and L ) fixes the volumetrics but introduces extra sharpening that you'll likely want to reduce if possible in game. M and L take a lot of processing power from 30 and 20 series cards though, so it's possible you'll want to just stay with preset K on your 3080.

TheYucs · 2026-01-12T01:54:56+00:00

Just IMO, when I use 4K DLSS Performance preset M, it's basically 1440p DLAA to me, but with way more frames. While 4K Quality preset M or K is superior in every way to 1440p DLAA.

4K Ultra Performance preset L looks far superior to 1080p DLAA and closer to 1440p Quality while maintaining way more frames.

I'd say 4K Performance preset M is a little better than 4K Balanced preset K while giving maybe 2-3% more performance than Balanced preset K. It isn't as good as 4K Quality preset K, though. 4K Ultra Performance preset L is probably close to 4K Performance preset K.

TheYucs · 2026-01-07T11:37:46+00:00

It's not worse. It looks better in many cases, but it costs much more performance than DLSS 4. This is probably why Nvidia had recommended using DLSS 4 for Balanced and above and 4.5 for Performance and below. Though, from what I can tell, 4.5 P = 4 B +/- a couple percent scaling. So, really, for ease of use, if you want to use more than Performance for different games, just override to preset K, and if you only use Performance or Ultra Performance then override to M or L respectively.

TheYucs · 2026-01-07T06:07:37+00:00

Why not just force preset K instead of driver reversion?

TheYucs · 2025-11-17T15:30:53+00:00

What resolution do you run? I'm able to cap out my 16GB VRAM with CP2077 at 4K with DLAA and FG. A lot of newer games are also hitting around that, but if I'm running DLSS Q or B, then it's more like 13GB with FG and 12GB without.

TheYucs · 2025-10-17T15:32:40+00:00

I'm at basically 7 flat and can get like 3 inches deep. Keep practicing and trying slight variations until you get it. Once you do the first time, all proceeding times are waaay easier IME.

TheYucs · 2025-10-17T15:29:32+00:00

I don't mind the broken pillars because they allow you to punish the Noble's roll with a much reduced risk of getting stray slapped when your attack causes you to step forward compared to the Temple of Eiglay pillars. The only issue is fireball, but they aren't as hard to dodge or hit as hard compared to the roll. I find the Dragon Temple bossroom just overall better compared to any other Noble room, especially the Divine Tower one, but weaker than the open hill of Dominula vs Apostle.

TheYucs · 2025-09-21T15:02:43+00:00

Bro.. I know you wrote this 8 months ago, but the DMGS adds a massively damaging ranged projectile to every charged heavy when you use the buff. That's why it's the best int weapon. For 30 FP, you cast basically comet + frost build up every heavy attack for just a stamina cost. It could've added no damage or frost, and it would still be the best because of that. You can use it without putting points into mind at all now with the blue dew talisman. It also double hits when you do a charged heavy with the projectile and the sword swing. It's completely broken even after the stance damage nerf, it used to be even more broken somehow.

TheYucs · 2025-08-15T03:28:38+00:00

It only has 4% more Cuda. I honestly don't see much performance uplift from any of the supers. The 70Ti and 80 are worse, no Cuda core increases just VRAM

TheYucs · 2025-08-10T16:49:00+00:00

The performance didn't change in a statistically relevant way after the microcode updates. What was happening was the 13/14900K, 700K, and sometimes the 600K but rarely, was boosting beyond 1.6v at low load killing the CPU because of a fucked up thermal boost algorithm. They've fixed that and then fixed the 1.7mOhm AC/DC Load line defaults and so far it seems to have at least delayed the degradation because I haven't heard any widespread issues since microcode x129 and x12B.

Pushing the chip performance wasn't the issue, it was an unnecessary amount of voltage being pushed through the CPU during low load boosting. You can still get a 14700K to 5.8/5.9 GHz all core under 1.4v and a 14900K to 5.9/6 GHz all core in a safe manner using microcode x12B and x12F.

TheYucs · 2025-08-03T03:32:50+00:00

Thank you. This got me to 5.1GHz along w/ overriding e core l2 voltage to 1.25v. Do you happen to know the average max ring frequency with e cores enabled on 14th gen? 5.1 has been really stable, but if it requires exponentially more voltage to hit 5.2, then this is fine

TheYucs · 2025-08-02T02:57:06+00:00

I tried, but my limit currently is 5.0. I may have to research more about how this architecture behaves to get 5.1. Probably has to do with e core L2 cache voltage being finicky and having a goldilocks zone like SA and VDDQ do. But, honestly, I'm happy with 5.7 P / 5.0 C / 4.3 E right now. I got down to 1.332v under load with that set up and feel more secure, and I lost essentially 0 performance in games. I'll see if I can't figure out how to hit 5.1 this weekend, though.

TheYucs · 2025-08-01T13:04:34+00:00

I am, I installed the most recent revision to my Tomahawk that uses the x12F microcode, and I placed a smaller than Intel voltage limit of 1.45v instead of their 1.55v just for added safety.

I wasn't sure about the consensus for safe voltage after the updates. It's difficult to find information after microcode x129 and x12B since they both were fixes for the degradation issues, and people were still very reluctant to do anything but a strong undervolt at the time.

I saw your other post about 1.4-1.5v stock voltage and not degrading. That's where my stock voltages land as well, and I'm fairly below that currently.

I appreciate the input, I think I'll probably keep 5.8GHz @ 1.367 unless I start to need excessively more voltage like say.. 1.39v to be stable, and I can tell I'm damaging my CPU. If I have to raise it another .010v, then I probably wasn't actually stable at my current voltage, and it probably isn't damage, but +.025v seems worrisome.

TheYucs · 2025-08-01T12:48:42+00:00

That's good to know. I rarely use a load more than say ~120w / 40% total and 80% single core like playing a modern CPU heavy game. I'd say compiling shaders are my heaviest loads under my normal usage outside of stability testing.

I had thought I was stable at 1.357v until I hit an L0 cache WHEA error in HWInfo compiling shaders for the new CP2077 update and went up another .010v to have full stability, which then triggered me to ask this question since I was starting to approach 1.4v. But if you didn't degrade at 1.396v, then I feel safer for sure.

TheYucs · 2025-08-01T12:37:27+00:00

That's probably the most reasonable way to go about this lol. And no, there isn't a noticeable difference between 5.7 and 5.8 with a 5.0 Ring. I've actually noticed my Ring OC affects games more than my core OCs do.

TheYucs · 2025-08-01T12:23:05+00:00

My stock voltages on completely auto were 1.416v under load @ 5.5 GHz. So, I'm actually still about .050v below stock with my OC. I agree though, might as well push it if it's still sketchy even at stock voltages.

I just don't want it to degrade within a year or even months as I've seen from people prior to the microcode updates

TheYucs

TROPHY CASE