Русский New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 1 of 512345»
Forum » SpaceEngine » General Discussions » Optimal PC building for SE discussion
Optimal PC building for SE discussion
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 16:27 | Message # 1
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3599
Status: Online
Placeholder until a more fleshed out main post can be made.







Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
 
drkrdr7Date: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 16:27 | Message # 2
Observer
Group: Newbies
Pirate
Messages: 5
Status: Offline
first of all, thank you space engineer for this excellent software. and for keeping working on improving it. thank you.

I'm sorry this is off topic,but I need direct answer from you,

if I get a graphics card with 8 GB vram, would there be any benefits? (like generation times,number of stars because i always like ti increase magnitude biggrin )

can space engine use all 8 gigs of vram? or atleast can we make it to use?

because I'm getting a new amd r9 390x soon. i'm only going for this because of space engine heavily depends on vram right?
yes, i'm getting this 8gb card especially for SE, eventhough i'm just on 1080p resolution.

and also, would you prefer amd or nvidia?
my choices are now nvidia 970 or amd r9 390x

I just want the perfect/maximum beneficial card just for space engine.
please guys i don't need advice on other games/perfomance.

space engineer, please give me the choice, because you know your software morethan anyone else biggrin
 
HarbingerDawnDate: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 16:27 | Message # 3
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8714
Status: Offline
Quote drkrdr7 ()
if I get a graphics card with 8 GB vram, would there be any benefits?

Yes, absolutely. You'd be able to load a lot of terrain a lot more quickly, and use as high an LOD setting as you want. I wish I could have such a card smile

Quote drkrdr7 ()
would you prefer amd or nvidia?

Nvidia is better overall, especially where drivers are concerned. Most of the experienced members of the SE community will probably tell you the same: choose Nvidia over AMD if possible. Though SE will obviously still run on an AMD card.





All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
 
the_nerervarineDate: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 16:27 | Message # 4
Space Pilot
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 106
Status: Offline
There is a very strong Nvidia bias for the long time SE users but it's all really fanboyism. There are benefits to each card. Nvidia has way better driver support while AMD has reasonably better image quality, AA and AF. But if you're buying a modern high end card I really don't think you need to worry how SE is going to run whether it be on Nvidia or AMD (Just for an idea my R9 290 never drops below 30 fps when rendering a planet and terrain and that's with an LOD setting of 0.000ect and tops out near 322fps)




AMD FX-8320 8 core @4.0ghz , AMD R9 290 4GB, 8GB DDR3 @1866mhz, 1TB Hard Drive

Edited by the_nerervarine - Friday, 19.06.2015, 22:48
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 16:27 | Message # 5
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3599
Status: Online
Quote the_nerervarine ()
while AMD has reasonably better image quality, AA and AF.




Quote the_nerervarine ()
But if you're buying a modern high end card I really don't think you need to worry how SE is going to run whether it be on Nvidia or AMD


Coming from discussions with SpaceEngineer it actually is recommended to buy Nvidia for SE. AMD has poor OpenGL support.





Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
 
HarbingerDawnDate: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 16:27 | Message # 6
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8714
Status: Offline
Quote the_nerervarine ()
it's all really fanboyism

[citation needed]

Quote the_nerervarine ()
AMD has reasonably better image quality, AA and AF

[citation needed]

It also has 5x as many occurrences of problems with SE as Nvidia. Not to mention that SE doesn't support AA anyway. This guy isn't asking about what card to get for most programs, he's asking specifically for SE. The developer himself has said many times that Nvidia works better than AMD with SE. If you think you know better than him how his own program runs, then congratulations, go work on SE's successor.





All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
 
drkrdr7Date: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 16:28 | Message # 7
Observer
Group: Newbies
Pirate
Messages: 5
Status: Offline
thanks for trying to help me choose guys.

but, harbinger is right. I'm getting a new card specifically for SE. I've done my research and know very well about how amd/nvidia gpus perform on other games and stuff. I needed to know which SE prefers.

if that's nvidia, it's not going to be 970 as it has some vram issues if past 3.5 gb of 4 gb. at the same time 980 is much expensive. sad even that's too 4 GB,but not crippled like 970

while i like amd because they give much more compute power and 8 GIGS! of vram for much less price biggrin

but I'll go with what space engineer prefers. I would like a word from space engineer himself. biggrin
 
the_nerervarineDate: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 16:28 | Message # 8
Space Pilot
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 106
Status: Offline
Quote HarbingerDawn ()
It also has 5x as many occurrences of problems with SE as Nvidia. Not to mention that SE doesn't support AA anyway. This guy isn't asking about what card to get for most programs, he's asking specifically for SE. The developer himself has said many times that Nvidia works better than AMD with SE. If you think you know better than him how his own program runs, then congratulations, go work on SE's successor.


That's why my system with an R9 290 destroys my mates system with a GTX 970 in Space Engine by a pretty wide margin. I'm going to stand behind what I said. If you're buying a modern high end card then you should have no problem running SE no matter if you choose AMD or Nvidia. As beautiful as SE is it really doesn't tax modern GPU's at all.

And @Doctor of Space - Your gif only goes to prove my point of Nvidia fanboyism here. Before you post something that you think is clever or insulting please use google and search AMD vs Nvidia image quality and from there you will see that there is quite the consensus that AMD does in fact have slightly better image quality then Nvidia.

Added (20.06.2015, 16:05)
---------------------------------------------

Quote drkrdr7 ()
thanks for trying to help me choose guys.

but, harbinger is right. I'm getting a new card specifically for SE. I've done my research and know very well about how amd/nvidia gpus perform on other games and stuff. I needed to know which SE prefers.

if that's nvidia, it's not going to be 970 as it has some vram issues if past 3.5 gb of 4 gb. at the same time 980 is much expensive. even that's too 4 GB,but not crippled like 970

while i like amd because they give much more compute power and 8 GIGS! of vram for much less price

but I'll go with what space engineer prefers. I would like a word from space engineer himself.


I'm telling you mate. Go with AMD right now to get the most bang for your buck. SE runs flawless on AMD hardware and you'll save a few bucks on the side. The price/performance ratio of the R9 290 is out of this world. For a sub $300 card it performs as well if not better in some cases then Nvidia's $350+ cards.





AMD FX-8320 8 core @4.0ghz , AMD R9 290 4GB, 8GB DDR3 @1866mhz, 1TB Hard Drive

Edited by the_nerervarine - Saturday, 20.06.2015, 16:01
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 18:14 | Message # 9
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3599
Status: Online
Forgive me for any errors in the following post I am a bit sleep deprived.




Quote the_nerervarine ()
Your gif only goes to prove my point of Nvidia fanboyism here


It proves nothing besides that I found your post pretty funny.

I have tested SpaceEngine on multiple AMD and Nvidia GPUs and time and time again the lower end Nvidia outperformed the supposed higher end ATI GPU in program stability and performance. This is not about other games, there were instances where ATI/AMD ran certain things better.

My 760 GTX 4GB outperformed a R9 280X which is supposedly a better card. I made sure the card was functional by benching other games and in D3D9/10/11 the R9 280X usually outperformed the 760 however when it came to SpaceEngine the R9 280X did not compete. The GPU required multiple config adjustments for SE, a driver profile in third party tools, multiple driver version installs before a suitable stable build was found on out of date drivers, and even then just to function in other programs properly required a different atioglxx.dll in the system folder.

I also compared SE on a Geforce 9600 GT, 9800GT, ATI 5770, and a ATI 5870. The 5870 should've been superior but the 9800 GT which is an older weaker Nvidia card ran the program for longer durations and immediately after installation without any profile adjustments, config adjustments, or DLLs placed in the system folder. The 5870 had on average higher fps and could render screenshots in above 1080 but it suffered from stuttering and crashing issues.

The evidence I have seen in person supports the claim that Nvidia overall is the better GPU when it comes to SpaceEngine. I am not claiming Nvidia is better overall, however in the programs I use and the games I play (for the most part) Nvidia offers me the better experience.

The only fanboy I see here on these forums defending a specific brand is you. You openly brag and boast about how superior your AMD card is. You refuse to acknowledge facts in the face of statements that defy your belief in your supposed GPU superiority and you fall back on your incessant need to blindly defend AMD and continually suggest such GPUs even in the face of being wrong.

It has already been said, and the troubleshoot proves this, that Nvidia is superior in performance, stability and quality to AMD WHEN IT COMES TO SPACEENGINE. The vast majority of issues tend to arise from AMD GPUs and SpaceEngineer himself has even stated that his program runs best on Nvidia.



To back up my claim on you being a fanboy I have quoted as many posts as I could find where you have blindly defended AMD, gave them abnormally high praise, and posts where you clearly have implied performance issues while you have been claiming none

Quote the_nerervarine ()
It is a bit more frame ratey (Laggy) compared to 972. You have a good system don't get me wrong but even I have lagging issues and I have a high end rig.

Quote the_nerervarine ()
I never thought I would be frustrated at Space Engine but here we are. @SpaceEngineer- I get random BSOD when I exit your program. At first I thought it was my overclock but I set everything back at default settings and it still happens. Any ideas?

Quote the_nerervarine ()
Everyone complaining about "lag" or frame rate issues I think I might have found a quick fix. Turning the bloom down to the good old 9.72 setting of 5 seems to help. Looks like I'm going to have to make a new performance configuration for people.

Quote the_nerervarine ()
Any fix for the buggy lava flows yet? Sticking with 9.72 for now...

Quote the_nerervarine ()
This is rather odd because for my card which has 4gb of vram barely breaks a sweat running SE. I never see my GPU temps or usage go that high with my card. Anyway you can verify this?

Quote the_nerervarine ()
I actually put more $$ into my GPU and got a R9 290

Very happy with what I built. Runs every game I throw at it max at 60+ FPS

Quote the_nerervarine ()
There is a very strong Nvidia bias for the long time SE users but it's all really fanboyism.

Quote the_nerervarine ()
But if you're buying a modern high end card I really don't think you need to worry how SE is going to run whether it be on Nvidia or AMD (Just for an idea my R9 290 never drops below 30 fps when rendering a planet and terrain and that's with an LOD setting of 0.000ect and tops out near 322fps)

Quote the_nerervarine ()
That's why my system with an R9 290 destroys my mates system with a GTX 970 in Space Engine by a pretty wide margin.

Quote the_nerervarine ()
I'm telling you mate. Go with AMD right now to get the most bang for your buck.

Quote the_nerervarine ()
SE runs flawless on AMD hardware and you'll save a few bucks on the side. The price/performance ratio of the R9 290 is out of this world. For a sub $300 card it performs as well if not better in some cases then Nvidia's $350+ cards.


I have tried to find all your posts that came after you built your new PC, some may be wrong in which case I will correct those errors. However clearly from the content and argumentative nature of your posts you seem to have a vested interest in defending AMD over Nvidia.

Quote the_nerervarine ()
SE runs flawless on AMD hardware


Just to refute this

From 0.9.7.2 Troubleshoot thread
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
No, driver bug, as usual for ATI.


to quote a comparison in troubleshoot thread between Nvidia and AMD ease of use and issues
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
Nvidia: Major lag spikes
To prevent major lags with Nvidia, go into Nvidia control panel, and in SpaceEngine's profile set Threaded optimization to off.


Quote SpaceEngineer ()
ATI/AMD: Crash on approaching to the black hole, neutron star or white dwarf, on using ship's hyperdrive, or when enabling the Oculus Rift mode or the Fish Eye mode
Open config/user.cfg and change this parameter value to false, so that it looks like this:

EnableMipmapsWarp false // use mipmapping for warp effects rendering

If crashes on enabling the Oculus Rift mode or the Fish Eye mode still remains, change these two parameters to false as well:

EnableMipmapsGUI false // use mipmapping for GUI FBO
EnableMipmapsFrame false // use mipmapping for scene FBO


And this doesn't even cover the amount of threads regarding driver crashes, black planets, and other crazy issues caused by AMD drivers.



Run a search on the forum for ATI/AMD and Nvidia, you will find many threads for both with many issues but the AMD issues clearly outnumber the Nvidia issues. The funny thing about this is that there are more Nvidia users on the forum and yet there are more AMD users with issues.

And lets not forget that someone from Nvidia actually registered on the forum to acknowledge an issue with SpaceEngine and a fix was added to future Nvidia drivers
http://en.spaceengine.org/forum/4-2355-44856-16-1414475118

I have yet to see AMD do the same.

The best position in any argument or discussion is an unbiased position. I am unbiased I use both brands of GPUs. I simply go where the evidence takes me.





Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
 
Destructor1701Date: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 18:28 | Message # 10
Pioneer
Group: Users
Ireland
Messages: 531
Status: Offline
[/thread]




 
the_nerervarineDate: Saturday, 20.06.2015, 19:26 | Message # 11
Space Pilot
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 106
Status: Offline
I have to defend my system here when it comes to this post you brought up.

"I never thought I would be frustrated at Space Engine but here we are. @SpaceEngineer- I get random BSOD when I exit your program. At first I thought it was my overclock but I set everything back at default settings and it still happens. Any ideas?"

I did find this to be an issue with the SE software I was able to correct by making it "not ask me again" on the promt that comes up when you start the software.

And perhaps you're right I am an AMD/ATI fanboy only because out of the 7 GPU's I've owned in the last 10 years 5 AMD and 2 Nvidia that the AMD cards last and my two Nvidia cards died on me in less than a year. (a meager 6 months of life on my 9800gt)

Also as pointed out by the other poster looking for a system primarily to run SE, I to went out to build a system primarily for SE and I have zero regret on any of the parts I picked for my build. Nvidia or not.





AMD FX-8320 8 core @4.0ghz , AMD R9 290 4GB, 8GB DDR3 @1866mhz, 1TB Hard Drive

Edited by the_nerervarine - Saturday, 20.06.2015, 19:36
 
Billy_MayesDate: Sunday, 21.06.2015, 09:11 | Message # 12
Pioneer
Group: Users
Finland
Messages: 485
Status: Offline
I agree with DoctorOfSpace on the fact that Nvidia GPU's are better than AMD in Space Engine, particularily regarding drivers. If you're only looking to upgrade for Space Engine, I'd definetely recommend Nvidia. But, if you're looking to upgrade for other games, look below.

I've had experience with both GPU's, and seen that both have their own flaws.

Nvidia tended to fail quite early, and was more expensive, but had better perfromance overall and was usually compatible with everything.

I've had a ton of driver problems with AMD, but in general it's been very cheap for its performance, and one hasn't failed on me (so far).

I believe AMD is much better for budget hardware. I got my card for about $80. Nvidia, on the other hand is better for enthusiast hardware, like the GTX 970, 980, and the titans.

If you've got the money, go for Nvidia. If you're looking for a budget, but still efficient GPU, go for AMD.





AMD Phenom II X4 955 3.2 GHz Quad-Core - AMD Radeon HD 6950 2GB VRAM - 4GB RAM - 1680x1050 75 Hz Samsung screen
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Sunday, 21.06.2015, 09:36 | Message # 13
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3599
Status: Online
Quote the_nerervarine ()
And perhaps you're right I am an AMD/ATI fanboy only because out of the 7 GPU's I've owned in the last 10 years 5 AMD and 2 Nvidia that the AMD cards last and my two Nvidia cards died on me in less than a year. (a meager 6 months of life on my 9800gt)


Quote Billy_Mayes ()
Nvidia tended to fail quite early, and was more expensive, but had better perfromance overall and was usually compatible with everything.


I agree that Nvidia seems to have a higher failure rate. My 760 that I bought last year has failed 3 times yet the 5870 I bought in 2011 has not failed once. There are probably just as many people who have had AMD cards fail, when it comes to hardware failure its a luck of the draw. I know plenty of people who have been using the same Nvidia cards for nearly a decade and haven't had them fail.





Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
 
HarbingerDawnDate: Sunday, 21.06.2015, 11:59 | Message # 14
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8714
Status: Offline
I haven't experienced this high failure rate with Nvidia that you guys mention. I've purchased 2 Nvidia cards, one over 5 years ago, and one 3 years ago. Both are still working perfectly, and neither has ever had any problems. Maybe it depends on the card manufacturer in addition to the GPU manufacturer; both of my cards have been EVGA.




All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
 
the_nerervarineDate: Sunday, 21.06.2015, 14:59 | Message # 15
Space Pilot
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 106
Status: Offline
I guess it is all a matter of preference and as Billy Mayes said AMD is great if you're on a budget. I was able to pick up my R9 290 on a flash sale for less then $225. I guess pricing is a big part of my preference but it's also shady business practices both company's practice and which is the lesser of two evils. First off the fact that AMD has been rebranding the Hawaii GPU for 2 generations now. Or how Nvidia purposely gimps cards (I'm looking at you GTX 960 with your 128 bit interface and the first models of the GTX 970 with only 3.5 gb of Vram) which forces the consumer to buy a new card before it should be necessary. The GTX 960 would a monster of a budget card if it had a 256 or 512 bit interface. Anyway I tend to ramble and as I said it's all personal preference.




AMD FX-8320 8 core @4.0ghz , AMD R9 290 4GB, 8GB DDR3 @1866mhz, 1TB Hard Drive

Edited by the_nerervarine - Sunday, 21.06.2015, 15:00
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » General Discussions » Optimal PC building for SE discussion
Page 1 of 512345»
Search: