Ashes of the Singularity Bench

[andybird123]

And for your info, couple of FPS here or there is matching performance

Its 20% differences... Yes at 30fps that is only 6fps, but at normal gaming settings that 20% becomes 15-20fps, which is definitely a visible difference for most people

Its funny how ashes was a poster child for AMD's coming domination of DX12 gaming when they were beating nvidia by 1fps, but now suddenly its not important

 

[Marine-RX179]

Its 20% differences... Yes at 30fps that is only 6fps, but at normal gaming settings that 20% becomes 15-20fps, which is definitely a visible difference for most people

Its funny how ashes was a poster child for AMD's coming domination of DX12 gaming when they were beating nvidia by 1fps, but now suddenly its not important

Am I the only one thinking that when reviewer compare GPU, they would use the same setup so they can direct GPU to GPU comparison; but in this thread here, it would seem that you think having faster CPU/system means nothing, and any extra performance must be from the GPU and only the GPU, and using more powerful system has zero impact on the result...especially when this is STILL a CPU intensive bench/game, even with dx12?

If that logic were to be thrown around, may be all those people keep spamming Fury X is no faster than 970 at 1080p should quote result from this thread (which back the claims of the Fury series being around 30% faster than 970)?

 

[andybird123]

Am I the only one thinking that when reviewer compare GPU, they would use the same setup so they can direct GPU to GPU comparison; but in this thread here, it would seem that you think having faster CPU/system means nothing, and any extra performance must be from the GPU and only the GPU, and using more powerful system has zero impact on the result...especially when this is STILL a CPU intensive bench/game, even with dx12?

If that logic were to be thrown around, may be all those people keep spamming Fury X is no faster than 970 at 1080p should quote result from this thread?

Look at the results, everyone here is GPU limited, people are getting 100+fps as the CPU score and 30-40 as the GPU score

AMDmatt has the fastest CPU on here, so let's see some of his FuryX scores?

Muziqaz and streetlight have the same CPU at the same clocks and there is still a 5.5fps difference, completely inline with GPU only affecting the score

 

[Marine-RX179]

Look at the results, everyone here is GPU limited, people are getting 100+fps as the CPU score and 30-40 as the GPU score

AMDmatt has the fastest CPU on here, so let's see some of his FuryX scores?

Muziqaz and streetlight have the same CPU at the same clocks and there is still a 5.5fps difference, completely inline with GPU only affecting the score

Well regardless, I don't think I ever dispute that fact that 980Ti is a very fast card. It's good to know that its performance doesn't tank for the 980Ti in dx12 as some of us may have worried...however, the same really cannot be said about the lower tier cards such as the 970. If this bench is anything to go by, the 290/290x will age better/last longer than the 970/980, just like the 7950/7970 vs 670/680 back then.

In fact the results here REALLY reminds me of the Sleeping Dogs bench thread, with Titan/780/780Ti trading blows with/beating 290x/290, but the 7970/7950 being ahead of the 670/680 by a fair margin.

 

[Lokken86]

So now that the 980ti is showing well all of a sudden the game isn't broken and flawed right?

 

[TheRealDeal]

So now that the 980ti is showing well all of a sudden the game isn't broken and flawed right?

It always has been doing pretty good from the initial reviews. Atm it overclocks better than the Fury x hence the higher scores. Once voltage control for Fury X comes along there will be nothing in it again as per the original reviews.

People are getting there knickers in a twist because Nvidia cards don't handle or can't handle Async compute which looks to be a big part of dx12. Although this game uses Async compute the developers say it only uses a modest amount and the game is not a poster child for Async Shaders.

 

[Gregster]

So now that the 980ti is showing well all of a sudden the game isn't broken and flawed right?

No, the bench is broken and flawed but seems a couple of guys are not happy for whatever reason and looking at their sig's, it does make me chuckle. Maybe results are not as they had hoped?

Your post also sounds a little bitter. Chill man, just a bit of fun bench thread.

 

[Marine-RX179]

It's always been doing pretty good from the initial reviews. Atm it overclocks better than the Fury x hence the higher scores. Once voltage control for Fury X comes along there will be nothing in it again as per the original reviews.

Funny enough some people seem to feel proud of the 980Ti beating the Fury X, where for those of us that never really expected much from the Fury X, it actually put it into more positive light than before

The thing is whilst the highly overclocked 980Ti is beating the current limited overclocked Fury X, but if I am not mistaken it would be at the cost of consuming more power and run hotter and noisier? So all the sticks that the Hawaii got for being "hot and noisier" than the 780/780Ti justified because it was AMD not Nvidia, and now it's not something worth thinking about now that it is the other way round?

 

[Mtom]

No, the bench is broken and flawed but seems a couple of guys are not happy for whatever reason and looking at their sig's, it does make me chuckle. Maybe results are not as they had hoped?

Your post also sounds a little bitter. Chill man, just a bit of fun bench thread.

I think he meant a specific user who spent the last week bashing the bench in another thread, and suddenly he's all happy.

 

[andybird123]

So now that the 980ti is showing well all of a sudden the game isn't broken and flawed right?

I think he meant a specific user who spent the last week bashing the bench in another thread, and suddenly he's all happy.

it is still broken, as the Ashes dev has said in the last couple of days they and NVidia are working together on their DX12 implementation, DX12 shouldn't be scoring lower than DX11... even that being the case, I am amused at how real world tests of FuryX vs. 980ti are shaping up, yes

5820k 4.625
980ti 1517/3900 (7800)

Spoiler

 

[tommybhoy]

In fact the results here REALLY reminds me of the Sleeping Dogs Starswarm bench thread

Wide open to user manipulation, it's all fun if your on top.

 

[Gregster]

I think he meant a specific user who spent the last week bashing the bench in another thread, and suddenly he's all happy.

Maybe but I said from the fist mention of results in this that nobody should read too much into it and clearly if I am getting more fps on the same settings with DX11 over DX12, it proves it is broken (at least for my system).

 

[tommybhoy]

Funny enough some people seem to feel proud of the 980Ti beating the Fury X, where for those of us that never really expected much from the Fury X, it actually put it into more positive light than before

The thing is whilst the highly overclocked 980Ti is beating the current limited overclocked Fury X, but if I am not mistaken it would be at the cost of consuming more power and run hotter and noisier? So all the sticks that the Hawaii got for being "hot and noisier" than the 780/780Ti justified because it was AMD not Nvidia, and now it's not something worth thinking about now that it is the other way round?

Can remember a 'who overclocks coz u don't need to' thread circa Kepler too.

 

[Gregster]

Shall we keep the fanboy crap for the other thread and leave this one for results? Probably wise I reckon

 

[fs123]

The TX's OC'ed by 20-25% are beating the FuryX (which is only OC'ed 5%) by around 20%...Interesting isn't it?

 

[muziqaz]

Maybe but I said from the fist mention of results in this that nobody should read too much into it and clearly if I am getting more fps on the same settings with DX11 over DX12, it proves it is broken (at least for my system).

well, in your case nvidia async shader implementation is broken, not the game itself. You just need to wait for nvidia to get their ac together and fix their drivers


Its beyond me how can anyone gloat about their GPU being faster in their mind, while they actually run different CPU than others.
As Greg said, this thread is just for fun to see how each config is doing. Not to compare GPUs, because the minute you put your GPU into your system and I put mine into my different system, all the comparisons about performance go out of window. I think you guys are wise enough to understand this?
On the other note, I would be very ****ed if my superclocked 980ti was not beating voltage restricted fury x and while we are at that 1080p? seriously? When your superclocked 980ti gets 20% more fps in 1440p and 4k, then you can gloat. Now, please keep calm with your mobile phone resolution

 

[andybird123]

Alright keep your knickers on, I'll do them tonight, dads birthday today and id rather get my OC for this game dialled in at 1080 and then run through the other resolutions

 

[Mtom]

IMHO the DX12 need s better drivers more games and benches, and devs need to get used to it, so it will be at least half a year until we get some idea whats what

 

[andybird123]

Funny enough some people seem to feel proud of the 980Ti beating the Fury X, where for those of us that never really expected much from the Fury X, it actually put it into more positive light than before

The thing is whilst the highly overclocked 980Ti is beating the current limited overclocked Fury X, but if I am not mistaken it would be at the cost of consuming more power and run hotter and noisier? So all the sticks that the Hawaii got for being "hot and noisier" than the 780/780Ti justified because it was AMD not Nvidia, and now it's not something worth thinking about now that it is the other way round?

Both of mine do 1480 with the fan at or under 60% which is no louder than any other fans in my system..
This is a bench thread, so yes I am now pushing it regardless of noise, but I don't have to do that to get within fractions of an fps of the scores being posted here

I don't have voltage control yet either but have just downloaded mbt so will have a play later

 

[fs123]

On the other note, I would be very ****ed if my superclocked 980ti was not beating voltage restricted fury x and while we are at that 1080p? seriously? When your superclocked 980ti gets 20% more fps in 1440p and 4k, then you can gloat. Now, please keep calm with your mobile phone resolution

Actually I didn't even think of the resolution but you are correct. At 1080P the Maxwell cards are faster due to the higher clock speed allowing them to pull ahead. As the resolution gets up to 4K the FuryX is basically the same fps as a TitanX.

2160p

DX12

1. Average FR 20.3, GPU TitanX @1127/1752, Normal FR 24.5, Medium FR 19.4, Heavy FR 18.0, CPU 5960X @4.0, Kaapstad Link
2. Average FR 19.6, GPU Fury X @1117/500, Normal FR 24.5, Medium FR 18.7, Heavy FR 16.9, CPU 5930k @4.375, muziqaz Link

I guess people forgot that they bought their TX/980Ti/FuryX to play at higher resolutions than 1080P .

.