• 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.

Well can it run Deus Ex MD ?

N19h7m4r3 said:
Let's not forget NVIDIA were the first to demo DOOM under Vulkan; they used it at GDC to with the launch of the GTX 1080 to showcase their new top performance.

They also mentioned a new Vulkan driver to improve performance, but I haven't seen that appear yet it seems.

In the end my original statement stands: Neither NVIDIA, nor AMD can be held accountable for bad developers; especially when the port is handed off to a third party.

This is still the case whether Gameworks or OpenGPU libraries are used. Both can provide insight in the use of them; but ultimately it's the developers that have to properly implement and optimise the end product for consumers.
Click to expand...

Its not even that - he uses some examples of Nvidia sponsored games running fine,and then saying how they are "better" than the AMD ones,etc.

Yet he apparently despite the fact he thinks all AMD sponsored titles are crap,why is he the second highest poster in this thread then??

UD7MRdq.png
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Its not even that - he uses some examples of Nvidia sponsored games running fine,and then saying how they are "better" than the AMD ones,etc.

Yet he apparently despite the fact he things all AMD sponsored titles are crap,why is he the second highest poster in this thread then??

UD7MRdq.png
Click to expand...

I would be happy if more people posted results in the bench thread rather than arguing in this one.

That is if they actually have the game to run !!!!
 
Greebo said:
Well i can only on all the reviews as to what you get with a 970 on medium and high. And yes thats the benchmark as in some parts of the game that is exactly what you will encounter.

I must have missed your screenshots showing "true" 970 performance where a 970 beats a 1070 at 1080 in high...........

Please post them again.
Click to expand...
You are relying on reviews benching with the built-in benchmark tool.

You are not relying on actual gameplay benchmarks(which I showed), where performance is much better than what the built-in benchmark shows. This is not uncommon with these tools.

You are also only basing your comments on minimum framerates, when we have no idea how quick or regular these minimum dips are. They could be there for a mere fraction of a second and be locked 60fps+ the entire rest of the time. It is not a good way to judge things.

Plenty of people *actually playing the game* are getting way better performance than you are claiming they should be. And I've explained why that is, yet here you are, spouting the same old baloney anyways, trying to get people riled up and sell an untrue narrative.

Which largely seems based on your inability to understand that 'Medium' and 'High' and 'Ultra' are arbitrary naming schemes that could mean completely different things in different games. And that the top settings in this game are high demand, low impact, meaning there is no shame in dropping your settings down to High - you will not be missing out on much of anything. I would guess you are bitter your Titan X wont be able to 'max' this game out or run it at 4k/60fps at Very High/Ultra or whatever.
 
My experience of the game so far is that it looks very good when playing it and I consistently get better fps in game than on the benchmark.

I am playing 1440p on very high at ~45fps. Waiting on DX12 though to push my 390X along better.
 
N19h7m4r3 said:
I don't, unless 2-4 fps better is a major improvement.

I barely get around 55 fps at 1440p High, and got 51 in the benchmark with my system.

The game needs performance patches, and AMD most likely need a new driver as well.
Click to expand...
You reported this yesterday. I'd say you are an exception rather than the norm, though. It is perhaps an issue with Fiji cards, cuz other AMD users are not saying the same thing.

I've seen plenty of people say that in-game performance is some 10fps or more better than what the benchmark said they would get.
 
Seanspeed said:
You reported this yesterday. I'd say you are an exception rather than the norm, though. It is perhaps an issue with Fiji cards, cuz other AMD users are not saying the same thing.

I've seen plenty of people say that in-game performance is some 10fps or more better than what the benchmark said they would get.
Click to expand...

It's mostly like down to either a driver and patch being needed, or the card's 4GB not enough.

I'm constantly just a smidge under 4GB usage. Although the memory usage stays the same whether it's 1080p 1440p, High, or Ultra.
 
N19h7m4r3 said:
It's mostly like down to either a driver and patch being needed, or the card's 4GB not enough.

I'm constantly just a smidge under 4GB usage. Although the memory usage stays the same whether it's 1080p 1440p, High, or Ultra.
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity - do you get any stuttering when using Very High or Ultra texture settings?
 
Seanspeed said:
Out of curiosity - do you get any stuttering when using Very High or Ultra texture settings?
Click to expand...

Not that I noticed, all I have is overall laggy performance as I'm barely hitting the mid 40's at Very High or Ultra.

So if there was stutter it would be masked by over overall terrible performance at those settings.

Ran the bench again at 1440p High, but this time enabled tessellation.
Avg 39.1
Mins 33.4

Without Tess
Avg 51.4
Mins 41.7

Quite a nasty hit for enabling that.
 
Last edited:
omg this still going on, the benchmark is useless, i spent ages playing last night with not 1 hiccup. with a couple of tweaks to the settings i've now got very high running an average 67FPS in game. overclocking the card to 1500 on the core is only netting me around 3fps extra. Wish people would stop criticising the game based on the inbuilt benchmark tool.

Still don't think it's a badly coded mess like some of you imply, have you seen the amount of tessellation and shadows going on in some areas. especially when there are a lot of NPC's on the screen just look at the detailing on the uniforms.

yes it has a few flaws mouse sensitivity is not great and moving the mouse left to right seems to be a bit jumpy. does not feel smooth would be a better explanation.Have you lot tried turning on triple buffering?
 
N19h7m4r3 said:
Not that I noticed, all I have is overall laggy performance as I'm barely hitting the mid 40's at Very High or Ultra.

So if there was stutter it would be masked by over overall terrible performance at those settings.

Ran the bench again at 1440p, but this time enabled tessellation.
Avg 39.1
Mins 33.4

Without Tess
Avg 51.4
Mins 41.7

Quite a nasty hit for enabling that.
Click to expand...

my point that the game uses absurd amounts of tessellation, turn it off and you do get some really good gains in some areas.

just wish people would stop judging the game by the benchmark, i've not seen any one single place in game that is reflective of the benchmark
 
N19h7m4r3 said:
So if there was stutter it would be masked by over overall terrible performance at those settings.
Click to expand...
Right, makes sense. Thanks.

Would be interesting seeing comparison with tessellation on and off for Nvidia vs Hawaii, Fiji and Polaris to see whether there's been improvements there at all.
 
bigjimmyauk said:
my point that the game uses absurd amounts of tessellation, turn it off and you do get some really good gains in some areas.

just wish people would stop judging the game by the benchmark, i've not seen any one single place in game that is reflective of the benchmark
Click to expand...

Simply read my previous post, I get at best 2-4 more fps than compared to the benchmark in the actual game.

It's very accurate for my system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom