|
LCD Deathpanel posted:Dual-GPU cards tend to have weird problems that other cards won't see though. It'd be like someone buying a 7950GX2 and then swearing off Nvidia cards forever for having bad drivers or prematurely dying, when it was really just a bad card. That's not really an excuse for the 5970 of course. Before my 5970 I was running Quad SLI with Nvidia 9800GX2s, so I have dual gpu experience on both sides of the fence. With the GX2s you'd get performance improvements with new drivers as games got optimized for SLI but I don't recall ever having show stopping bugs on release day that necessitated a driver upgrade (of course I spent most of my time in those days playing WoW so maybe I didn't get out enough.) The 5970 drivers had constant issues when games came out, despite two GPU generations having passed.
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:54 |
|
|
Klyith posted:Only super-sampling AA requires additional memory capacity in any significant way. Multi-sampling needs memory bandwidth, and the various post-process types (FX-, TX-, ML-, and SMAA) hit GPU shader performance hardest (also needing memory and bandwidth to varying extents, but less so). This was helpful, thanks! I'm planning a build for a friend as the summer continues and he's very much (perhaps unreasonably) interested in being able to keep the machine playing at sky-high settings for a good long time, for however much that's worth. I just hope he doesn't try to play Crysis 3.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
Sidesaddle Cavalry posted:This was helpful, thanks! I'm planning a build for a friend as the summer continues and he's very much (perhaps unreasonably) interested in being able to keep the machine playing at sky-high settings for a good long time, for however much that's worth. That'll be down to resolution. An overclocked 680 can keep Crysis 3 above 30FPS for the vast majority of the game at 1080p. There might be one or two really showy areas with a LOT of tessellated water that has all kinds of self-reflectivity and dynamic environmental refraction going on that push it into the 15-20 fps range, but I'm playing it right now with a GTX 680 and everything maxed, plus some extra stuff set higher with the CVar editor put out by one of the devs. If I recall I doubled shadow cube density, some other shadow thing, and upped the water effects considerably. Which, uh, not an awesome idea. Makes for nice screenshots, but that water stuff KILLS framerates... Shadows aren't so bad, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Yeah, he's definitely got a lot of options open to him. He's more interested in smoother gameplay though, so I've got some explaining to do for him on compromises he's going to need to make. Like on whether he needs that 144Hz monitor or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
This is a big what-if but how well would a current gen Intel GT3 GPU stack up to the latest from nvidia and AMD if they all used the same number of transistors and connected to the same memory? Basically comparing the architecture outside of real world silicon and number of execution units.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 20:24
|
|
|
AnandTech saves the day. Not precise ALU to ALU comparison, but this is probably more useful. Better compute and shader performance, but worse at pushing pixels and geometry (i.e. running at higher resolution/texture quality/geometry quality is harder than cranking up the shader effects). Factory Factory fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Jun 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
But aren't those Nvidia/AMD offerings at different transistor counts despite being in the same 'class'?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
GK107 is ~1.2 billion transistors. Haswell 4C/GT3 does not have an official transistor count, as Intel is being hush about it. But if we estimate by scaling up 4C/GT2's transistor density linearly, and then remember that GT3 is about 65% of the die size, then GT3 is about 1.3 billion transistors. So practically speaking, they're close enough for comparison. It's a silly to compare transistor to transistor, though, because the real differences are in architecture. If you compared straight transistor, you'd also have to adjust for Nvidia and AMD being on 28nm SOI vs. Intel's 22nm FinFET. Meanwhile, AMD's Mars (384-shader GCN, closest to the high-end Kabini/Trinity GPU) is 900 million transistors, and its graphics balance is just as much "higher details at lower resolution" than GT3, albeit at a lower performance point. The next GCN part up is Cape Verde (7750/7770 GHz) at 1.5 billion transistors. When you scale it to equal GT3's compute performance (7850M, ~864 GFLOPS), it has equal pixel fill but faster texture fill. You can go crosseyed trying to do this. "Performance per transistor" is artificial; architecture determines performance, including clocking. Any scaling you do on transistor count isn't related to real-world performance except as an approximate proxy for functional units of architecture. There's a minimum and fairly large amount of transistors and organization before reducing them any further turns a GPU into a mess of useless silicon. Factory Factory fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Jun 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
I want to preface this question by first saying that I've Google'd this for hours on end, and I can't find a solution to the problem. I recently upgraded from an AMD 5870 to a 7970. After installing the new card, updating drivers, etc., I'm getting some really really bad stuttering in any 3d application. I've posted a video below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSXmZymI1S8 It might be hard to tell, but you'll see how it goes from being smooth, to jerking/stuttering along for a bit. The kicker is, the FPS never drops once. In the video above the FPS meter was basically sitting at like 61-63FPS the entire time. The same happens when I play any other game (CS:GO for example), the FPS will never drop below 300, but the stuttering will still happen but show no FPS drop. It's not screen tearing, it's literally the entire screen stuttering. It's not micro-stuttering, I'm not running Crossfire. It's not the rest of my system, everything is way above satisfactory (i7 930@4.0ghz, 12GB RAM, SSD, etc.) plus I never had this problem with the 5870. There was some fix for this that I used a while back when I had a 3870 that doesn't work anymore (disabling all HID in the device manager). Everything I've looked up either refers to micro-stuttering, or v-sync. Is this just how it's going to be for now on? I'm going to post a thread in tech support to really troubleshoot this, but I'm just wondering if there's some really simple fix for this that I'm completely missing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 06:52
|
|
|
FetalDave posted:Is this just how it's going to be for now on? I'm going to post a thread in tech support to really troubleshoot this, but I'm just wondering if there's some really simple fix for this that I'm completely missing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 07:04
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Stuttering is a known issue in the AMD drivers, install the latest beta drivers for the best experience. Thanks, I'll give that a go. If it's a known AMD issue, then I'll just keep watching for updates until it's fixed then. FetalDave fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Jun 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 07:06
|
|
|
LCD Deathpanel posted:Dual-GPU cards tend to have weird problems that other cards won't see though. It'd be like someone buying a 7950GX2 and then swearing off Nvidia cards forever for having bad drivers or prematurely dying, when it was really just a bad card. That's not really an excuse for the 5970 of course. Coincidentally I did exactly this and have been perfectly happy with the decision.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 07:17
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Stuttering is a known issue in the AMD drivers, install the latest beta drivers for the best experience. Are we at a point where it's okay to actively discourage people from purchasing AMD cards because their software team is broke as poo poo and, as a result, so are their drivers? Seriously, they lost one of the best CTOs in the business because he saw the shift in the wind, they've got major issues and are handling them with all the grace of a hippo in an ice skating rink. Because they're poor. Because AMD bought them. I'm not saying it's their fault, precisely, but at what point does it become acceptable to simply warn people away from a lemon like "oh, yeah, stuttering on your single GPU setup, totally normal, try the beta drivers (and hope they don't break compatibility with something else)?" I have tried to be very fair to AMD's graphics division because against very tall odds they have consistently put out stellar hardware, really nailing some price:performance market segments for years now (although with former CTO out the door and like one die shrink left, who knows where that goes). I've gone so far as to enumerate the issues that nVidia cards have had when they've had them. But nVidia is Goliath on the software side of things, they fix their drivers right quick if there's an issue because they have the money to do so. It's not fair, but who wants to buy a high end graphics card and get some crappy stuttery mess? They can't keep up with their new hardware and all the hacks that are involved with compatibility, the last really stable generation seems to have been the 6000 series. I don't think my opinion carries all that much weight here, but I'm done trying to lift up AMD's graphics cards as true competitors when they are really rather sadly and quickly falling into the position of lame duck also-rans thanks to their software just totally biting. MeramJert posted:Coincidentally I did exactly this and have been perfectly happy with the decision. Of course there's always room for debate 
Agreed fucked around with this message at 07:21 on Jun 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 07:18
|
|
|
Does it really just come down to "They're smaller and have less money than nVidia, so they can't pump out updates as fast"? I've almost exclusively bought AMD/ATI since 2001. I've had a few nVidia cards here and there, but AMD always felt better to me. Maybe it's time I just bit the bullet and got an nVidia card.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 07:24
|
|
|
Am I the only one who thinks that AMD and Nvidia cards feel different? Like, even at the desktop? Same for AMD and Intel machines.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 07:29
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:Am I the only one who thinks that AMD and Nvidia cards feel different? Like, even at the desktop? Same for AMD and Intel machines. Well, they do some stuff differently that's subtle but noticeable, especially if you're running hardware-enhanced features (I like Aero, I don't know why. It's just neat.) - in games, things get way different, for obvious architectural reasons that I don't need to tell you about but also because they have substantially different approaches to AA, AF, and shader-based stuff that all the deferred rendering engines today are using. Remember back when the 5000s had terrible AF under certain conditions, and they basically stole nVidia's AF algorithm to fix the problem in the 6xxx cards? Image quality differences are quantifiable if you bother to do so, but the qualitative experience is noticeable to me too. My last ATI card was a 4870x2, I believe, and it was very hot, very noisy, very buggy, and after some deliberation returned within a fairly short period for a 280 instead. I ate the performance hit (which is to say I noticed no difference at all because I was gaming on a 5:4 LCD monitor at that point) and got a much less finicky experience. Now, that was a card that is recognized to have had problems with its engineering so drawing broad conclusions from it isn't something I did. As you know dual GPU cards until very, very recently just have not been a very good idea, I can't recall why I bought it in the first place. I think to get twice the power without having to go to the oh-so-bothersome trouble of putting two cards in, or something. A dumb reason. And that was back when AMD had two separate things that you had to mess with as part of their not-yet-unified driver architecture, too. But they're unified now and still really struggling to put out a product that matches nVidia's when it comes to the driver package. Granted new hardware tends to have kinks, but we're not really looking at new hardware, just reiterations of stuff they ought to know how to steer by now. I can forgive nVidia's 700-series launch driver for being a bit buggy in some games because it's a fairly substantial departure from what was effectively their 560Ti that just so happened to perform like crazy; moving to the full GK110 chips that are not Titan is a step that I grant some allowance for bumbling so long as they fix it quick (which they do). AMD's driver team is having trouble getting their cards to work with all games to the point that there are as I recall more or less official recommendations to use certain older drivers if you experience issues with new games, and newer drivers for the newer games. That poo poo is bananas.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 07:42
|
|
|
It's hard to argue NV's software advantage. AMD manages to produce first rate hardware at the right price points vs. Nvidia frequent pricing insanity. When I go card shopping I want to spend $100-$300; coincidentally this encompasses something like 90% of all sales. AMD is typically competitive at this price point. 3gb 7950s sells for $260; that is a lot of performance for the money. AMD's console wins provide revenue. Further, as much as others blame AMD, the gate first disaster has held them back as much as anything else. Considering that the 18 month old GCN still can compete speaks well of the engineers that made it and I hope their drivers catch up. When I go to replace my 6000 series card I will buy whatever is best, though I am still angry about bump-gate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 07:44
|
|
|
Yudo posted:It's hard to argue NV's software advantage. AMD manages to produce first rate hardware at the right price points vs. Nvidia frequent pricing insanity. AMD gets in on the price gouging when they've got the top performing cards too; they just have a nice exit strategy that keeps them profitable once nVidia comes out with competitive hardware (last generation, AMD was first to bat by several months and the 7970 was the $600 card - and the 7950 ran something like $375-$400, if I recall correctly). The console win is meaningful but not game-changing. It's more like a patch on a deflating raft than getting a brand new shiny boat. Back in the days when computer hardware was first used in consoles, Microsoft got hosed by nVidia and had to pay full price for the graphics card that you could, by the end of the Xbox's shelf life, get for a pittance. Console manufacturers are savvy to that and don't allow for locked-in contracts anymore, they'll make some nice money up front for sure but then it'll peter off into a reliable but not extraordinary revenue stream. For what it's worth, I'm right there with you on the hardware side - ATI, under the yoke of AMD, has consistently put out killer hardware. But sans any such limitation as being tied to an endangered company, so has nVidia, and given rough performance parity, I really don't like when drivers attack.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 07:54
|
|
|
The real big thing for AMD getting all the console wins isn't GPUs, it's preventing defaulting on their Global Foundries contracts if they can't sell enough desktop chips and GPUs. That caused a lot of losses the past few years. My past buncha cards have been all been AMD - a 4850 (bought for a song when the 5xxx series came out), my 6850 and later 6850 CF, and the 7750 in my HTPC. I honestly can't say I've had a *bad* experience with any of them, and in fact I've been quite pleased. The sole exception to this has been Far Cry 3 and Blood Dragon - it has once-per-second stutters that drive me batty. Undoubtedly, I've gotten very lucky. The 7750 is not problematic, as HD 7000 cards go. The few new/AAA games I've gotten at launch have been either AMD logo program or very well adapted to HD 6000 CF. I mostly wait for sales in games, and by that point, the driver issues have been ironed out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 08:24
|
|
|
Agreed posted:Are we at a point where it's okay to actively discourage people from purchasing AMD cards because their software team is broke as poo poo and, as a result, so are their drivers? The biggest problem for me this time around has been XFX and their lovely QC really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 08:34
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:The real big thing for AMD getting all the console wins isn't GPUs, it's preventing defaulting on their Global Foundries contracts if they can't sell enough desktop chips and GPUs. That caused a lot of losses the past few years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 08:36
|
|
|
I've never run crossfire, and I've had excellent luck with ATI/AMD cards. My current 7950 is one of the best cards I've owned. No stutter, has a ton of muscle, and OC's amazingly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 08:51
|
|
|
Alereon posted:I think the console products are fabbed at TSMC, and though I could be wrong I think AMD tends to be fighting FOR capacity with TSMC rather than having excess. I'm pretty sure this is the case. GloFo gate first 28 nm has been a cluster gently caress; many of AMD's 28nm designs were for the common platform process which has not panned out. So AMD has been at the mercy of TSMC for their graphics parts and jaguar cores and waiting on GloFo to get their act together for big cpu parts. AMD actually contracts wafers that never get used due not to demand issues but process problems that are now just this year ironed out. There is a reason richland was released at 32nm in the year 2013. Jaguar at 28nm was TSMC optimized from the get go. Piledriver at 28nm will be GloFo I think; considering how behind process wise AMD is, it's impressive that they compete with the likes if Intel at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 09:03
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:I do know they don't have the resources that nV's has to get devs to program for their cards' quirks...but that doesn't seem to pan out to be a huge advantage to me despite the hype to me. The disparity is enormous. I won't give an exact figure but it's David and Goliath here, except David's sling broke and Goliath has his visor on anyway. It is a deeply unfair fight. Racing for sweetheart deals is a catch-up, me-too practice and more power to them for it, but even there they can't compete as strongly. Console games developed for AMD hardware may really give them some breathing room on the software side of things, since most everything is ports now anyway, that may be a serious feather in their cap driver-wise. I don't know what you mean by hype. You describe updating your drivers and it breaking regular, not even enterprise or especially GPU-dependent software like your internet browser. That's pretty, ah, unusual. And yeah, they're beta drivers, but nVidia puts out beta drivers regularly too to avoid the WHQL hassle and they're just... better. ATI's beta drivers seem like a mad scramble to fix this, that, and one other thing that aren't working right by way of comparison, not just "well it's gonna be awhile before we can be arsed to do a fully certified WHQL release, so use these in the meantime." AMDTI is playing catch-up on a lot of fronts; FactoryFactory, you remember when they finally unified their driver architecture? Compare that to nVidia who did it ages ago. It sucks for everyone, though I'm glad to hear some folks come in with positive AMD card experiences within the current generation. This is a discussion I've been wanting to have, kind of a shame I go in for surgery really soon and probably won't be having it much longer, have to return to it later if we haven't reached some kind of consensus by the weekend. Well, my own fault for picking the day before pre-op to start the debate, hah.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 09:06
|
|
|
Agreed posted:The disparity is enormous. I won't give an exact figure but it's David and Goliath here, except David's sling broke and Goliath has his visor on anyway. It is a deeply unfair fight. Racing for sweetheart deals is a catch-up, me-too practice and more power to them for it, but even there they can't compete as strongly. Console games developed for AMD hardware may really give them some breathing room on the software side of things, since most everything is ports now anyway, that may be a serious feather in their cap driver-wise. I know it's bullshit but: ATI/AMD cards "feel" different. Pricing aside, I have stared at ATI graphics for almost a decade. I'm an addict to inferiority and have irrational hopes for opencl and AMD in general. Also: youch. I hope you recover quickly. Enjoy the pills.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 09:16
|
|
|
Agreed, stay in touch as soon as you get a chance and are halfway lucid, okay? I'm praying for ya.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 09:22
|
|
|
Yudo posted:I know it's bullshit but: ATI/AMD cards "feel" different. Pricing aside, I have stared at ATI graphics for almost a decade. I'm an addict to inferiority and have irrational hopes for opencl and AMD in general. To the first point, there are reasons they feel different  . In the past, hm, when ATI had their first really dominant showing with the 9800 (god drat time flies) and just totally ate nVidia's lunch in performance, in image quality, in standards compliance (team green had recently integrated 3DFX tech which would later be quite useful in getting to multi-card setups first, but the FX-5000 generation suuuuuuucked for architectural reasons). It was a total coup. Then nVidia came back and won again with their 6800, but still, that's to me when ATI stopped being effectively "100% soundblaster compatible" but for videocards and really came into their own hardware-wise. And they continued for several generations to have superior image quality, quantified in things like superior AA and AF algorithms and better color handling. These days those advantages are gone, but they still differ in interesting ways. It's not just your imagination, promise.To the second, man... I've been on pills for my stupid loving back my entire adult life, this surgery ought to be a great way out of that shithole. Ever since I was 19. gently caress me. Should have had the surgery then, but they don't like operating on kids. I guess I qualify now that I'm a little more crotchety. I have a good surgeon and I trust him and it's a fairly non-invasive procedure, or at least as non-invasive as it gets when we're talking about dicking around inside a spine, but you get what I'm saying. Thanks for the well wishes. Factory Factory posted:Agreed, stay in touch as soon as you get a chance and are halfway lucid, okay? I'm praying for ya. There is a very good chance I will phone-Skype you from the hospital high as a kite. Shouldn't be a long stay at all (and thank god, medical bills are insane, insurance covers far too little... bleh, there's a reason I want to upgrade to a new card out of principle but I can't, hah) but it is inpatient. They pump the good poo poo while you're inpatient. So, uh... prepare for that, amigo. Haha. Agreed fucked around with this message at 09:30 on Jun 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 09:27
|
|
|
Agreed posted:The disparity is enormous. Agreed posted:I don't know what you mean by hype. Agreed posted:You describe updating your drivers and it breaking regular, not even enterprise or especially GPU-dependent software like your internet browser. That's pretty, ah, unusual. Agreed posted:you remember when they finally unified their driver architecture? Compare that to nVidia who did it ages ago. Good luck on the surgury BTW.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 11:38
|
|
|
Agreed posted:It's not fair, but who wants to buy a high end graphics card and get some crappy stuttery mess? But they aren't. Only in crossfire or crossfire based cards have this problem. Single GPU, the frame times are perfectly fine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 12:09
|
|
|
Agreed posted:To the second, man... I've been on pills for my stupid loving back my entire adult life, this surgery ought to be a great way out of that shithole. Ever since I was 19. gently caress me. Should have had the surgery then, but they don't like operating on kids. I guess I qualify now that I'm a little more crotchety. I have a good surgeon and I trust him and it's a fairly non-invasive procedure, or at least as non-invasive as it gets when we're talking about dicking around inside a spine, but you get what I'm saying. Thanks for the well wishes. Good luck man. I will pray for you in the traditional manner of our people, by futzing around this weekend with my 580 trying to get it stable at over 900 core (where it is rock solid right now).
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
I don't think we should necessarily be recommending away from AMD cards (this reminds me that OP recommendations are probably in need of updating), and they certainly deliver a better value at certain price points (especially when there's 2-3 AAA games thrown in). I think single GPU performance at say 1080p is still solid for most gamers, assuming drivers are stable/ready at that point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
Agreed posted:There is a very good chance I will phone-Skype you from the hospital high as a kite. Shouldn't be a long stay at all (and thank god, medical bills are insane, insurance covers far too little... bleh, there's a reason I want to upgrade to a new card out of principle but I can't, hah) but it is inpatient. They pump the good poo poo while you're inpatient. So, uh... prepare for that, amigo. Haha. Also I missed this, well wishes Agreed. Please tape your high-as-kite rantings about GPU overclocking to share with us afterwards 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
Agreed posted:Are we at a point where it's okay to actively discourage people from purchasing AMD cards because their software team is broke as poo poo and, as a result, so are their drivers? Seriously, they lost one of the best CTOs in the business because he saw the shift in the wind, they've got major issues and are handling them with all the grace of a hippo in an ice skating rink. Because they're poor. Because AMD bought them. I'm not saying it's their fault, precisely, but at what point does it become acceptable to simply warn people away from a lemon like "oh, yeah, stuttering on your single GPU setup, totally normal, try the beta drivers (and hope they don't break compatibility with something else)?" This. Never again; unless things change in a major way. Sorry AMD.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
Anyone think that AMD will announce new cards at computex? It's past due unless they want to give nV free reing until 20nm parts are baked sometime next year.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
Yudo posted:Anyone think that AMD will announce new cards at computex? It's past due unless they want to give nV free reing until 20nm parts are baked sometime next year. I agree, still waiting for the 9000 series to pop-up before I commit to a 780.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:But they aren't. Only in crossfire or crossfire based cards have this problem. Single GPU, the frame times are perfectly fine. That's not true. I've had issues with stuttery graphics from my 3870, to my 5870, and now to my 7970 (see my post above/youtube video). That's almost 5? years of different generations of AMD/ATI cards with the same issue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
FetalDave posted:That's not true. I've had issues with stuttery graphics from my 3870, to my 5870, and now to my 7970 (see my post above/youtube video). That's almost 5? years of different generations of AMD/ATI cards with the same issue. Fair enough, I just remember looking at the fcat analysis and it didn't show anything wrong with the single card setups, as far as I recall Edit: yeah, visible in the video
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
FetalDave posted:That's not true. I've had issues with stuttery graphics from my 3870, to my 5870, and now to my 7970 (see my post above/youtube video). That's almost 5? years of different generations of AMD/ATI cards with the same issue. --- AMD drivers are still 2nd best compared to nvidia, but as a long time nvidia user who just switched to AMD, I'll say they're not a reason to avoid all AMD cards these days. If you have two competing choices that are tied on the price, performance, and pack-ins, the drivers are certainly a good tie-break for nvidia. If you don't give a poo poo about paying more, you could just go with nvidia all the time. The microstutter thing for example, they've made good strides to fix. Nvidia didn't have the problem because they already had done work on it when it became general knowledge. If TR had started their new method of benchmarking frame delay instead of average FPS a year earlier, both would have had the stutters. Finally, Nvidia isn't perfect themselves. They haven't had a major fuckup for a while, but when they have it's often been the hardware, which IMHO is worse than bad drivers. Software can be fixed, but things like poo poo analog quality (back when people still had VGA monitors) or a bad heatsink standard resulting in cards that cooked themselves after 18 months are forever. Those examples are from a long time ago, but at the time there was plenty of  about it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:58
|
|
|
No idea seems to have taken specific steps with the 700 lone with heating design. But even with a card running hot I haven't any problems. I used an 8800gtx for about 4 years with a dual monitor setup so the card was always running like I was gaming. (stupid design in that one). But then again perhaps I've just been lucky.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:54 |
|
|
Klyith posted:If it still happens when you have vsync enabled, then the problem is by definition something other than the micro-stutter associated with Radeon cards. That means it's an actual drop in frame rate. And if the problem happens in all 3d applications, including ones that the card is overqualified for, then the issue could be in the video card or it could be elsewhere in the system. I'd say 50/50 odds you could put in a 780 and still have it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:10
|
|