• 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.

***The DigitalFoundry Face Off Thread***

Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2011
Posts
20,679
Location
The KOP
Feel these guys deserve there own thread, personally I don't think they is a better channel out atm doing a better job than these guys.

I'll continue to post latest video about GPU vs GPU performance. Feel free to post your own from these guys.

Inside Digital Foundry: How We Measure PC Performance

First up Crossfire vs SLI @4k with selection of games
Games Tested:

00:42 - Battlefield 4
01:38 - Shadow of Mordor
02:15 - Grand Theft Auto 5
04:12 - Assassin's Creed Unity
05:19 - Far Cry 4
06:22 - Ryse: Son of Rome
06:57 - Crysis 3


The Division 970 vs 390

Core i7 5960X Eight-Core Overclock/R9 Fury X CrossFire Benchmarks - CPU Bottlenecks
Street fighter 5


Hitman PC Beta GTX 970 vs R9 390 Frame-Rate Test
Farcry primal 970 vs 390


Quantum Break PC Performance: GTX 970 vs R9 390 - What Went Wrong?

Dark Souls 3 GTX 970 vs R9 390/GTX 960 vs R9 380 Gameplay Frame-Rate Tests

Has i expected an updated version. Am lead to believe this was an issue with OpenGL feature pack. Nvidia is running 4.5 while AMD is running 4.3 with Features. So I guess they was an issue with a extension?

Doom Dev - @idSoftwareTiago
It's using 4.3 with extensions from 4.4 and 4.5. There is no advantage in initializing a 4.5 context.





Shocking Game.




Nvidia GTX 970 vs AMD R9 390 1080p/ 1440p Benchmarks [DX11/ DX12]
 
Last edited:
Their videos are always great. Also they are almost only site who openly always notices cpu caps in games, and openly talk about them. I really like their videos.
 
They should do a follow up to see if Fury X cf is indeed cpu limited. Seems like a fair enough video and i would probably opt for the gtx980ti on memory alone.
 
Honestly I always find that if anyone finds a "controversial" result - it's these guys. For example their 6600K was consistently beating a 4790K in gaming benchmarks, which is very odd as the 4790K has stronger single and multi core performance due to higher clock speeds and hyperthreading.
 
Honestly I always find that if anyone finds a "controversial" result - it's these guys. For example their 6600K was consistently beating a 4790K in gaming benchmarks, which is very odd as the 4790K has stronger single and multi core performance due to higher clock speeds and hyperthreading.

Could have been DDR3 vs DDR4? Also multithreading itself only helps occasionally in games. Sometimes it even harms the performance.
 
Yea i like Digital Foundry, ive watched a few of thier benchmarks. Very consistent and well done!

I was comparing the 390x vs 980Ti on various resolutions to see what sort of performance difference there is as its closest thing performance wise to my 290x as its quite well overclocked so it has to be atleast at 390x level and i can see the 980Ti is quite some lead ahead keeps tempting me every time i watch to buy a 980ti lol.

Anyways i think DF thread would be good!
 
Excellent nice one Shanks.

I feel I actually learned something from watching those videos tonight. No particular bias towards Nvidia or AMD and just reporting the results and looking at the technology (I guess that's what the afternoon shift is for....right? :p ).

What with CPU bottle necking and Memory speeds, it's not all about FPS for the best gaming experience....Frame Times are what we should be looking at. From the direction that AMD seem to have taken with Fiji I am guessing and hoping that DX12 will help with some of those issues.

At the very least it has given me some info for my Mobo/Ram/Processor upgrade.

Subscribed to that channel :D
 
Last edited:
They should do a follow up to see if Fury X cf is indeed cpu limited. Seems like a fair enough video and i would probably opt for the gtx980ti on memory alone.

Latest crossfire test on overclocked 5960x shows that cpu doesn't exist that would run all games fast enough on lower resolutions, and occasionally you get cpu limited at 4k aswell.

I7-6770k might give a bit better scaling on some games compared to 5960x duo of better ipc, but that's mostly marginal (10%?)

Want better scaling? Increase resolution, but face potential memory problems.
 
Funny how they didn't overclock the 390 yet they overclocked the 970 to try and beat it. Biased much? I've seen another DF video where the guy didn't even know there was a DSR equivalent available on AMD cards (i.e VSR) and made it sound like it was a Nvidia only feature.
The comparisons are good for a quick visual representation but some of the guys don't seem to be fully knowledgeable.
 
Last edited:
Funny how they didn't overclock the 390 yet they overclocked the 970 to try and beat it. Biased much? I've seen another DF video where the guy didn't even know there was a DSR equivalent available on AMD cards (i.e VSR) and made it sound like it was a Nvidia only feature.
The comparisons are good for a quick visual representation but some of the guys don't seem to be fully knowledgeable.

What video did they OC the 970 but not the 390?
 
nice one Shankly :D curious on that; as that would show even more the 390 is goto card at its price over 970....literally only single reason I could see to get 970 over 390 is if you have g-sync monitor otherwise ;)

they have solid foundation; is there some bias; of course it will happen with everyone but over all DP videos are usually solid
 
What video did they OC the 970 but not the 390?

The 2nd video in the OP from 4 minutes onwards. The 390 is faster than the 970 when both are stock and they overclock the 970 to make it look faster near the end of the video. Not entirely a fair comparison in that sense.

The Division 970 vs 390
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom