L3s7ing

A normal batch file would be able to do that, but Fallout 4 uses txt files with normal console commands. Due to the fact, that you use txt files with normal console commands there is no way to use the normal in batch files used commands like "goto" or "timeout" which would make your idea possible. The fallout console would simply not recognize the commands. So the only thing that would come near this is a txt file with something like: kah bat kahFile If you name your txt file "kahFile" this would lead to an overflow of the command kah (the file would simply open itself over and over again) ... how often I don't know. Maybe as fast as your pc can handle executing this command per second? So, as far as I know, there's no possible way to make a repeating bat file in Fallout 4. However, what fun would it be to play the game without any enemies? :wink:

Steam -> Settings -> In-Game -> (on the right side "when a screenshot is taken") check "save an uncompressed copy" You can also select a custom folder there.

https://reshade.me/ A post processing tool, with similarities to enb. But maybe not worth using it only for producing screenshots.

Reshade can also save screenshots in full resolution.

Not sure how the actual situation now is, but maybe, according to this video (https://youtu.be/VTmIBr1dpfM), reinstalling your os might help. Just tripped over this while browsing yt, just thought it was worth mentioning in case your problem still exists. Edit: Or maybe not. SLI underperforming is a similarity, but it's a different way of underperforming. But looking into bios reset might be worth a shot, can't hurt to try, if nothing else helps.

I think the fps in menus aren't worth looking at. I'm having the same in around 3 or 4 games. Maybe cause they're just so easy to render, one gpu simply goes faster without being held back by another. I run some benchmarks on the same spot as you and had basically the same problem now. 60-65 FPS always... (getting a bit jealous on your single core performance there :tongue:) 4k without SLI, 4k with SLI, 5k without SLI, 5k with SLI. Sadly the game wouldn't allow me to go up to 8k or even higher :sad: so I could look into it further by simply raising the resolution. Both gpu's aren't even doing much, but there's a difference between 4k and 5k. 4k the load on both is around 20% each and in 5k it rises to ~24%, while the cpu is still doing it's normal thing. Running for me on Core 1 and 7 and with always the same load. For me it seems that the current state is cpu limited and even if I pack more gpu demanding things onto it, there's no performance loss. Basically what I think is, that you could load much more gpu demanding things onto your game without losing performance. For me I only get more fps when there's less stress on the cpu. Test for this would be loading your game up with as much 4k textures as you can get, without stressing the cpu more (like with more/better shadows). For some games SLI only gets you benefits when one gpu can't do the job anymore. In my tests I couldn't see any negative scaling in Skyrim with SLI ... so no Idea where that's coming from. Sadly I can't confirm any of this for sure at the moment and might not be able to do much in the next days, got some exams coming in. Edit: Just tried something: I lowered some cpu intensive settings (shadow quality, actor-fading) to see what would happen. (still using the whiterun spot, but not every time on the millimeter perfect spot. Somehow dsr or some settings destroyed my game, making every new save corrupt ^^) Single GPU got up to 60-70% load while running 5k at ~90-100 fps. SLI both cards around 55% usage at 5k with 95-110fps at 5k. So gpu usage went up and fps also. Sure it's not a future option, cause good shadows look nice and we want to also see characters further away then 10m, but it could give information on SLI performance under better load. At least I hope so, got a lot of stuff on my mind, so correct me if I'm taking wrong turns somewhere. There are also some SLI optimised ENB's which would be worth a look.

https://ufile.io/h6qz3 Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Hope that works

My knowledge is at an end ^^ maybe the gpu numbers are simply switched somehow, but it would be maybe worth a try to ask your manufacturer for help (sometimes their support really helps out ... even if you can't believe it :D) Disabling Hyperthreading shouldn't have brought an improvement in the first place ... but maybe the way Skyrim is coded just messes everything up. I would probably have tried to set up the cpu cores through the ini, but that's mostly because I switch between many games and some need more power than Skyrim (so taking away power from the cpu, in general, wouldn't work). That's why your usage is up at 33% now ... disabling half the cpu (not exactly, cause hyperthreading doesn't really double the performance, but roughly) means higher usage. But somehow Skyrim seems to work better for you this way. When I first assembled my pc I tried turning off HT to go for higher oc with lower temps but couldn't let it stay there, cause it really cut my performance away (but I didn't play Skyrim often back then). And the game doesn't really use the double cpu power. Cutting hyperthreading away maybe gives you a slight boost, but technically you don't just put two parts of a cpu together again. Like you don't just cut them in half by enabling it. According to the gpu-thing, taking power away from it shouldn't do help you and it shouldn't also help the cpu. Your cpu will be either way at its limit with those cards and they aren't even on oc yet (if I saw it right in your pictures). They simply give your cpu as much room as it can get to work. Which isn't much in Skyrim... It seems like your SLI worked in the 3d mark benchmark and superposition 4k benchmark so your setup seems to work fine in benchmarks generally ... maybe the games you tested weren't simply optimized (not according to Skyrim here). However, I was wrong some times already ... so trying a bit around shouldn't hurt ...

If I'm correct hyperthreading doesn't work exactly like that. It gives your OS the possibility to give on core multiple workloads, cause sometimes there are ways that one core could do two tasks at one time. Disabling HT would simply leave the core to work on the information given to him by one thread. Simply said each core has multiple modules which can do different things. Hyperthreading basically puts those modules into two threads and they can work independently without relying on each other. Somehow ... magic (pipelining ... but magic is easier). However, those two "workloads" should be automatically managed to never interfere with each other, so disabling HT wouldn't do anything. It can be useful if you go on extreme oc cause of voltage handling and heat dissipation, but that should also be not very ground breaking. ==> Disabling Hyperthreading should not improve performance. It's simply the engine that is limited to only use that many cores. So single core performance is more important, but your cpu is already very strong and on a high oc, which leaves not much room for improvements. Most good optimized games also only use 4 (or up to six) cores, which of course would be a great improvement. Regarding the motherboard: I looked up the manual to see if I could fine something about that (cause I never heard anything about it and also use an Asus one), but couldn't find anything ... it also makes no sense to me, because your lower card runs on an 8x pcie lanes and the first on 16x ... so the first pcie slot should be the main card (like it's normally is).

"I'll have what she's having." ? ... sry couldn't hold back Did you try switching the cards and replugging the monitor into the top card? I think there was a way to reset the order... but simply reinstalling drivers doesn't seem to work. Hope I can find something onto that. Sometimes gpu#2 is doing more work then #1 for me too (in my configuration) so I think it's ok that the lower card sometimes does more work in not fully balanced workloads.

So step by step. (I'm just comparing them to my settings now ... which should more or less be standard ones - I hope - but either way they are somehow working ^^) Differences I noticed for the Inspector Oldrim Settings: Sync and Refresh: Vertical Sync = Forced off Stereo: I have a lot fewer settings there... and all turned off (still searching why - if I'm correct that are settings for 3D Vision...). <=== (not important I think) I also have some more settings under "undefined" (in your case unknown) but I think that's due to my older version of the inspector (seems I need to update again). Also in the control panel, the SLI-rendering-mode is set to "recommend (SLI)" instead of the forcing rendering mode and vertical Sync is on "off" ... normally I would recommend setting the rendering mode to "recommend" which should load the sli profile with "alternative rendering mode 2". ====> Would definitely look into this: And I'm not sure if that's the problem, but you connected your monitor to your second card... normally I would go with the first card. http://imgur.com/kr3GDHW not so important but I will also mention it (maybe that's why some settings are different): I'm using the 382.53 WHQL drivers (so a bit older).

Due to me messing up great while I got into confusion (seems to be my bad day, sorry) I redid my post. SkyrimSE runs fairly good in SLI for (now with the right vanilla settings) with a cpu limitation. I retested it and my gpu's won't go full in while my cpu is stuck at using only a bit of it's power. However, you normally should get much better results, cause with lower hardware I could match up with your results. So something must be going wrong with your SLI settings... what exactly I can't see right now. For your general sli problem, if you could name the games you tested that would be helpful. How your SLI isn't working correctly, in general, I can't say... some games doesn't really scale very well, some even to the negative. The best games for testing SLI in my case were ones designed on the Frostbite Engine, which has genius good sli optimization. Settings up SLI should be as simply as activating it under your control panel (SLI, Surround, PhysiX config -> maximize 3D performance), no other requirements (except the sli bridge).

deleted

I wouldn't recommend running Skyrim with SLI. For me it only leads to problems. As far as I've seen it Bethesdas Engine doesn't really go well with multi-gpu setups (the only game where I notice a difference is FO4) and Skyrim doesn't even has native support for it. It seems like you created your own Skyrim Profile but I think there already be some profiles that should work with Skyrim (think I used the one for Dark Souls 2 back then with AA turned off). However, you will be heavily cpu bottlenecked, cause original Skyrim can't really manage multiple cores very well (that's where your low cpu usage comes from). I think it never took more then 3 or 4 of my cores and even then they weren't fully utilized. Two 1080TIs is just full overkill for some old game like Skryim ^^ one card should easily run this game and I think two wouldn't even run it much better, without mentioning the scaling problems of ENB's and other sli problems in Skyrim. Also never go above 60 fps, creation engine can't really handle that.

Can confirm this. I'm using a similar psu and it runs like a charm. Most times completely silent and otherwise still very quiet. Corsair also has one of the best supports I've ever seen.

If you look at the max power draw of your gpu's + cpu you're around 700W with the cpu being a bit moodier it could take a few watts more. So yes, a 860W psu should be good. If you take the 1000W or the 860W one is up to your personal preference. I would probably go with the 1000W one to have some room and a bit more efficiency (even if it's just a ittle bit better).

You would probably get more help in the game specific modding forum cause it could be hard to know which game you're talking about... I would guess you mean Skyrim or SkyrimSE so I would recommend looking into these forums: Skyrim: https://forums.nexusmods.com/index.php?/forum/419-skyrim-modding/ SkyrimSE: https://forums.nexusmods.com/index.php?/forum/4045-skyrim-special-edition-files/

I don't know if the fps should be that bad, but your gpu isn't the best for 1080p and upwards gaming. Would be good to know what your ingame settings are. Some options heavily decrease fps without adding too much visual quality. Regardless I would probably blame the gpu.

There shouldn't be any issues. You can safely install two or more os on different partitions while being on the same drive.

I wouldn't recommend installing mods manually. Always use a mod manager. It's the best way to avoid problems. Simply manually download the mods and after that add them to your mod manager (in nmm it's possible with the "add mod from file"-button, it's a green plus). Short Edit: Bootcamp does not convert your system to anything. It simply installs a dual-boot system, so both os are installed at the same time. Just wanted to add this :sweat:

What exactly do you mean by automatic optimization? Do you mean that GeForce Experience optimized the game? If yes, you could go to your game library inside GeForce Experience, click on DOOM and then there should be a reset button (near the screwdriver, which whom you can adjust the "optimization" level on a scale from performance to quality). In my experience just turn off auto-optimization completely. Never really optimized any game for me besides Deus Ex Mankind Divided where it changed some dx12 SLI driver settings (at least I think that's what it did).

Had DA:O for some time on my macbook (just to play a bit on my breaks) and used win10 for it (bootcamp and dual-boot). Everything worked fine there. Never used wine, so I'm not sure about it, but I heard that some games are not working 100% with it. So if nothing else works, maybe take a try on windows (even if that's not the user-friendliest way... never liked bootcamp and dual-boot isn't easy for everyone).

They way how I understand it, they are not allowed to take money because of their normal jobs (legal problems). So it will be not very likely that they will join the Creation Club. That's also why you can't donate to them.

I'm using two gtx 1080 with a max. power draw of around 250W each. Combined with the cpu and the rest of my system I get around 650W in full load. Still had my previous 1200W power supply and everything runs perfectly (no load psu fans or coil whine). The strix carsd are rated with 180W max power draw, but to have some oc capability I would also go with a minimum of 750W psu and to have a bit overhead you could take everything above. (850-1000W would be best, at least in my experience) Also, go with a quality one so it won't die after the first year.

Could be interesting to see how Intel's i9 will go against Ryzen 9. In the benchmarks I've seen, Intel beats the ryzen 7 with their i7 in gaming, but the ryzen 5 mostly beats the i5. If I looked up the leaked charts right, the i9 should be heavily overclockable, which could give Intel further lead in gaming. However workstations load and so on could be easily dominated by AMD now, at least at a reasonable price point. In the end, it seems most things will be decided by the price.