|
HalloKitty posted:Nightmare on Fury? I guess there's some kind of hack to ignore the 5GB VRAM limit in the menu. +menu_advanced_AllowAllSettings 1, Afterburner says it tops-out at 3.9GB at it's most demanding, but Nightmare shadows are the only difference you can actually see compared to the texture cache. I'm also at 1920x1200, so I'd imagine it's a crapshoot when you leave the 1080p ballpark
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 01:46 |
|
|
Hubis posted:Just as a warning that you might want to examine your system for other issues, I have *never* had stability problems in Doom. Boards are full of people having the crash to desktop issue, so much so that they added in more logging to the last update and are begging people to submit crash reports. Everything else I do is rock solid, no issues playing anything else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Those benchmarks are outdated, since there was an enormous boost to FPS in the AMD driver after the one used in that review (16.5.2.1 vs 16.5.2 in the review) My bad, I checked the release notes for 16.5.2 and they claim "Support for Doom" so I assumed that was the tuned driver. Looking forward to proper comparisons on the Vulkan path, we really need more unbiased data-points for low-level APIs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
Hubis posted:Just as a warning that you might want to examine your system for other issues, I have *never* had stability problems in Doom. It's an anecdote, but I never had any stability issues playing on my 290X in Doom. repiv posted:My bad, I checked the release notes for 16.5.2 and they claim "Support for Doom" so I assumed that was the tuned driver. Yeah, AMD did screw up by claiming to have a "game-ready" driver on launch day that wasn't actually ready. Took 'em a few days to release the newer version. Not ideal, but also not a huge deal in reality (although it leaves terrible benchmarks all over the place, which isn't much good for AMD). HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Jul 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
repiv posted:My bad, I checked the release notes for 16.5.2 and they claim "Support for Doom" so I assumed that was the tuned driver. It will be *hiiiilaariioouuss* if it really does turn out that the 480 gives comparable performance to the 1080 in Vulcan / dx12 games. I mean it ain't gonna happen but
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Hubis posted:Just as a warning that you might want to examine your system for other issues, I have *never* had stability problems in Doom. He's not alone, I found DOOM kinda crashy on a 2500K / R9-290. Edit: After thinking about it more, really crashy, and maybe DOOM is just finding bad memory or unstable overclocks for me? Maybe I'm due for a memtest and OC stability test, that 2500K is getting long in the tooth and the 290 that used to be OK at 1050MHz might want to be slower nowadays. Twerk from Home fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Jul 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:Tomb Raider released a patch with async compute Oh hey cool it's not the only DX 12 game that's slower than the 11 version anymore. Lockback posted:My Opinion. I have a XB270H (which was bought refurbed for $450) and a GTX 770(1070 coming tomorrow). While GSync helps somewhat over 60FPS the best use for it is when Frame rates start bouncing around from 35-60. Pre-GSync those bounces would be pretty noticable, now it feels like I have an artificial increase in FPS because those dips don't feel nearly as jarring. A game like XCOM2 (which is optimized like crap and really taxes my 2500K) immediately felt way better because the monitor just clocked itself down in the low 40s. If I play, like, CS GO or something (FPS in the 80s) it still feels better but not as dramatic as lower FPS. Agreed. It's the demanding games where it makes the biggest difference (which is great). I can get down to 40 before things start feeling stuttery while I'd want to stay above 60 before, while above 60 there's less room to be smoother.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
For me, it's 3750k and GTX 1080 (though, it was going it with a GTX 970 prior to that). It'll run fine for hours, but then randomly decide to puke back to the desktop. No rhyme or reason. It seems like if I switch up graphics settings after loading, it's more stable (change resolution and then change resolution back.). That's how i managed to get past one spot that always died on loading (it was after I completed a rune which was spectacularly maddening because it would die right before progress was saved.) Every other stress test I've thrown at the system hasn't made it blink.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
Vulkan DOOM on dual 760s (both 4GB) is basically "Yeah, time to upgrade."
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Am I supposed to be able to see antialiasing overrides like 16xQ CSAA and such in the NVidia control panel with the GTX 1070? According to some Youtube video for tweaking GTA V, this should be one of the options available, I however only see "2x", "4x" and "8x".
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Am I supposed to be able to see antialiasing overrides like 16xQ CSAA and such in the NVidia control panel with the GTX 1070? According to some Youtube video for tweaking GTA V, this should be one of the options available, I however only see "2x", "4x" and "8x". I think they dropped the hardware support for CSAA starting with Maxwell. Try MFAA instead?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Am I supposed to be able to see antialiasing overrides like 16xQ CSAA and such in the NVidia control panel with the GTX 1070? According to some Youtube video for tweaking GTA V, this should be one of the options available, I however only see "2x", "4x" and "8x". Nvidia cut CSAA support from the 900 series, and I'd be surprised if it has returned with the 10 series.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Does Vulcan have the same degree of multi GPU support that directx12 does?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
MFAA seems to work and looks noticeably nicer. For something else. This MSI card has the boost clock set to 1772 MHz, when running a game that pegs the GPU load at 99%, NVidia Inspector claims that it goes up to 1949 MHz. That normal, or NV Inspector being wrong?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Does Vulcan have the same degree of multi GPU support that directx12 does? Not yet. You can open connections to multiple devices if you want, but there's no way to directly copy data between them or synchronize events between them so it's not very useful. They intend to add full support comparable to DX12 in Vulkan 1.1.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Does Vulcan have the same degree of multi GPU support that directx12 does? In the sense that it's down to the developer. I believe GPU hardware is abstracted away in a similar fashion, so that you can use many GPUs simultaneously on your workload. At the moment though I do not think Vulkan has mGPU support. I read it is a feature planned for the next major release.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:MFAA seems to work and looks noticeably nicer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
http://videocardz.com/62101/more-pictures-of-custom-radeon-rx-480-graphics-cards-emerge More pictures and apparently the Sapphire 480 Nitro is "introduced" on the 13th? Whatever that means.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Boards are full of people having the crash to desktop issue, so much so that they added in more logging to the last update and are begging people to submit crash reports. Yeah, interesting. Sounds like it might be a weird "whole config" bug I just personally haven't run into. Ain't PC gaming fun!
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
So in my limited testing of Vulkan on my GTX 1070, it works well in CPU limited situations. At 1080p I can see gains of nearly 25% in parts of the Argent pipeline area. Notable is CPU utilization is up about 20% across all threads on my i7 6700k. At 2880x1600, which I usually play at using DSR, I see basically little difference between OGL and Vulkan, with Vulkan seeing slightly lower minimum framerates.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
HardOCP has done some CrossFire testing of the RX 480. Basically, RX 480 in CFX performs slightly worse to slightly better than a GTX 1080, but with wildly inconsistent, higher average frame times. It beats the GTX 1070 is several games and loses in some because of vendor favorability in certain games. Example, RX 480 CFX beats 1070 by 20 FPS average in Tomb Raider DX12 at 4K, buy only matchs the 1070 in Witcher 3 at 4k. http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/07/11/amd_radeon_rx_480_8gb_crossfire_review/1 Edit: Put 490 instead of 480 \/ 
SlayVus fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Jul 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
What the gently caress is the RX 490?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
Beautiful Ninja posted:So in my limited testing of Vulkan on my GTX 1070, it works well in CPU limited situations. At 1080p I can see gains of nearly 25% in parts of the Argent pipeline area. Notable is CPU utilization is up about 20% across all threads on my i7 6700k. At 2880x1600, which I usually play at using DSR, I see basically little difference between OGL and Vulkan, with Vulkan seeing slightly lower minimum framerates. TL;DR, higher highs, better multithreading?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
PerrineClostermann posted:What the gently caress is the RX 490? a typo
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
wicka posted:a typo That's a lot of typos.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:TL;DR, higher highs, better multithreading? Seems like it. Much like early Mantle, looks like the biggest jumps in performance will come with people on systems with beefy GPU's but mediocre CPU's. Saw a guy on Reddit who got up to 100% increase in performance with the totally unbalanced combination of a i7-920 and a Titan X - https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4sbeb8/doom_vulkan_update_offers_up_to_27_increase_in/d5845pf In more balanced scenarios, you're probably looking at around 20% for Nvidia and maybe like 30% for AMD in CPU limited situations.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme One nice looking card! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO64zln8kNg ...Shame his FE is faster.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
Ak Gara posted:Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme  look at that loving thing
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:
Sad (or ironic) that it doesn't overclock any better than other 1080s. Certainly not worth the cost unless this is a going in a system that the owner won't manually oc and price isn't an issue.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
How quiet can you make that giant thing for a decent temp though?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:How quiet can you make that giant thing for a decent temp though? In the vid he said while stress testing the fans would turn on then turn off when it got cool enough. I mean that's pretty sweet but its as fat as a literal brick
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
Using Vulkan in DOOM is about 10 FPS lower for me. All settings maxed plus Nightmare enabled GTX 1070 @ 2075 MHz 368.69 drivers i5 4670k (currently not OCd) 1440p 165Hz G-Sync
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:In the vid he said while stress testing the fans would turn on then turn off when it got cool enough. I mean that's pretty sweet but its as fat as a literal brick Wait, turning off during stress testing? Hot drat, all they need is one with a short PCB for better noise and cooling and I'd be all over it. Why do I have to like the really stupid cooling setups?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
KingKapalone posted:Using Vulkan in DOOM is about 10 FPS lower for me. I'm seeing a jump from 50-60 fps up to 70-90 FPS with the RX 480, @ 2560 x 1440.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Vulkan *has* to be biased towards AMD, by virtue of being built upon Mantle's bones, right? Isn't that to be expected? Or is the delta just way too large?Ak Gara posted:Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme Did Zotac just say, "Well, we made this cooler anticpating another 28nm chip... sure would be a waste if we never used it!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Vulkan *has* to be biased towards AMD, by virtue of being built upon Mantle's bones, right? Isn't that to be expected? Or is the delta just way too large? I think it's just that AMD cards have better asynchronous compute capability right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Yay, I just got my XFX RX 480 in the mail, installed it and downloaded more ram  Does anyone have a good setup for Wattman? Something like a sight undervolt / overclock curve?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
The biggest reason for the huge FPS jump in DOOM is because AMD's OpenGL support was godawful and had huge CPU overhead. Vulkan cut the CPU overhead way down for everything, which ends up being a large boost for AMD cards but also a large boost for anything NVIDIA + lovely CPU. The link Beautiful Ninja posted above shows a great example, where a TitanX + i7-920 gets double the FPS under Vulkan. And yea, NVIDIA seems to have lovely async support right now even on the 1070/1080, but who knows how that will turn out down the line. If AMD releases a high end card later this year that competes with the 1080 but has similar gains under DX12/Vulkan they could be in a pretty amazing place performance wise for those games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Vulkan *has* to be biased towards AMD, by virtue of being built upon Mantle's bones, right? Isn't that to be expected? Or is the delta just way too large? It's just a catchy name for OpenGL 5 to run away from decades of clutter, proprietary hacks and bad word of mouth. How much studios are gonna use AMD's donated code, impossible to know. So far only 2 Gaming Evolved games (Warhammer and that crappy rts) use the fabled async, and you can bet your rear end they had engineers on site.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 01:46 |
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I think it's just that AMD cards have better asynchronous compute capability right now. It seems that way, but it could also be that AMD's OpenGL support in their drivers has been lovely, so removing overhead by swapping to Vulkan produces bigger gains. Also, according to a dev tweet async compute is only enabled in two cases right now: no AA at all (AA set to off in the menus), or TSSAA. All other forms of AA in the game (FXAA, etc.) disable async entirely. He mentioned they're going to add support for more AA options in Vulkan in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 00:39
|
|