• 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.

Ashes of the Singularity Coming, with DX12 Benchmark in thread.

humbug said:
Did you link to the wrong article? it looks like Fury-X is at the top with the 980TI while the 960 is lower mid with the GTX 770.

[/URL]
Click to expand...


Nope: You must be reading the wrong numbers:

GTX 960 DX11: 32.4FPS
GTX 770 DX11: 32.8 FPS
FuryX DX11: 30.6 FPS



So in which current games does a 960 and 770 beat a FuryX and a TitanX?
 
D.P. said:
Nope: You must be reading the wrong numbers:

GTX 960 DX11: 32.4FPS
GTX 770 DX11: 32.8 FPS
FuryX DX11: 30.6 FPS



So in which current games does a 960 and 770 beat a FuryX and a TitanX?
Click to expand...

Do you understand Draw Calls? it really doesn't look like you do, if you did you would understand why this happened, a little phenomena called "CPU Bound"

why are you clutching at this so hard? its insane.
 
D.P. said:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37637177&postcount=46

On which planet is a 770 faster than a TitanX?
Click to expand...

humbug said:
He's using different QI settings from the two different setups, look on the left panel
Click to expand...

Its not even the QI settings and the Titan X will be faster if you read the hardware.de bechmark. And even then with the Settings, the temporal AA was set higher on the 770 test.

TheRealDeal said:
I have read several times on this thread with people saying the gtx770 results have been debunked as the settings were wrong. If these are different results i apologise but if they are the same then you should read what others are saying.
Click to expand...

It is, even in that post if you look at the picture it says "CPU TEST" at the top of the 770 one instead of "Full system test" which would have shown the actual GPU results. The "CPU" test is the one that shows what your cpu could churn out in terms of FPS if you had a GPU that could process all the frames.
 
humbug said:
He's using different QI settings from the two different setups, look on the left panel
Click to expand...

True, but the Titan X settings are actually lower than the GTX770 , the only real difference would be Fullscreen vs Windowed mode, which should never make that much difference.
 
D.P. said:
Do people really think this benchmark tells us anything meaningful? In how many games has the 960 been faster than the FuryX?


Completely junk.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting point about the GTX 960

A TitanX is basically 3x GTX 960s slapped together and you get 3x the performance to go with it as the Maxwell Architecture scales very well.

The question is why is the GTX 980 Ti (which is very similar to a TX) not getting nearly 3x the performance of the 960. They both have the same architecture and drivers and are both running DX12 in your link.

Could it be a flaw in the bench !!!

Also on the subject why is the GTX 960 better @DX11 yet the GTX 980 Ti is far worse @DX11

Could this be another flaw in the bench !!!
 
Last edited:
Strategy games are not a reliable way of measuring gpu performance. Close thread before we drown in nvidia fanboy tears please.
 
I keep saying there is nothing in this that looks in anyway bad for Nvidia.

Would we be having these ridiculous arguments had Nvidia just not said anything? its like some mad merry-go-round to justify Nvidia's moaning.
 
humbug said:
I keep saying there is nothing in this that looks in anyway bad for Nvidia.

Would we be having these ridiculous arguments had Nvidia just not said anything? its like some mad merry-go-round to justify Nvidia's moaning.
Click to expand...

+1. The results are what they are. Time to get on with our lives.
 
Exactly, they lose a frame or two in "some" of the tests with high end cpu's and when not using the Heavy Draw calls bench. which could be a tiny bug. or something weird.

but otherwise there are improvements in the majority of cases.
 
humbug said:
I keep saying there is nothing in this that looks in anyway bad for Nvidia.

Would we be having these ridiculous arguments had Nvidia just not said anything? its like some mad merry-go-round to justify Nvidia's moaning.
Click to expand...

So you are agreeing that a 960 and 770 are faster than a FuryX if there is nothing wrong with the benchmark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom