• 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***

I don't think I have ever had any issues on game release days on my 290 or 7850 before, in fact, the only 1 where I did have an issue was with battlefront and missing textures/flickering/lights/shadows being messed up on ice maps, that took them a few weeks to fix iirc.

Crossfire on the other hand.... :p
 
Nexus18 said:
I don't think I have ever had any issues on game release days on my 290 or 7850 before, in fact, the only 1 where I did have an issue was with battlefront and missing textures/flickering/lights/shadows being messed up on ice maps, that took them a few weeks to fix iirc.

Crossfire on the other hand.... :p
Click to expand...

We do get the odd day one issue, I've experienced them with ROTTR and Resident evil Revelations 2 as two recentish examples, They do happen but with the move to Crimson AMD have been on the ball so if it continues like it has so far this year there's no room for complaints really.
 
homefront is broken, they are talking about patching to improve optimization, and the game scores about 11/20 in most reviews, what's shoking is the time spent on this game developement to end up a repetitive, boring, unoptimized game, what a shame.
 
Not really surprising that a game with such a troubled development history is such a mess. It's sad how far the Free Radical guys have fallen since TimeSplitters though. They never really recovered from the Battlefront III cancellation and Haze bombing.
 
Nice review.Nowhere near as good as GTX970 was, cant OC to 1080 level, but it is cheaper than TITANX atleast..
Just like he said...
 
Well compared to a 980ti (780ti with the 970) the 1070 is similar, its just that the 1080 is better than normal for an xx80 card. For example the 980 on release was not as much faster vs 780ti as the 1080 is vs 980ti.
 
So the 1070 is for 1440p what the 970 was for 1080p (turn down a few settings like AA to maintain 60+)? Not bad.

lumik said:
Nice review.Nowhere near as good as GTX970 was, cant OC to 1080 level, but it is cheaper than TITANX atleast..
Just like he said...
Click to expand...

+1
Exactly, though he did show off the reference card, perhaps non-reference cards might overclock better? It's funny he showed off the MSI Gaming 970... that's the one I have! Though judging by the 1080 MSI Gaming price... I doubt the 1070 version will be as well priced and thus as well popular. The 970 version was one of the best performing coolers AIB-designs at a decent price and it overclocks very well (though my one crashes in Just Cause 3 overclocked).

NirK said:
Well compared to a 980ti (780ti with the 970) the 1070 is similar, its just that the 1080 is better than normal for an xx80 card. For example the 980 on release was not as much faster vs 780ti as the 1080 is vs 980ti.
Click to expand...

Kinda... looking at the pricepoint and what it seems to be 'competing' with, the current 1080 is less of an xx80 card and something a bit more, like a xx80.5? But not quite an xx80ti. It is rather ununsual for a xx80 card, I'll admit. Then again, Nvidia have been smart and have protected the 1080 by the large increase in price (relative to the 1070) and making sure the 1070 can't catch up.

Both cards seem to be 1440p cards IMO, the 1080 guarantees 60+ fps for a cost of a few hundred quid more and has a go at 4k. Similar to what the 980 was in the last gen.
 
You do after ask the question just was is it that kills AMD performance on the Nvidia Hyper setting? Like he says in the video they is very little IQ difference between Hyper and Ultra but the AMD GPU gets destroyed.

Did AMD not have access to this setting? Am sure they did how else could they release a Driver before release if they wasn't testing the game.

 
Reading around it sounds like the game has a Memory Restriction setting. To quote Gamers Nexus:

"GPU Memory Restriction: This is an important setting. With this enabled, the graphics quality will scale dynamically with available VRAM. That's something you probably want in most use cases, but not for testing."

http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2471-mirrors-edge-catalyst-graphics-card-benchmark-gtx-1080-1070-390x

The game may actually be scaling back detail to fit within the VRAM available on the GTX970 - i.e. the GTX970 on Hyper isn't actually running Hyper.

Digital Foundry will need to clarify whether or not this setting was used and whether it makes a difference.
 
Something odd going on there and it isn't as simple as the 970 loading in lower quality assets - if you pay attention to the textures some are slightly different and so are the detail shader passes in some places when a surface is viewed close up with it sometimes looking sharper on one card than the other but its a mixture with both having the odd lower quality texture not one card.

Even with the AMD card on ultra though the 970 is running noticeably smoother throughout.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom