The 660 Ti Thread: Questions and Answers Here!

[g4sho]

All after days and days of trying to find the problem I was having with waking up from sleep, I finally returned my Gigabyte 660ti 2gb video card, and got the EVGA 4gb 670 SC version. And my sleep wake problems are gone. So this tells me there is a dfference amongst these Nvida Cards, even with the same chipset. Now I am happy with my Hack Pro setup, and by the way did I not meniton that it is wicked fast. lol

 

[raygan]

All after days and days of trying to find the problem I was having with waking up from sleep, I finally returned my Gigabyte 660ti 2gb video card, and got the EVGA 4gb 670 SC version. And my sleep wake problems are gone. So this tells me there is a dfference amongst these Nvida Cards, even with the same chipset. Now I am happy with my Hack Pro setup, and by the way did I not meniton that it is wicked fast. lol

I never had any issues with sleep/wake, but I've thought about returning my card because of the FCPX issue. Does the 670 work well with FCPX? (I'd be going for the 2gb version.) It's a shame because I love this card, and it is $100 cheaper, but $100 might be a small price for comparable performance with Final Cut awesomeness.

I need to make a decision in the next few days or my return period will expire.

 

[3william56]

Sweet - nailed it. Thanks Raygan.
(for others having slow startup / boot after installing a 660Ti on a Gigabyte Motherboard, hold DEL during startup to access the BIOS configuration screen, press right arrow to get to Peripherals, scroll down to Internal Graphics, press enter then set to "Auto" - better than disabling the internal graphics totally so you won't have to change the setting again if you remove the GPU).

 

[ElKanyeEast]

I never had any issues with sleep/wake, but I've thought about returning my card because of the FCPX issue. Does the 670 work well with FCPX? (I'd be going for the 2gb version.) It's a shame because I love this card, and it is $100 cheaper, but $100 might be a small price for comparable performance with Final Cut awesomeness.

I need to make a decision in the next few days or my return period will expire.

It's really hard to say. I would return your 660 Ti and get an MSI 670 Power Edition, and if that doesn't fix your issues, then get a 570/580 or 2 570's/580's and run them in SLI. Also, try this thread http://www.tonymacx86.com/user-buil...d5h-i7-3770k-gigabyte-geforce-gtx-660-ti.html because he had a 660 Ti and managed to get FCPX working on it. Try it out on both cards, and like I said, if those don't work, you have the 570/580

 

[3william56]

Here's a really stupid question. How do you know if FCPX is actually using the GPU? What performance would you expect?

Having installed the 660Ti, GraphicsEnabler=No, the new NVIDIA CUDA drivers installed, but not using the Multibeast NVIDIA 6xx series tweak as it ran OpenCl fine without it. I am getting a Luxmark Sala score of 990 on GPU only / 1125 GPU+CPU, and FCPX appears to render fine as long as I avoid Compressor (use Share/Export Media instead), at a rate of roughly real time for 1080p H264 with only basic title and transition effects (i.e. 5 mins of film takes 5 mins to render and save with no background prerendering).

During the render, iStatMenus shows all 8 core/threads lighting up to 50-100%. But I don't know of an equivalent monitor for GPU utilisation.

So can anyone tell me what Luxmark score or FCPX render rate should a properly functioning 660Ti be achieving?

 

[ElKanyeEast]

Here's a really stupid question. How do you know if FCPX is actually using the GPU? What performance would you expect?

Having installed the 660Ti, GraphicsEnabler=No, the new NVIDIA CUDA drivers installed, but not using the Multibeast NVIDIA 6xx series tweak as it ran OpenCl fine without it. I am getting a Luxmark Sala score of 990 on GPU only, and FCPX appears to render fine as long as I avoid Compressor (use Share/Export Media instead), at a rate of roughly real time for 1080p H264 with only basic title and transition effects (i.e. 5 mins of film takes 5 mins to render and save with no background prerendering).

During the render, iStatMenus shows all 8 core/threads lighting up to 50-100%. But I don't know of an equivalent monitor for GPU utilisation.

So can anyone tell me what Luxmark score or FCPX render rate should a properly functioning 660Ti be achieving?

That sounds about right, although most people are getting 1000-1020, but it's nothing to cry over. You may have just found a fix for the FCPX problems, but the question is how does it perform with adobe apps? Have you tested any of those?

 

[g4sho]

I never had any issues with sleep/wake, but I've thought about returning my card because of the FCPX issue. Does the 670 work well with FCPX? (I'd be going for the 2gb version.) It's a shame because I love this card, and it is $100 cheaper, but $100 might be a small price for comparable performance with Final Cut awesomeness.

I need to make a decision in the next few days or my return period will expire.

I don't have FCPX, but I am both a mac and windows user, so my card is to be able to have the luxury of running high demand games in windows, and video encoding when necessary. But I wanted a card that had both performance and 100 percent compatibility, with the things I do in both os's. I have found that card. It also doesn't hurt that it can do 70 fps consistantly(score 1875), in the Heaven benchmark with everything set to max but the tellesation(off).

 

[raygan]

Well tomorrow I am going to pick up a 670 card, possibly the Gigabyte card here:
http://www.microcenter.com/product/...e_GTX_670_2048MB_GDDR5_PCIe_30_x16_Video_Card

I'll test it out and see if it improves things. If not, back it goes.

ElKanyeEast, why do you reccomend that MSI card in particular? They don't carry it at my local store, but if you think there is a compelling reason to wait for that one I can.

 

[axiom]

Here's a really stupid question. How do you know if FCPX is actually using the GPU? What performance would you expect?

Having installed the 660Ti, GraphicsEnabler=No, the new NVIDIA CUDA drivers installed, but not using the Multibeast NVIDIA 6xx series tweak as it ran OpenCl fine without it. I am getting a Luxmark Sala score of 990 on GPU only / 1125 GPU+CPU, and FCPX appears to render fine as long as I avoid Compressor (use Share/Export Media instead), at a rate of roughly real time for 1080p H264 with only basic title and transition effects (i.e. 5 mins of film takes 5 mins to render and save with no background prerendering).

During the render, iStatMenus shows all 8 core/threads lighting up to 50-100%. But I don't know of an equivalent monitor for GPU utilisation.

So can anyone tell me what Luxmark score or FCPX render rate should a properly functioning 660Ti be achieving?

You can use atMonitor to see GPU utilization. From my research, FCPX does not use the GPU for rendering. You'll see the GPU being used when you're exporting, using titles, transition, effects.

FCPX (some functions), Motion, and Compressor relies on the GPU to do some of the work and when I had the GTX 660 installed, it would randomly freeze or lock up the entire system.

I now have a GT 640 installed and haven't had one lockup/freeze.

Keeping fingers cross for new drivers as I would rather use the GTX660.

 

[axiom]

Well tomorrow I am going to pick up a 670 card, possibly the Gigabyte card here:
http://www.microcenter.com/product/...e_GTX_670_2048MB_GDDR5_PCIe_30_x16_Video_Card

I'll test it out and see if it improves things. If not, back it goes.

ElKanyeEast, why do you reccomend that MSI card in particular? They don't carry it at my local store, but if you think there is a compelling reason to wait for that one I can.

Interested in your testing. Please let me know how well the GTX 670 play with FCPX. I might pull the trigger and get one too, just have to figure out what to do with the GTX 660