Nazgren

Enableunsafememoryhacks is a testing setting and its use is generally not recommended. I would suggest that your problem is elsewhere. Have you enabled disablepreloadtovram by any chance? Enabling this would cause one time only turn stutter. Make sure it set to disabled. Might be best for you to simply post your enblocal.ini so we can see what the problem is.

Go official steam copy of skyrim or go home.

Your using body textures and face textures that don't match. You could either be using custom body textures and vanilla face textures, vanilla body textures and custom face textures or incompatible face and body textures. What if any npc texture mods are you using?

Hi, a month or two ago my PC took a tumble and as a result my hard drive is now ticking like a clock. Needless to say it's dead, and I am taking the opportunity to rebuild my computer , with the main change being the jump from AMD to Intel CPU. More specifically, I will get rid of my AMD Phenom II x4 965 and get an Intel i7-5820k. As I'm sure your aware, this will be a hefty increase in CPU power. My last skyrim build was script heavy (primarily in added npc's) and was also extremely graphics heavy, to the point that I believe my Titan X was heavily bottle necked, despite playing at 4K res with SMC and ENB. Thus, my question is would upgrading my CPU result in an increase in script performance in skyrim? I did some research and got mixed answers and was unable to find anywhere that specifically stated that scripts were CPU dependant, so I put the question to you fine people. I would imagine I would, but knowing skyrim / papyrus I suppose the engine could become a limiting factor long before the cpu would. Any ideas?

Will probably remove Randomly-Generated Generic Townsfolk and go on from there, seems to add the most people that do the least. I seem to have another problem though. I decided to empty my skyrim and work my way up from the bottom, starting mods one at a time and see which townsfolk mod had the biggest performance hit. I ran an empty game on default settings, 4k DSR, full aa, af, etc. 70fps+, no problems, installed SKSE, still good. Installed Grim and Sombre - Hircine ENB. I'm back to 20 FPS. This seems to be a huge part of the problem. Thats a 40-50 fps hit, i must have a problem with my ini settings, a Titan X shouldn't suffer this much from an ENB. G+S isn't even one of the most performance intensive, its up high on the list, no doubt about that, but there's certainly more demanding ENB's. My total available graphics memory with a GTX titan x and 8GB vram is 7892GB (does this sound right?) so i take away 170 for 7722 and make that my Videomemorysizemb and leave the reservedmemorysizemb as 128. I have also attached my enblocal ini below. Have i made a stupid mistake somewhere? Edit: ok, now im sure its my ENB. I removed my ENB, turned on all my add ons, including the many script heavy addons, loaded into the AS-LAL cell at over 120 fps. There is something wrong with my ENB settings. I tried ot go to whiterun, but got an infinite loading screen, however this is because i have a few addons requiring ENBoost which is currently not installed, nor is the memory patch set up (i think, never been sure if skse comes iwth it running or not).

Set up: Amd Phenom II x4 965 EVGA Superclocked GTX Titan X 8GB 2400mhz VRAM My mods, well, as i said, its enough to cause 4 script dumps in as many minutes, but to name a few: Inconsequential NPCs Populated Cities Towns and Villages Civil War Overhaul Warzones: Civil Unrest Tame the Beasts of Skyrim II Expanded Towns and Cities DA - YMOYL Travellers of Skyrim NPCs Protected OBIS Realistic Needs and Diseases Wet and Cold Traders of Skyrim I could go on, but i feel its already clear that I am pushing the game to its scripting limit and most likely beyond, but I'm getting the impression from what I'm reading on google that this limit is merely an ini setting. Even dropping from uGrids 11 to 5 doesn't help anything, I'm still lucky to get 20 FPS. I'm pretty sure the main cause of my scripting woes is the sheer number of NPCs that are in game. I walk down the stairs from the Bannered Mare to find what must be nearly 30 NPC's chatting, drinking and singing. I walk out of the bannered mare and see what must be at least 40 going about there heavily scripted lives between the bannered mare and the city gate alone. As nice as it is to have more citizens then guards for once, I'm pretty sure that this is the root of the problem. That being said, if i can simply make skyrim make use of the vast amount of vram and ram that is not being used so it can handle the scripts, i would much rather do that.

Hi, I made a new installation of skyrim. I made a character, picked the Tavern Patron Bannered Mare Alternate Start option, walk outside the tavern talk to some people and quit the game. I check my Papyrus log and find "Suspended stack count is over our warning threshold, dumping stacks" 4 times. I'm going to assume this is why I'm getting only 20 FPS. I have never managed to cause a stack dump before so i have no idea how to deal with them. Some people say change papyrus settings as this increases the number of stacks there can be before they are dumped, others say never ever do this because it makes the problem worse. How am i supposed to deal with Stack Dumps? I know that one way is to remove the script heavy mods in my system, but i have a pretty meaty system and am sure that it can handle more then it currently is, hence my interest in the possibility of editing papyrus to make the game handle more suspended scripts. tl;dr: What are my options for dealing with Stack Dumps?

Why would you want a laptop at all for gaming? You're better with a console; better graphics, more reliable, the list is huge. My GPU is much the same as the Op's, yet i don't even need to see his graphics to be able to say, without fear of being proved wrong that mine are far, far better then his laptop will ever get, plus when the 980 TI comes out i wont need to buy a whole new computer, but he will need a whole new laptop.

DX12 was leaked by AMD i believe as releasing at the same time as windows 10 in late june, so i guess we can only wait and see what happens. The biggest limiting factor currently with skyrim is VRAM, so if Boris can manipulate the DX12 SLI improvements into Skyrim then the skys the limit. We can only hope.

Don't go near Alienware at all. You can make a much better computer for much less money. Alienware is like getting an i7 for gaming, people get it for bragging rights but an i5 actual does just as well if not better for less money.

What about the Background processes that aren't managed by the game such as the hyper-threading overhaul? Surely ENB will be able to Jury Rig some form of DX12 implementation like it has with DX11? I don't just mean the visual effects, i mean the performance enhancements, like 2x4 GB cards resulting in 8 GB VRAM in DX12 whereas it didn't in DX11

Hi, As per the title, can I expect skyrim to see any major performance gain with the release of DX12? I was considering upgrading my 780 TI to a 980 TI but as skyrim is the only game I cannot currently run then if DX12 was to solve the problem it would tide me other for a bit longer. Being able to combine the VRAM of two GPU's will obviously help everyone with dual GPU's massively but unfortunately I only have one. My card is only beaten by skyrim and to a lesser extent GTAV so I know it's time for an upgrade, but I'm not expecting the 980 TI to cost pocket change so the longer I have to save for it the better.

Agreed BBen, my skyrim + enb use more then 4GB themselves! but then many gamers wont ever come close to that ram usage on a single game, at least for the next few years. Only thing that comes close to my knowledge is Shadows of Mordor with HD installed but even that grossly overestimates the necessary specs. Easiest way is to check ram usage is Task manager, listed as physical memory % at the bottom, as someone who's never looked into it i cant say whether its as accurate as dedicated monitoring software, but don't see why it wouldn't be.

I would only use 16GB of ram for rendering. 4gb is considered the norm for gaming for a reason, 8GB tops. I have a massively resource intensive skyrim installed, Total war rome: 2 with graphics overhauls, etc and have never managed to hit the limit of my 8GB. I would recommend faster ram over more ram at 8GB any day. Your better off with ram that can process the data faster, rather then more of it. If your already at 2400 mhz then theres no need to upgrade, if your absolutely desperate to buy RAM then look at DDR4, but if you have 8GB at 2400 MHZ then i think you would be better spending the money elsewhere.

IIRC that thing about pilots being able to pick out 1 frame from 300 was due to it having a plane in it or something wasn't it? The reason we can see that is because we subconciously see all 300, but our brain picks out that particular one due to the difference, namely the plane. From what i remember, the only limit to how many "frames" we see is how fast our occular nerve fires, which is pretty damn fast, however, our brain will only bother "perceiving" so many, because more then that would be pointless. What our eyes see clearly is basically a very small area in the center of our vision, maybe the inner 25% of our field of view. The rest is fuzzy and undiscernable. Think frosted glass. However our brain is capable of sharpening the images to what we see. It, obviously, does this so well that when neuro science eventually figures out exactly how, texturing will likely achieve a similar potential via a program capable of replicating the process. My point is, our eyes suck, and are the biggest limiting factor. On the contrary, i think its a massive boon. If somebody else needs at least 60 FPS in order for the motion to appear smooth then they need the extra processing power to put out that many more frames, wheras i can put that extra processing power towards higher textures. I am massively of the opinion that quality beats FPS. While going up from 24 to 60 FPS may provide, a 2% increase in quality, going up from 2k to 4k is absolutely undeniable, and thus would be i would say, at least a 75% increase in overall quality. As i said, i have for the moment, downgraded to the most popular skyrim 2k texture pack and am struggling massively with the decrease in graphics. I think i would need a 4k Monitor for 3840 x 2160 res before i could use these textures for any extended period :(

I understand that its not "FPS" that we see in, what i'm refering to is that we cant appreciate the difference above that. Its just easier to say "i cant see FPS above 24" so i don't have to explain human biology to people that don't understand it. Also, what makes you think i havent tried higher hz monitors? I've done Interactive media at college, its something i've looked into. Besides, as has been said, im not complaining. If i could pick between playing skyrim with 2k textures at 60 fps or 4-8k textures at 24 FPS i would pick the latter. Every, single, time. I've just installed Skyrim HD in order for my card to be able to actually handle the game, the quality is absolutely appaling. i was counting pixels on the cart ride in :S. As soon as the GTX 980 TI comes out i'm buying one and getting my textures back.

I said GPU, not PSU, my GPU has 3 fans each kicking out 60 celcius at an RPM of 4300. that's how it heats the room :).

One example is my brother, due to his squint or lazy eye or something, doctors say he cant see any difference in 3D movies, but he believes he can. Whos to say who is right? The science may be there, but if he can see it then he can see it. Same goes for people who can or cant see any difference above 24 FPS. Persistence of vision says images staying on the retina for 1/25 of a second, maybe that is all we can see and belief otherwise is an example of Self-Deception / GroupThink / Subjective Validation, Maybe differences in FPS perception are due to an as of yet undocumented and widespread genetic variation, who knows? I diddn't see any difference for example, in the Hobbit in 24 or 48 FPS, however many filmmakers believe that going up to 48 FPS ruins it. That's a point, if people who work in the industry think that higher then 24 FPS sucks then why are people so desperate for it? 24 FPS has been the industry standard in film making for years despite having the tech to go further for a very good reason. As i said, and as Amyr said, all you can do is pick one, experiment and tweak it to your computer spec. we could link a number of ENBs that aren't resource intensive, but you may not like them.

How much further you can push your GPU can only really be determined by you, best i can suggest would be to download soem that you like and see what happens. I use Grim and somber and have the 780TI myself and don't get 60FPS with my current set up, but then i have a number of 8k textures installed. If there's a ENB you really like then you can always tweak it to reduce the resource usage while maintaining the same style. Why specifically so high? Unless you specifically can see a difference then your killing the potential for your game massively. I myself know from years of experience that i at least, cannot see a difference above 24 FPS, so i dont need to worry about getting any higher then that which means more textures.

Corsair TX850W, why do you ask?

By setting it up in a certain way you can have your RAM do "most" of the work, but will most certainly still put a strain on your GPU. The best way to find out would be to test it and see what happens, but my guess would be probably not :(.

Fluff wise there would be absolutely no grounds for it. Dagon had to open an absolute ton of gates all across Cyrodil in order to manifest a weak version of himself. We also wouldn't stand a chance. In oblivion if you attack sheogorath he teleports you about 1000 feet in the air, give or take.

What Amyr said. I think you would benefit more from 8GB ram at 2400 mhz then 16 GB at 1600 mhz, plus then you could spend the extra money elsewhere. Not a bad looking case, should do the job. It could be worth trying with the side off. This can help cooling immensely but if dust is an issue where you live then it may cause problems. If i don't have the side off then my case overheats due to the amount of heat my GPU kicks out, but dust is near non existent with me so having the side off it isn't an issue. Open case systems such as the one linked before and "Wall Rigs" seem to be getting more popular, as components start to generate more heat than can be dealt with in closed case sytems. My GPU alone has 3 fans pushing out 60 Celcius. In the middle of Scottish winter i can have the huge, 1 meter by 1 meter window next to me wide open and still have a warm room!

16GB is massively overkill, 4GB is the usual, 8GB for higher end gaming, any more then that is only worth it for rendering. I would definitely cut down on the ram and go to something like this which is the same, if not similar to what I have and I cant fault it at all. Its almost half the price and 2400 mhz instead of 1600. Even if you desperately want 16gb then you'd be better with 2 sets of that. IIRC i have never managed to max out 8GB of ram, even with my ENB using 3gb itself, but then its not something i tend to look at. Dropping the SSD is a good plan, unless money isn't an issue then i don't think the performance gains justify the price. The few hundred quid could be better spent elsewhere then shaving 2 seconds from your windows load time. There are better looking (imho) and functioning cases for less money then the one you have selected. I'm using the Cooler master Storm enforcer at £75 (£25 less then yours) and has superb ventilation and looks mint. Partpicker doesnt really have a great selection of cases. You should have a look through google and see what you can find. There are plenty of less "traditional" cases that look awesome and still do a fantastic job without breaking the bank. Here is a case thats £23 less then yours, looks a bit more interesting then a usual case and still provides superb cooling (from what I've heard), its pretty big though, make sure you have room. You will want to make sure that your motherboard is compatible with the case too, if your mobo has usb 3.0 then make sure your case does too. I would definitely wait for the new renditions of the GTX coming december, maybe later as stated by Amyr and go for the 980 instead of 970. Theres nothing worse then buying a graphics card and it falling just short. As my previous post shows, i know that feeling :(. This goes double for if you want to dual monitor, you will need a beefy GPU. My GPU is almost the same as the one you've selected and i can push it too far on a single monitor with minimal effort. I'm waiting for the 980 myself. I would avoid using sites like parts picker, they have limited selections and there prices can be way off the mark. At the most, i would probably use it for a rough, initial draft and to get an idea for components. You should still do research yourself on the latter though. When i built my current rig i bought stuff from overclockers and scan as they had the best deals on the components i wanted but prices change and you will need to think about the components and then shop around.

No, i only have a single monitor, any more then that is pointless. For the money saved from 2 average GPU's and montitors i would rather get a single 4k monitor and good GPU. When i run skyrim my gpu levels out at: 1215 mhz core clock: 3500 mhz memory clock 3072 MB vram usage at the most, 60 celcius temp My ENB alone eats 3 gb system ram and that's in low resource areas with the most resource intensive effects such as DOF turned off.The majority of my textures are 4k, with a number of 8k textures thrown in there too, dragons, galaxy, etc. I also have a wide variety of resource eating mods like long distance graphics overhauls and interesting NPC's. Using over 2gb Vram doesn't mean your doing something wrong, it just means your not afraid to bump up your graphics past the console level that yours are at 2k. I couldn't play like that, i would start counting pixels...