Really?
i had a 7870XT when i got a 38% improvement, do you know how much more powerful an R9 290 is? you don't understand the concept of a CPU Bottleneck at all do you?
You also know Star Swarm has been patched many times.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD's next big Mantle Game
- Thread starter humbug
- Start date
Really?
i had a 7870XT when i got a 38% improvement, do you know how much more powerful an R9 290 is? you don't understand the concept of a CPU Bottleneck at all do you?
You also know Star Swarm has been patched many times.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,528
Youve upgrade to a 290, got the same score in mantle, yet a much lower score in DX?
Umkay
Because the things been patched yet again.
Look at Quartz, he got near 10 FPS less than me on a 780TI, Less than 10 more on DX, tell me. why is that?
Last edited:
I have no idea but Quartz on a 780TI also gets less than i did on the 7870XT 'pre the latest patch', think about it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,680
- Location
- The KOP
Lets not forget here star swarm is a CPU bound benchmark even the Devs have said this. GPU plays very little part in the results. The results are CPU more than the GPU.
Dan Patched it after Nvidia PR'd their slides, i think he cranked up the Batching intensity.
Oops i think i posted my results in the wrong thread. I meant to post them here lol.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,528
Woah Woah Woah, so the maker of the game is openly admitting that he is deliberately increasing the batch count in direct response to nvidia optimising for high batch counts, the effect of which is poorer to unplayable performance on both nvidia and AMD hardware, but it retains the "ooh look at how mantle is better than DX" effect, so that makes it perfectly ok
Lmfao
If so and the same people who moaned like crazy about GameWorks needs to look at what they are now saying.
Thats not what i said, i said "i think he increased Batching intensity", it makes the CPU work harder.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,528
Yes, because more batches = more draw calls... Re-check the nvidia slides, "draw" was one of the main functions they optimised for
Either way, rerunning these tests now, it is pretty obvious that they are deliberatley patching the game to make performance WORSE and not better, which is what you would expect patches and optimisation to bring, and that they are decreasing nvidia performance more than AMD performance is pretty obvious why
At least there was a question mark over Gameworks, this is red handed smoking gun territory
Last edited:
Not so sure. My DX performance has gone up and my Mantle performance has gone down as a result of the draw call increase.
This is not a game btw Andy, its a benchmark designed to highlight the differences in performance between Mantle and DX.
They are sabotaging Nvidia?
Its just to make the CPU (including those 12 thread £450 i7's) work more for it, the bench is designed to test CPU performance, they obviously felt it wasn't working CPU's like the 3960K hard enough, (if my guess is right)
There is no conspiracy.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 3,663
This. Just for the record, I had back in February ~ 36fps vs. ~59 fps, while today I have ~ 36fps vs. ~50 fps. Don't know what they've done to it, but at least for me it looks like the DX performance is about the same, while Mantle performance went down about 50%, from an improvement of ~ 63% to about ~ 42%.
It' clear that if you build your game going for Mantle full support and features with insane number of batches (justified, of course), DX cannot catch up. That's the whole point of the benchmark.
Also notice when you talk about increases:
X card could do theoretically 107FPS
Y card could do theoretically 120FPS
X card could do 100fps + Mantle 105fps
Y card could do 90fps + new driivers 110fps.
What that tells you? Well, 1st - the previous driver might not have used that Y card to the best of what could have been done without the latest research that enabled even more performance under DX; in contrast, X card would have already pushing to the max of what that hardware could do under DX. Basically, Y is faster so it's normal to be faster if the SW isn't holding her back to much and it DOESN'T mean that the new drivers are better than Mantle.
2nd - there is no "standard" point of reference to compare the SW since it's not running on the same HW and that's why you go back to the 1st point which makes "versus" standoffs a little bit pointless.
It would have been useful to see how these drivers increase apply to lower powered hardware or a little bit of disproportionate performance components mixed together.
Also food for thought, I can show 0% with Mantle or about 40-50% against DX, it's all about willingness to do that. How? Test the darn thing in a proper situation for which it caters! Same goes for nVIDIA drivers or any kind of testing.
This is what i have been saying since Mantle's inception, reviewers, or about 90% of them run nothing but top end; often overclocked CPU's.
Thats completely useless information, its as if they don't understand the concept of a CPU Bottleneck, they obviously do and yet use a CPU they know would not Bottleneck.
And they are doing the same thing with the Nvidia wonder-driver, mind you so are Nvidia.
Its all very strange to demonstrate the benefits of using whatever system to alleviate a CPU bottleneck by using the least likely CPU to bottleneck they can find.
