Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did the new AMD video cards fail?

245678

Comments

  • MikePaladinMikePaladin Member UncommonPosts: 592
    edited October 2016
    GPS temperature and Power consumption
    Are the new AMD just as old one able to melt even  Sauron RING OF POWER ?
    ???
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    GPS temperature and Power consumption
    Are the new AMD just as old one able to melt even  Sauron RING OF POWER ?
    ???
    No, it was dramatically reduced.
  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    edited October 2016
    Malabooga said:
    filmoret said:
    Here's some more benchmarks saying same thing.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1771?vs=1748

    http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2652-battlefield-1-graphics-card-benchmark-dx11-vs-dx12

    Its showing the nvidia card is 20% faster when it comes to DX11 and when it comes to dx 12 the RX 480 is about 5-10% faster and in some cases slower.  But that appears to be the case when ashes of singularity is involved.


    BF1 multiplayer:

    DX12

    rx-480-dominates-gtx-1060-dx12-battlefield_20

    but NVidia is better in DX11 right? yup, but still much slower than 480 in DX12

    rx-480-dominates-gtx-1060-dx12-battlefield_21

    480 dominates 2016. and beats 1060 in 90% of games, it even beats it in NVIdia gimpwrks games like Witcher 3, Division and ROTR.

    20% faster? what are you, NVidia product champion? There yet has to be a game where NVidia doesnt lose FPS in DX12, THATS how badly NVidia cards perform, complete fail.
    Odd Gamersnexus had completely different results.  Matter of fact noone else has results like that.
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    oooh, yeah, as long as it doesnt fit your "narrative" right? rofl
  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    Malabooga said:
    oooh, yeah, as long as it doesnt fit your "narrative" right? rofl
    Its a matter of using several different sources.  And that one you used has went to an extreme I haven't seen on another website yet.
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    filmoret said:
    Malabooga said:
    oooh, yeah, as long as it doesnt fit your "narrative" right? rofl
    Its a matter of using several different sources.  And that one you used has went to an extreme I haven't seen on another website yet.
    Makes you wonder how Tweaktown generated those benchmarks, if others are unable to duplicate them.
    Perhaps its time to use a more reputable source than Tweaktown. :o
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited October 2016
    filmoret said:
    Malabooga said:
    oooh, yeah, as long as it doesnt fit your "narrative" right? rofl
    Its a matter of using several different sources.  And that one you used has went to an extreme I haven't seen on another website yet.
    [mod edit] Waaaaaaaaaaaaay ahead of you, October 17th, and yeah other sites didnt test multiplayer. Im not sure what part you dont understand, its all very clear lol.

    http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/457303/battlefield-1-benchmarks#latest

    Post edited by Vaross on
  • VrikaVrika Member LegendaryPosts: 7,993
    filmoret said:
    Malabooga said:
    filmoret said:
    Here's some more benchmarks saying same thing.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1771?vs=1748

    http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2652-battlefield-1-graphics-card-benchmark-dx11-vs-dx12

    Its showing the nvidia card is 20% faster when it comes to DX11 and when it comes to dx 12 the RX 480 is about 5-10% faster and in some cases slower.  But that appears to be the case when ashes of singularity is involved.


    480 dominates 2016. and beats 1060 in 90% of games, it even beats it in NVIdia gimpwrks games like Witcher 3, Division and ROTR.

    20% faster? what are you, NVidia product champion? There yet has to be a game where NVidia doesnt lose FPS in DX12, THATS how badly NVidia cards perform, complete fail.
    Odd Gamersnexus had completely different results.  Matter of fact noone else has results like that.
    It's not odd at all. TweakTown run their tests with AMD drivers that had most BattleField drivers optimizations already in place, whereas NVidia drivers were still unoptimized.

    GamersNexus did a more professional job and made sure to get optimized drivers before doing their tests.

    It's possible to measure nearly anything if you choose the result first, then start to look for a test that gives you that result.
     
  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    edited October 2016
    Malabooga said:
    [mod edit]
    I honestly don't care either way.  When you type GPU benchmarks on google then select these 2 video cards.  Sure some games have their ups and downs but overrall mostly they are saying GTX 1060 is better at dx11 and the RX480 is equal and sometimes slightly better at dx12.
    Post edited by Vaross on
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • OzmodanOzmodan Member EpicPosts: 9,726
    There is virtually little difference between a 480 and a 1060.  As to drivers, AMD cleared up their driver issues a long time ago.  Just a matter of preference as to what graphics card you buy.  

    Kind of silly to argue about such minor differences if you ask me.  As to AMD financials, bashing AMD is like sticking a knife in your back as without them, Nvidia could jack up prices to make all of you wince.


  • VrikaVrika Member LegendaryPosts: 7,993
    edited October 2016
    Malabooga said:
    [mod edit]

    Here's from GamersNexus Article:
    AMD's 16.10.2 drivers contain the largely the same driver optimizations as released in the AMD 16.10.1 hotfix. Here's a note from AMD's driver team on this matter:

    “We have been optimizing ahead of launch for BF1 since the beta, so yes, 16.10.1 is already fairly optimized. 16.10.2 will add a couple of quality fixes and may add another +1-2% of performance in DX12 cases, but yes, the direction was that 16.10.1 would be good enough to perform testing for early access since we’ve done a lot of optimizations already.”

    For our tests, because they began a few days ago, we used AMD 16.10.1 drivers (which contain Battlefield 1 optimizations) for AMD GPUs. NVidia driver package 375.57 (press drivers) were used for Pascal and Maxwell GPUs. These drivers contain Battlefield 1 optimizations.


    And this is from TweakTown article:

    Drivers: NVIDIA GeForce 373.06 WHQL and AMD RSCE 16.10.1
    Post edited by Vaross on
     
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited October 2016
    filmoret said:
    Malabooga said:
    [mod edit]
    I honestly don't care either way.  When you type GPU benchmarks on google then select these 2 video cards.  Sure some games have their ups and downs but overrall mostly they are saying GTX 1060 is better at dx11 and the RX480 is equal and sometimes slightly better at dx12.
    "equal or slightly better"= it beats 1060 in every DX12 game lol (and in most by quite a margin). ANd that isnt even biggest NVidias problem, abbysmal drivers and support is MUCH worse than quite a bit worse performance.

    BUT...Witcher 3, The Division.....NVidias DX11 games....480 beats 1060 too.


    Post edited by Vaross on
  • Abuz0rAbuz0r Member UncommonPosts: 550
    I guess the prices are going to stabilize again... bitcoin fad over?
  • VrikaVrika Member LegendaryPosts: 7,993
    edited October 2016
    Malabooga said:
    Vrika said:
    Malabooga said:
    [mod edit]

    Here's from GamersNexus Article:
    AMD's 16.10.2 drivers contain the largely the same driver optimizations as released in the AMD 16.10.1 hotfix. Here's a note from AMD's driver team on this matter:

    “We have been optimizing ahead of launch for BF1 since the beta, so yes, 16.10.1 is already fairly optimized. 16.10.2 will add a couple of quality fixes and may add another +1-2% of performance in DX12 cases, but yes, the direction was that 16.10.1 would be good enough to perform testing for early access since we’ve done a lot of optimizations already.”

    For our tests, because they began a few days ago, we used AMD 16.10.1 drivers (which contain Battlefield 1 optimizations) for AMD GPUs. NVidia driver package 375.57 (press drivers) were used for Pascal and Maxwell GPUs. These drivers contain Battlefield 1 optimizations.


    And this is from TweakTown article:

    Drivers: NVIDIA GeForce 373.06 WHQL and AMD RSCE 16.10.1
    [mod edit]
    375.57 is the NVidia driver version that's game ready for BattleField 1:

    http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/nvidia-game-ready-drivers-37557-battlefield1-titanfall2/

    You can see that GamersNexus used that version, while TweakTown did not.
    Post edited by Vaross on
     
  • SlyLoKSlyLoK Member RarePosts: 2,698
    edited October 2016
    Malabooga said:
    filmoret said:
    Here's some more benchmarks saying same thing.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1771?vs=1748

    http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2652-battlefield-1-graphics-card-benchmark-dx11-vs-dx12

    Its showing the nvidia card is 20% faster when it comes to DX11 and when it comes to dx 12 the RX 480 is about 5-10% faster and in some cases slower.  But that appears to be the case when ashes of singularity is involved.


    BF1 multiplayer:

    DX12

    rx-480-dominates-gtx-1060-dx12-battlefield_20

    but NVidia is better in DX11 right? yup, but still much slower than 480 in DX12

    rx-480-dominates-gtx-1060-dx12-battlefield_21

    480 dominates 2016. and beats 1060 in 90% of games, it even beats it in NVIdia gimpwrks games like Witcher 3, Division and ROTR.

    20% faster? what are you, NVidia product champion? There yet has to be a game where NVidia doesnt lose FPS in DX12, THATS how badly NVidia cards perform, complete fail.
    Thanks for posting those. Also the performance at 1440p and 4k are similar differences. 

    Once true dx12 titles come out the difference will be even greater. Most games now use dx12 as an add-on ATM.
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited October 2016
    Vrika said:
    Malabooga said:
    Vrika said:
    Malabooga said:
    [mod edit]
    Here's from GamersNexus Article:
    AMD's 16.10.2 drivers contain the largely the same driver optimizations as released in the AMD 16.10.1 hotfix. Here's a note from AMD's driver team on this matter:

    “We have been optimizing ahead of launch for BF1 since the beta, so yes, 16.10.1 is already fairly optimized. 16.10.2 will add a couple of quality fixes and may add another +1-2% of performance in DX12 cases, but yes, the direction was that 16.10.1 would be good enough to perform testing for early access since we’ve done a lot of optimizations already.”

    For our tests, because they began a few days ago, we used AMD 16.10.1 drivers (which contain Battlefield 1 optimizations) for AMD GPUs. NVidia driver package 375.57 (press drivers) were used for Pascal and Maxwell GPUs. These drivers contain Battlefield 1 optimizations.


    And this is from TweakTown article:

    Drivers: NVIDIA GeForce 373.06 WHQL and AMD RSCE 16.10.1
    [mod edit]
    375.57 is the NVidia driver version that's game ready for BattleField 1:

    http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/nvidia-game-ready-drivers-37557-battlefield1-titanfall2/

    You can see that GamersNexus used that version, while TweakTown did not.
    And 16.10.2 is AMDs driver that is optimized for Battlefield 1:

    http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/Radeon-Software-Crimson-Edition-16-10-2-Release-Notes.aspx

    You can se that none of them even used proper AMD driver.

    And through my thorough testing for the last 11 months, NVidias drivers are just rebranded drivers that offer 0 improvements, doesnt solve probelms if there were some in early access/beta and so on. "gameready" is just PR BS for weakminded lol

    Post edited by Vaross on
  • H0urg1assH0urg1ass Member EpicPosts: 2,380
    Way back in 2004 I had an AMD card when KOTOR 2 came out, and it was literally unplayable on that card due to driver issues.

    Now, I realize that their issues are a thing of the past and that their drivers have made a lot of improvements, but for some reason in the back of my mind if the two products are on the shelf beside each other, then I'd have a lot of trouble buying the AMD.

    I will say, however, that Eyefinity is far far far better than Nividias trashy 1990's interface for multiple monitor support. FFS Nvidia, give us a single button push to swap between extended and stand alone displays.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,524
    Ridelynn said:
    I'd rather pay more money for a solid Nvidia card then pay less money to deal with the shit AMD drivers.  

    By the time DX12 is a notable consideration for gaming, I suspect Nvidia will be releasing a card that's at least comparable to whatever AMD is offering if not superior performance-wise.
    @SedrynTyros wins - first to mention "bad AMD drivers" in an AMD vs nVidia thread.
    I base my opinion on personal experience.  When I tried my first AMD card back when it was still ATI in 2001?  Their drivers sucked.  And now that I use a AMD card while at work?  Yep ... they still suck.  

    As soon as AMD drivers stop sucking, I'll be the first one to congratulate them, but a 15 year suckfest is one helluva streak so I'm not going to hold my breath
    What exactly are you doing at work where you have driver problems?
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,524
    Hrimnir said:
    H0urg1ass said:
    The GTX 1070's are ridiculously overpriced right now, probably to make up for the huge losses they took in the lawsuit against the 970's.

    I wouldn't touch one with a ten foot pole until they come down another $150 and offer two free games with purchase, like when I got Witcher 3 and Batman with my 970.
    You do realize nvidia doesn't control what retailers sell their product for, right?
    Sort of but not really.  If Nvidia sets an MSRP and charges a suitable corresponding price, and can provide as many cards as vendors are willing to buy at that price, then the cards will be available at MSRP.  The cards might also be available somewhere else for double that price, which isn't Nvidia's fault.  But the cheapest price at which GTX 1070s are commonly available is very much "Nvidia's fault".

    That said, hiking prices to make up for a lawsuit isn't how it works.  The lawsuit has no effect on prices unless it leads to an expectation of future lawsuits that basically hike prices about the same as an industry-wide tax would.
  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    SlyLoK said:
    Malabooga said:
    filmoret said:
    Here's some more benchmarks saying same thing.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1771?vs=1748

    http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2652-battlefield-1-graphics-card-benchmark-dx11-vs-dx12

    Its showing the nvidia card is 20% faster when it comes to DX11 and when it comes to dx 12 the RX 480 is about 5-10% faster and in some cases slower.  But that appears to be the case when ashes of singularity is involved.


    BF1 multiplayer:

    DX12

    like Witcher 3, Division and ROTR.

    20% faster? what are you, NVidia product champion? There yet has to be a game where NVidia doesnt lose FPS in DX12, THATS how badly NVidia cards perform, complete fail.
    Thanks for posting those. Also the performance at 1440p and 4k are similar differences. 

    Once true dx12 titles come out the difference will be even greater. Most games now use dx12 as an add-on ATM.
    *PST*  You missed the part where they used the old nvidia drivers and the updated AMD drivers.  Giving them a clear advantage.
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383
    filmoret said:
    SlyLoK said:
    Malabooga said:
    filmoret said:
    Here's some more benchmarks saying same thing.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1771?vs=1748

    http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2652-battlefield-1-graphics-card-benchmark-dx11-vs-dx12

    Its showing the nvidia card is 20% faster when it comes to DX11 and when it comes to dx 12 the RX 480 is about 5-10% faster and in some cases slower.  But that appears to be the case when ashes of singularity is involved.


    BF1 multiplayer:

    DX12

    like Witcher 3, Division and ROTR.

    20% faster? what are you, NVidia product champion? There yet has to be a game where NVidia doesnt lose FPS in DX12, THATS how badly NVidia cards perform, complete fail.
    Thanks for posting those. Also the performance at 1440p and 4k are similar differences. 

    Once true dx12 titles come out the difference will be even greater. Most games now use dx12 as an add-on ATM.
    *PST*  You missed the part where they used the old nvidia drivers and the updated AMD drivers.  Giving them a clear advantage.

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited October 2016
    filmoret said:
    SlyLoK said:
    Malabooga said:
    filmoret said:
    Here's some more benchmarks saying same thing.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1771?vs=1748

    http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2652-battlefield-1-graphics-card-benchmark-dx11-vs-dx12

    Its showing the nvidia card is 20% faster when it comes to DX11 and when it comes to dx 12 the RX 480 is about 5-10% faster and in some cases slower.  But that appears to be the case when ashes of singularity is involved.


    BF1 multiplayer:

    DX12

    like Witcher 3, Division and ROTR.

    20% faster? what are you, NVidia product champion? There yet has to be a game where NVidia doesnt lose FPS in DX12, THATS how badly NVidia cards perform, complete fail.
    Thanks for posting those. Also the performance at 1440p and 4k are similar differences. 

    Once true dx12 titles come out the difference will be even greater. Most games now use dx12 as an add-on ATM.
    *PST*  You missed the part where they used the old nvidia drivers and the updated AMD drivers.  Giving them a clear advantage.
    You missed a part where both used old AMD drivers giving a clear advantage to NVidia!
  • VrikaVrika Member LegendaryPosts: 7,993
    edited October 2016
    Malabooga said:
    filmoret said:
    SlyLoK said:
    Malabooga said:
    filmoret said:
    Here's some more benchmarks saying same thing.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1771?vs=1748

    http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2652-battlefield-1-graphics-card-benchmark-dx11-vs-dx12

    Its showing the nvidia card is 20% faster when it comes to DX11 and when it comes to dx 12 the RX 480 is about 5-10% faster and in some cases slower.  But that appears to be the case when ashes of singularity is involved.


    BF1 multiplayer:

    DX12

    like Witcher 3, Division and ROTR.

    20% faster? what are you, NVidia product champion? There yet has to be a game where NVidia doesnt lose FPS in DX12, THATS how badly NVidia cards perform, complete fail.
    Thanks for posting those. Also the performance at 1440p and 4k are similar differences. 

    Once true dx12 titles come out the difference will be even greater. Most games now use dx12 as an add-on ATM.
    *PST*  You missed the part where they used the old nvidia drivers and the updated AMD drivers.  Giving them a clear advantage.
    You missed a part where both used old AMD drivers giving a clear advantage to NVidia!
    You missed the part where GamerNexus had checked from AMD, who commented that 16.10.1 is already good enough for testing, and 16.10.2 adds maybe 1-2% to DX12 speed.

    Hint: I posted it in this thread



    EDIT: It looks like Guru3D.com has information that neither NVidia nor AMD added any optimization other than Multi-GPU support profile in their latest drivers. If that's the case, then using old drivers for NVidia didn't matter since it was not Multi-GPU test

    Source: http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/battlefield-1-pc-graphics-benchmark-review,5.html


    EDIT 2: There's also a YouTube video that more or less confirms this: NVidia's gameready drivers did not add any frame rate compared to the version used on tests.

    Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr7TyKGEa6s
     
  • sultembersultember Member UncommonPosts: 1

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited October 2016
    Vrika said:

    If that's the case, then using old drivers for NVidia didn't matter since it was not Multi-GPU test

    Source: http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/battlefield-1-pc-graphics-benchmark-review,5.html


    EDIT 2: There's also a YouTube video that more or less confirms this: NVidia's gameready drivers did not add any frame rate compared to the version used on tests.

    Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr7TyKGEa6s
    Thats pretty much case for any game they claimed "gameready drivers" in last 11 moths rofl (and i tested vast majority of them) along with most of "gameready drivers" crashing extensively in DX12 rofl

    As i said, NVidia had "BF1 open beta gameready driver" on 30th August, anyone expecting anything needs to have their head checked lol

    in fact in that video 373.06 works better than "gameready" 375.w/e rofl (starts at 0:50)

Sign In or Register to comment.