Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > Video Cards and Graphics

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-30-2013, 09:22 AM   #51
Ibra
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 184
Default



Lol, on high settings HD 7970 GHz can't win against GTX 660 Ti.
Ibra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 09:30 AM   #52
Haserath
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 736
Default

Needs a few driver updates to see where things land performance wise.
Haserath is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 09:54 AM   #53
Elfear
VC&G Moderator
 
Elfear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 6,149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibra View Post

Lol, on high settings HD 7970 GHz can't win against GTX 660 Ti.
I'm not too worried. Game is still in beta so AMD and NV have awhile to improve drivers.

Way to make it into another flamewar though.
__________________
4770k@4.7Ghz | Maximus VI Hero | 2x290@1150/1450 | 16GB DDR3 | Custom H20
Elfear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 09:55 AM   #54
Pottuvoi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 262
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sontin View Post
Forward+ is not resolving the performance problem. In Dirt:Showdown AMD cards lost 40%+ and nVidia cards over 60%. Forward+ is only good to win benchmarks but not to help to make MSAA a lot more useful in the latest game engines.
Indeed the advantages of forward+ lie elsewhere.
IE. Ability to render transparent surfaces using same lighting methods as anything else is a big win.
Pottuvoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 10:20 AM   #55
VulgarDisplay
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sontin View Post
Sure, because then your company can actually win a DX11 benchmark with MSAA when bandwidth is not the limiting factor.

Forward+ is not resolving the performance problem. In Dirt:Showdown AMD cards lost 40%+ and nVidia cards over 60%. Forward+ is only good to win benchmarks but not to help to make MSAA a lot more useful in the latest game engines.
Making MSAA work on the entire scene is not useful?
VulgarDisplay is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 10:52 AM   #56
Red Hawk
Platinum Member
 
Red Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,011
Default

Yeah, this just seems like the "MSAA" that's used in Battlefield 3 and Far Cry 3 -- it's there, but it works very selectively because deferred rendering engines do not play nice with MSAA, and even then it still incurs a large performance hit. Forward+ rendering which allows similar lighting as deferred rendering but also also MSAA to be applied to the whole frame with a reasonable performance hit really needs to catch on.
__________________
Desktop: Thermaltake V-4 Black case | Gigabyte GA-Z68AP-D3 | Core i5 2500k @ 4 GHz | ASUS Radeon HD 7870 DirectCU II 2 GB @ 1110 MHz | 8 GB G.Skill DDR3 RAM 1333 MHz | 120GB OCZ Vertex 3 SSD & Western Digital 500 GB HDD | Antec 650w PSU | Acer 1080p 60 Hz 21.5'' | Windows 8.1 Professional
Laptop: ASUS K52Jr-X5 | Core i3-350m @ 2.26 GHz| Mobility Radeon HD 5470 1 GB @ 750 MHz 4 GB DDR3 RAM | 90 GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD | 1366x768 15.6'' | Windows 8.1 Professional
Red Hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:06 PM   #57
chimaxi83
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibra View Post


Lol, on high settings HD 7970 GHz can't win against GTX 660 Ti.
Et tu, Balla?
__________________
Mine: 3770K - MSI Z77 MPower - Gigabyte 290 CF - 16GB Samsung - M4 256GB/Caviar Black 1TB - XFX Core Pro 1050W - NZXT Switch 810 - Auria IPS 27" 2560x1440 - Custom loop
Kiddo: 3770K - MSI Z77A-G43 - 7870 Tahiti LE - 8GB Samsung - M4 64GB/Caviar Black 1TB - Antec Neo Eco 620W - HAF 922
chimaxi83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:09 PM   #58
lavaheadache
Diamond Member
 
lavaheadache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cape Cod MA
Posts: 6,515
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chimaxi83 View Post
Et tu, Balla?
You know it's not him or else we would have gotten 470 tri sli benchies in comparison.

__________________
Video Card Specialist

sell me your 5950 Ultra

Heat 137-0-0 heatware 1 percentile
lavaheadache is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:12 PM   #59
Elfear
VC&G Moderator
 
Elfear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 6,149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lavaheadache View Post
You know it's not him or else we would have gotten 470 tri sli benchies in comparison.

__________________
4770k@4.7Ghz | Maximus VI Hero | 2x290@1150/1450 | 16GB DDR3 | Custom H20
Elfear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:12 PM   #60
notty22
Diamond Member
 
notty22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Beantown
Posts: 3,312
Default

Driver updates will recover alot of performance. I played without AA, and dropping a couple settings from mostly high, allows a fast cpu to get good(playable) fps. Then I try/up them one at a time, to see what is worth it to me or not.`
__________________
i5 4670K@4100mhz, 32GB Kingston 1600,H50
MSI GTX 970 gaming
Seasonic SS-760XP2
240gb SSD, Win 8.1
Let's make sure history never forgets... the name... 'Enterprise'. Picard out.
notty22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:39 PM   #61
3lackDeath
Junior Member
 
3lackDeath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10
Angry

Lol, on high settings HD 7970 GHz can't win against GTX 660 Ti. [/QUOTE]

It's really embarrassing is it what it is, to think the game is not playable on high with msaa 4x
3lackDeath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:48 PM   #62
lavaheadache
Diamond Member
 
lavaheadache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cape Cod MA
Posts: 6,515
Default

dp
__________________
Video Card Specialist

sell me your 5950 Ultra

Heat 137-0-0 heatware 1 percentile
lavaheadache is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:48 PM   #63
lavaheadache
Diamond Member
 
lavaheadache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cape Cod MA
Posts: 6,515
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lackDeath View Post
Lol, on high settings HD 7970 GHz can't win against GTX 660 Ti.
It's really embarrassing is it what it is, to think the game is not playable on high with msaa 4x[/QUOTE]

It's in BETA for pete's sake...
__________________
Video Card Specialist

sell me your 5950 Ultra

Heat 137-0-0 heatware 1 percentile
lavaheadache is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:56 PM   #64
BrightCandle
Diamond Member
 
BrightCandle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,763
Default

This has been a common trend all year actually. A lot of games in beta and on day of release performed better on NVidia and then AMD releases a drive/profile and the games performance was then better than NVidia's. I don't know why it is AMD insistes on releasing their profiles after the game is out and NVidia does it before but that has kind of been the way its worked for a couple of years now. I have no doubt the 7970GE will end up faster than the 680, and certainly better than the 660ti/670 once AMD gets around to fixing it.
__________________
I no longer frequent these forums.
BrightCandle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 01:10 PM   #65
ShadowOfMyself
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,223
Default

So sad (regarding the AA performance)

Im getting used to playing without AA already... Midrange cards get slaughtered with AA on any recent game in high settings, sigh

Anyway, I hope this is like Crysis 2 and looks great even with the settings on "high" (which should be the minimum option?) so I can actually play it
__________________
Let's say we're advanced enough in few thousands years. And we simply build a stick that's 2.5 LY long. And then simply move it 5 inches forward. It is fully testable.
ShadowOfMyself is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 01:13 PM   #66
thilanliyan
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,152
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrightCandle View Post
This has been a common trend all year actually. A lot of games in beta and on day of release performed better on NVidia and then AMD releases a drive/profile and the games performance was then better than NVidia's. I don't know why it is AMD insistes on releasing their profiles after the game is out and NVidia does it before but that has kind of been the way its worked for a couple of years now. I have no doubt the 7970GE will end up faster than the 680, and certainly better than the 660ti/670 once AMD gets around to fixing it.
If this is a TWIMTBP game, why are you surprised that on launch it performs better on nVidia hardware? It would be a real surprise if it DIDN'T.

Did all the recent Gaming Evolved titles play worse on AMD hardware on launch? I have no idea.
__________________
Intel 4670k
Asus Z87-Expert
8GB Kingston HyperX DDR3-1600
3x7950 3gb (mining)
Corsair HX1050 Gold

Last edited by thilanliyan; 01-30-2013 at 01:18 PM.
thilanliyan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 01:41 PM   #67
RussianSensation
Elite Member
 
RussianSensation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 14,567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sontin View Post
Sure, because then your company can actually win a DX11 benchmark with MSAA when bandwidth is not the limiting factor.
There is nearly a 20 fps drop on the GTX680 by forcing MSAA. You do not see how this is a problem but instead you read my post as me comparing HD7970 to GTX680 and calling MSAA unfair?

Are you serious right now? I am simply commenting that the performance hit with MSAA on both brands is way too high. It's time developers rethink deferred lighting game engines because obviously as AMD has shown with a forward+ model in the Leo Demo, you can retain MSAA and minimize the performance hit. Maybe you forgot that in the past you could enable 4xMSAA with a 15% performance hit and even 8xMSAA worked fine. Those days are gone.

Everyone here knows I favour price/performance. My HD7970s were free because of bitcoin mining and are saving up more $ for a free upgrade to 8970s/9970s (as long as BTC continues). Now you can keep accusing me of being AMD-biased all you want (which you seem to be doing no matter what I post), and I'll just keep saving $$$ every generation and spending it on other things in life. Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sontin View Post
Forward+ is not resolving the performance problem. In Dirt:Showdown AMD cards lost 40%+ and nVidia cards over 60%. Forward+ is only good to win benchmarks but not to help to make MSAA a lot more useful in the latest game engines.
Yes it is. Let's stop pulling #s out of thin air.



16% performance hit going from 0xMSAA to 4xMSAA at 1080P on 7970GE, 18% hit at 1600P.

You seem to be confusing the performance hit associated with turning on the Global Illumination setting in this game with the performance hit of 0xMSAA vs. 4xMSAA. The forward+ MSAA fixes the MSAA performance hit normally incurred under deferred + MSAA game engines.
__________________
i5 2500k | Asus P8P67 Rev.3 | Sapphire Dual-X HD7970 1150/1800 1.174V CFX | G.Skill Sniper 8GB DDR3-1600 1.5V
SeaSonic Platinum 1000W | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB + HITACHI 7K1000.B 1TB | Windows 7
Westinghouse 37" 1080P | X-Fi Platinum | Logitech Z5300E 5.1

Last edited by RussianSensation; 01-30-2013 at 02:03 PM.
RussianSensation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 02:08 PM   #68
RussianSensation
Elite Member
 
RussianSensation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 14,567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pottuvoi View Post
Indeed the advantages of forward+ lie elsewhere.
IE. Ability to render transparent surfaces using same lighting methods as anything else is a big win.
The problem with deferred rendering (DR) is that it brings a list of cons in the form of heavier performance hit when handling multiple materials, and because it usually discards the geometry data it can't really apply proper MultiSampling antialiasing.

One solution is to run a compute shader to apply the lighting to the Forward Rendered image, instead of the usual way of "Render everything 1 time for each light source in the scene!" This way you save a great deal of passes, save on memory by not needing the G buffer (the geometry is always present on a Forward Renderer, instead of discarded), and you also get the proper MSAA that's been included on every traditional GPU design in the last 10 years. Finally, multiple materials can be used without the big performance & memory hit of the DR. All it takes is compute time for the new compute shader.

It's pretty obvious why NV isn't promoting forward+ lighting game engines with developers. Their existing GK104 GPU generation tanks when Compute shaders need to do any work. Additionally, because traditional MSAA doesn't work properly with deferred lighting engines, it results in an exponentially large performance hit on AMD cards. The end result is both NV and AMD GPUs take a huge performance hit with MSAA but NV tends to do a little better. The problem is we gamers suffer because even with NV there is still a > 30% performance hit most of the time.

Forward+ lighting model + compute shaders allow you to bring back the traditional MSAA approach, and you minimize the performance hit at the same time.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost...66&postcount=5

I am personally of the view that software developers should adopt superior programming methods that maximize image quality and performance, if these alternatives are available, even if it means for GPU developers to rethink their hardware designs (i.e., focus more on compute for example). Recently, the intermediary solution has been the introduction of FXAA/MLAA/TXAA filters which especially in TXAA's case blur details in games. These are not great solutions because they are trying to fix what is a fundamentally flawed approach to game engine design in the first place. IMO instead of trying to come up with some hybrid AA filters, they should just revamp how the engines are coded for in the first place and traditional MSAA can be properly applied to the entire scene. When you have a situation where a 2013 game suffers from a 33-52% performance hit when forcing just 4xMSAA, it is a problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pottuvoi View Post
This pretty much shows that traditional MSAA has been surpassed in every way.
SMAA done properly with subsamples and temporal information looks a lot better and so does TXAA especially when in motion.
While TXAA reduces pixel crawl, it blurs the entire picture and thus reduces details. TXAA, without tweaks in SweetFX, has atrocious native IQ filter quality. It's like playing a game with a wrong set of prescription glasses.

A clear example of why TXAA is inferior to MSAA is Black Ops 2 or the Secret World on the PC:

COD BO2 8xMSAA
COD BO2 4xTXAA

Now if you want to spend $800+ on high-end GPUs and turn your game to look more like a blurry console title, by all means. In that case, I'd rather save $400 and get a PS4...

Your opinion that MSAA is outdated even contradicts the IQ in Crysis 3, where MSAA clearly provides superior IQ to FXAA or TXAA.

FXAA 4x (anti-aliasing doesn't even work)
TXAA 4x (significant detail texture quality degradation/blurring)
MSAA 4x (way better IQ than FXAA without any of the blurfest of TXAA).

Quote:
Originally Posted by SirPauly View Post
I'm interested in the x2 TXAA setting.
See above. TXAA is a blurfest, as usual.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibra View Post
Lol, on high settings HD 7970 GHz can't win against GTX 660 Ti.
Ironically none of the single GPU cards are playable either. 28 fps min and 36 fps avg on 680? This again goes back to the unreasonable performance hit of MSAA in this deferred lighting game engine.

At 1080P VHQ with 4xMSAA, neither the GTX680 nor the HD7970GE seems to be fast enough with current drivers.

__________________
i5 2500k | Asus P8P67 Rev.3 | Sapphire Dual-X HD7970 1150/1800 1.174V CFX | G.Skill Sniper 8GB DDR3-1600 1.5V
SeaSonic Platinum 1000W | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB + HITACHI 7K1000.B 1TB | Windows 7
Westinghouse 37" 1080P | X-Fi Platinum | Logitech Z5300E 5.1

Last edited by RussianSensation; 01-30-2013 at 02:54 PM.
RussianSensation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 02:16 PM   #69
moonbogg
Diamond Member
 
moonbogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,868
Default

At least its not unplayable. I might check out the beta just to see how my 670's do.
__________________
3930K @ 4.3 - 16GB DDR3 @ 1600 - 2X GTX 670 SLI(2GB) - SAMSUNG 830 SSD - 1920X1080 @ 120HZ - WINDOWS 8.1
moonbogg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 02:26 PM   #70
blackened23
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,556
Default

Maybe it's too early to declare winners and losers?

The game is not released, drivers are in beta, dust hasn't settled yet.
blackened23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 03:06 PM   #71
Ajay
Platinum Member
 
Ajay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: NH, USA
Posts: 2,111
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grooveriding View Post
Thanks, it works now.



Everything on high with 4xMSAA is not playable for me on my setup imo. Too many dips to 40FPS. This is with SMAA MGPU on.
Since it's in beta, the exe was probably compiled with the debug and symbols flags tagged on, that probably causing somewhat of an FPS hit. That, and they are probably still optimizing GFX during the beta.
__________________
Asus P6T V2 Deluxe Ci7 970 @ 4.2GHz w/HT, Corsair H100i, 2x240GB SanDisk Extreme RAID0, 2x WD VR 300GB RAID0, MSI GTX 680 PE @ 1110MHz, 12GB G.Skill Riojaws DDR3 1600, Corair 850HX, Corsair 800D case. Win7 x64 Ultimate. Dell U2412M.
Heatware
Ajay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 03:14 PM   #72
SirPauly
Diamond Member
 
SirPauly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,854
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RussianSensation View Post

I am personally of the view that software developers should adopt superior programming methods that maximize image quality and performance, if these alternatives are available, even if it means for GPU developers to rethink their hardware designs (i.e., focus more on compute for example).
Personally pleased by the sheer flexibility of in-game AA options available.
SirPauly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 03:22 PM   #73
moonbogg
Diamond Member
 
moonbogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,868
Default

I just realized that if this game runs 3D as well as crysis 2 does, I might have a unique experience ahead of me with this one. I have never played a game through in 3D and this might be the perfect candidate. Interest level elevated from 4 to 7 out of a possible 10.
__________________
3930K @ 4.3 - 16GB DDR3 @ 1600 - 2X GTX 670 SLI(2GB) - SAMSUNG 830 SSD - 1920X1080 @ 120HZ - WINDOWS 8.1
moonbogg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 03:25 PM   #74
RussianSensation
Elite Member
 
RussianSensation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 14,567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SirPauly View Post
Personally pleased by the sheer flexibility of in-game AA options available.
You completely evaded the point I made. FXAA and TXAA provide worse IQ in this game than MSAA. If this game was a forward+ with a traditional 15-18% MSAA performance hit, you wouldn't even need to think about using FXAA/TXAA as a last resort. FXAA/MLAA and TXAA are 'poor man's AA modes' in this case. The only reason you'd use those in Crysis 3 is if your GPU can't handle MSAA/SMAA/SSAA.

__________________
i5 2500k | Asus P8P67 Rev.3 | Sapphire Dual-X HD7970 1150/1800 1.174V CFX | G.Skill Sniper 8GB DDR3-1600 1.5V
SeaSonic Platinum 1000W | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB + HITACHI 7K1000.B 1TB | Windows 7
Westinghouse 37" 1080P | X-Fi Platinum | Logitech Z5300E 5.1

Last edited by RussianSensation; 01-30-2013 at 03:36 PM.
RussianSensation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 03:27 PM   #75
snarfbot
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 72
Default

t2x and 4x smaa also reduce temporal aliasing, ie pixel crawl. i didnt get the beta however, can anyone compare those modes with txaa high in terms of performance hit?

afaik this is the first game to use it natively, so it should be an interesting comparison.
snarfbot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.