Caporegime
Not necessarily. I saw 14% improvement on a single 290 vs DirectX. That was with my cpu at 4.8ghz and my gpu at stock. This was at Ultra settings, 1440P x4 AA.
-
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.
Mantle vS 780Ti in BF4
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
Not necessarily. I saw 14% improvement on a single 290 vs DirectX. That was with my cpu at 4.8ghz and my gpu at stock. This was at Ultra settings, 1440P x4 AA.
Well the graphs you showed at the top (before your edit) show 4K at 30 fps, which I also consider unplayable so not sure what your point is?
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,375
As you frequently like to say, i'll take the results of a well respected independent site rather than yours thanks
Caporegime
LtMatt said:
As for the 4k graphs. I would not consider the single card results playable. But for the multi gpu i would consider the 290X results playable for sure.
As you frequently like to say, i'll take the results of a well respected independent site rather than yours thanks
Good to see you agree with Guru3D and HardOCP then.
Soldato
I have no idea why, but it seems that most of these reviewers that are using high and no AA benchmarking settings have the 780Ti thrashing the 290X and it all seems strange.
maybe the 780Ti does thrash the 290x on lower settings i don't know, i never tried low settings on either, but if i'm buying a Top end card, i expect to run my games with max settings, i don't fancy having the "Fastest card in the world....at lower settings".
I had both the 780Ti and 290X just before xmas, i tested both on BF4 and other games, i'm not biased, both cards offer incredible performance but i noted that the 780Ti's build quality and easy of use was nothing short of amazing.
I loved the 780Ti, it's a fantastic card with killer looks, awesome cooling even in Ref form and is very quiet, but it's performance isn't any better than a 290X in BF4, infact the 290X was slightly faster and that was before Mantle.
Which is what Kaap was saying too.
Caporegime
Spot on, i expect.
However i think its just a case of, in this specific scenario, Nvidia's multi threaded driver is better than AMD's. However unless you run those settings, or a low detail then you won't benefit from it as much. As you move to ultra settings with AA the lower cpu over heard does not mean as much. In fact AMD are faster at higher settings. That's what it seems like to me anyway.
But you are getting massively OT now. The test was an XFX 290X (that doesn't downclock) against a 780Ti (that by all accounts is a reference card), and I believe the XFX uses reference 1Ghz clocks, so a fair comparison in a Mantle Vs a 780Ti thread.
My point stands that you are not happy that they use non ultra settings and then supply charts with non ultra settings. Seems daft to moan about something and then do that very same thing.
Edit:
At Recce, you have missed out on massive driver performance gains with BF4 and the time you had a 780Ti. People forget that this is an AMD game and "should" be beating out the competition, even on DX.
Last edited:
Soldato
Yep, unless Kaap in lying
or biased towards one brand... i doubt it.Cheers Matt, definitely looks that way.
Caporegime
Doesnt exactly look like the 780ti is being ridiculed
It would be good if a few more ran the test that Matt has set up to see if the Titan is being ridiculed, as from what I have seen, my Titans are taking names and kicking ass
Was just giving some insight as to what was going on based on the above posts.
Those massives gains don't seem to help the 780TI much in HardOCP's testing. Perhaps they help more at 1080P HIGH details with AA off?
AMD said the 290X was targeting the 780/Titan as well to be fair. It was never aimed to compete with the 780TI, which came out after the 290 cards, but somehow it does.
Last edited:
Soldato
Settings don't matter. Read the opening statement.
Using Ultra settings alleviates a certain amount of bottleneck.
Using Ultra settings alleviates a certain amount of bottleneck.
Caporegime
Understood. I was just explaining my opinion (see my first post) on why we're seeing different results based on settings used.
Soldato
I still don't understand the theory that improving the settings would increase the 290X advantage. My thinking is that it would decrease any advantage the 290X has or stretch the gap.
Not doubting what is being seen by you Matt but don't understand the reasons it would exhibit this. Perhaps we need to wait for more reviews by trusted websites.
Not doubting what is being seen by you Matt but don't understand the reasons it would exhibit this. Perhaps we need to wait for more reviews by trusted websites.
Soldato
How can you defend a card so blindly yet you haven't even had/used or tested yourself Greg? what are you defending if not the card? the Company?
It seems crazy to defend them so much over one game..
Kaaps said that the 290X was only a few FPS slower than one of his 690s, is the 690 faster than the 780Ti?
Last edited:
Soldato
I don't see any defending of a card or brand there?!
Caporegime
I think the point is Rusty, whatever advantage Nvidia have with lower cpu overhead at lower res/settings (if you believe the TechReport benchmark) it is not prevalent, or as prevalent once you dial up all the settings. As we can see from HardOCP's/Guru 3d's benchmarks, with settings up the 290 is the faster card. According to TR, at lower settings the 780TI is the faster card because of the Nvidia driver having lower cpu overhead, or handing that overheard better. Probably because of multi threaded rendering, though im not 100% sure on that as i don't know a lot about it.
Last edited:
Soldato
Mantle seems to benefit the lower end heavily by removing bottleneck, but it just shows (at least to me) that the faster the CPU, the lesser benefit currently from Mantle. But we knew this already from findings elsewhere.
The performance numbers between D3D and Mantle on the Ti do seem a tad on the high side, but at the base, it is a faster card. It would be slightly 'fairer' to compare the GTX / Titan given the release time frame, but there you have it.
If TR have taken that number out of a hat, then that's not good sport. But given the initial problems with Mantle it might be slightly too early to give clear results. I think they're simply relaying what they found on their test bed.
The performance numbers between D3D and Mantle on the Ti do seem a tad on the high side, but at the base, it is a faster card. It would be slightly 'fairer' to compare the GTX / Titan given the release time frame, but there you have it.
If TR have taken that number out of a hat, then that's not good sport. But given the initial problems with Mantle it might be slightly too early to give clear results. I think they're simply relaying what they found on their test bed.
Last edited:
Soldato
Depends on what / how they tested really? A general gameplay scene representative of BF4 or just something to illustrate what Mantle can offer.
AMD / DICE could have avoided this confusion by building an in game benchmark.
Soldato
Edited.