Dismiss Notice
Some Razer services have been impacted due to the unique circumstances COVID-19 has created. We apologize for any inconvenience and appreciate your understanding during this critical time.

Razer Core Bottleneck?

Discussion in 'Systems' started by Katana, Aug 22, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Katana_x_II7

    Katana_x_II7 Well-Known Member

    So I keep seeing posts on here about how, for example, you can get around 5-10% less power out of a 1080 in the core, then if the 1080 was in a desktop. But havnt found an exact answer why yet. I asked some people about the TB3 being the bottleneck at 40GB/s, but have heard mixed things from that, some people saying it is a bottleneck, some saying it isnt. Some say it will be fixed in future software/firmware updates, some seem to say its here to stay. So does anyone have a clear explanation for why that 5-10% of power is lost with the gpu and the core?

    really considering getting a blade and a core when the new 1060 blades are announced, and want to pick up the core and a 1080, but nervous about losing 10% of the power of the 1080. If i spend that much money I wanna get the most out of it. Thanks in advance for any answers :)
     
  2. qyuburt

    qyuburt Active Member

    To my limited knowledge I would ASSUME it had something to do with feeding through the cable, but I really don't know enough to give a solid answer. It makes sense to me that being connected directly to the mobo is going to better than being connected via cable.
     
  3. Katana_x_II7

    Katana_x_II7 Well-Known Member

    Yeah thats what I thought would be the bottleneck...but I've seen people say that the cord isnt a bottleneck at all. Idk, i just see conflicting statements in a lot of the threads on here and other places. That makes it confusing for what actually is the bottleneck :\ hopefully we can get a clear answer on hear from someone very informed :) thanks for the response though!
     
  4. qyuburt

    qyuburt Active Member

    I'm sure we will get more information about it over time, from the likes of Linus and their tests. =)
     
  5. I have a core running with a gtx 1070. I don't have anyway of comparing to a desktop or anything, but my stealth with the gtx 1070 runs pretty smoothly, I will see a lit lag but that is expected. Most of my games I can play in high graphics at 1080p in 40-60 fps, the game I have most issue with is cities skylines. And I have a mouse and ethernet cable connected to the core, along with a displayport going out from the 1070 into an external monitor.
     
  6. qyuburt

    qyuburt Active Member

    Many people are saying that City Skylines is an issue, and I think that's a CPU issue more than anything else, since the Stealth only has a 2 core hyperthreaded CPU.
     
  7. Katana_x_II7

    Katana_x_II7 Well-Known Member

    Yeah I would be buying the blade 14inch version, so I'm more concerned about the GPU end of things instead of the CPU. I've heard some other cases as well that shows the stealth cpu cant keep up with certain things. That makes sense though with the CPU it has.
     
  8. qyuburt

    qyuburt Active Member

    I would just wait a little while, theres word that the Blade will have the 1060, if it does, that is gonna be pretty powerful enough for most uses, you don't necessarily need to go spending money on a 1080 and a Core until there are more tests to determine what causes the loss and whether or not its something fixed via firmware.
     
    Katana likes this.
  9. If you are asking me if its worth it, definitely for me with my stealth the core is worth it. The performance boost is great, there is lag but not too bad. And since I use the stealth for work, I like the portability of the stealth and then plugging it in to play games. The overall cost is the same as a high end laptop, but I don't have to carry around the massive laptop. If you talk to razer support, they say not to try the 10 series cards yet with the core, even though they work fine, since razer hasn't listed them as supported yet. I have had a few issues, mostly related to windows and sometimes the drivers.
     
  10. Vaypron

    Vaypron Well-Known Member

    Always remember that the whole gpu/display/whatsoever over thunderbolt is still kinda new. I would give them one year, after that there shouldn't be any performance difference(in theory).

    Like @QyuBurt mentioned, a direct connection with a mobo pcie interface will always be better. The way the data needs to travel are so much shorter, so less distance in which interference can appear.

    And seriously, 5-10% performance loss is more than acceptable, for just plug the core in when you need it.
     
    Katana and QyuBurt like this.
  11. qyuburt

    qyuburt Active Member

    @Vaypron got ma back
     
  12. Vaypron

    Vaypron Well-Known Member

    Always mate



    The 40GB/s connection shouldn't be the bottleneck either. According to the PCIe-Wiki, every normally used PCIe 16x Connection has a common speed of 4000-31000Mb/s.
    You may wanna correct me on that, I'm not that familiar with bandwidths and if you can compare these two connection-types face to face.
     
    Katana likes this.
  13. Katana_x_II7

    Katana_x_II7 Well-Known Member

    Ah okay, so if this is the problem, its probably just a software/firmware thing if razer says not to use them yet, if they havnt optimized them. Hopefully they can get all the 10 series working well in the next few months so there is no more loss. Thanks for the reply!

    Yeah hopefully over time they can get the performance perfect so there is no more loss. Makes sense I guess that we lose some performance since it just came out. I didn't think about that. Thanks!
    I'll have to look into this bandwidth and see what it can really do. Thanks!
     
  14. Katana_x_II7

    Katana_x_II7 Well-Known Member

    Just looked at that Wiki, and looks like you are right. With what is currently out right now, can only do about 31.5GB/s, which is pretty far below the current 40GB/s of the TB3. So I guess its just optimization of firmware/software that causes the performance loss. Thats good to hear, hopefully the loss will be one in the next few months or early next year once Razer comes out with some updates for the new 10 series cards. Looks like PCIe 5.0 is not coming out until the "far future" according to that wiki, so looks like once we get some updates, we shouldnt notice any performance drops on cards in the near future.

    Thanks for all the replies everyone :)
     
    Vaypron likes this.
  15. For someone who personally owns a Blade 2016 + Core + 1080 FE I can say there is a bottleneck comparing it to a desktop configuration, it's around 10%-15% depending on the game. Even in 4K gaming I see 8-10% loses compared to a comparable desktop w/ a i7-6700 + 1080.

    My biggest gripe is with VR, DPC latency is much more apparent and I get issues with display driver timeouts in windows due to that latency over TB3 (don't forget protocol overhead saturating that PCI-e bandwidth). I've alleviated it somewhat setting the TdrDelay (Timeout Detection) to 10+ seconds in windows (default is 2 seconds). This allows the display driver more time before windows considers it locked up which it attempts to crash the driver and restart it. I still get it in Edge of Nowhere on the Rift, Raw Data seems to be happy with the 10+ second TdrDelay in place. Always fun to have my Rift display lock up, windows completely unresponsive like the Blade is hard locked, give it it's time to wait and boom display driver recovers and the external monitor refreshes.

    So with those things in mind I honestly at this point understand the loss is real, not only that but the extra latency is very noticeable in VR applications, frame latency is just as bad if not worse then lost frames (low frame rates) in VR. So take those factors into consideration. Again I've had my Blade 2016 + Core + 1080 for almost 3 months now and I've gamed extensively on it (beat 5-6 Rift games, 10+ Vive games, etc.).
     
  16. Katana_x_II7

    Katana_x_II7 Well-Known Member

    Thanks for the reply! Nice to hear some stuff from someone who actually has a setup that im thinking of getting. Although I'm not big on VR (at least at the moment with whats out there, but might be in the future if some games I like implement it), so the VR aspect and performance loss wouldnt matter to me. But it seems like the main performance loss as noticed in your first paragraph is due to lack of software/firmware optimization, so hopefully it will be fixed later down the line so there is close to no performance loss (maybe just 1-2%). Do you really see up to 15% performance loss for some games? thats a pretty large amount. what games do you see this large of a performance drop?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Sign In with Razer ID >


Don't have a Razer ID yet?
Get Razer ID >