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 02-09-2013, 01:31 PM   #26
Nintendesert
Diamond Member
 
Nintendesert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: LOLorado.
Posts: 7,761
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeymikec View Post
If I've had the Flash plugin crash 10 times in 10 years I would be surprised - when I say this, I don't mean "you're wrong / something you're doing is wrong", necessarily, but my wife's machine had a problem with Flash (painting issues, graphical corruptions in animation, crashing), which were fixed by downgrading Flash on her machine. Not an ideal solution, but a damn sight better than browsers crashing left, right and centre. Combine that with the Flashblock add-on for Firefox so you just enable Flash clips when you want them, and that should make things a bit more manageable. Her problem was with Firefox on Vista 64 and Flash. Keeping the latest FF version but downgrading Flash to 11.2 (IIRC) fixed it.


I had to turn off hardware acceleration years ago due to how it crashed all the time. Flash is such a turd.
__________________
TFP4Life!
Nintendesert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 01:43 PM   #27
BallaTheFeared
Diamond Member
 
BallaTheFeared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,128
Default

I've never had problems with flash TDR /\
BallaTheFeared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 02:54 PM   #28
RussianSensation
Elite Member
 
RussianSensation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 14,665
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeymikec View Post
If I've had the Flash plugin crash 10 times in 10 years I would be surprised - when I say this, I don't mean "you're wrong / something you're doing is wrong", necessarily, but my wife's machine had a problem with Flash (painting issues, graphical corruptions in animation, crashing), which were fixed by downgrading Flash on her machine. Not an ideal solution, but a damn sight better than browsers crashing left, right and centre. Combine that with the Flashblock add-on for Firefox so you just enable Flash clips when you want them, and that should make things a bit more manageable. Her problem was with Firefox on Vista 64 and Flash. Keeping the latest FF version but downgrading Flash to 11.2 (IIRC) fixed it.
Ya, I am not saying everyone has Flash issues but it has a history of giving problems regardless what GPU you use. Flash crapping out on Chrome is a common problem, regardless of GPU vendor. Chrome is my preferred browser at the moment which is why I notice it.

I can't wait until Flash disappears from this world. It's one thing Steve Jobs was right on about.

Adobe stops mobile Flash development, will focus on HTML5
http://www.techspot.com/news/46192-a...-on-html5.html

Adobe confirms it won't support Flash on Android 4.1, stops new Flash installs from Google Play on August 15th, 2012
http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/28/a...n-android-4-1/

1. Flash is proprietary. You have to buy tools and compiler to develop.
2. Flash is terribly optimized as in the compiled code is very inefficient.
__________________
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
RussianSensation is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 08:00 PM   #29
nitromullet
Diamond Member
 
nitromullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 8,674
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax83 View Post
So is the 8000 series coming out in the second quarter as rumored?
I have no idea. I just couldn't get excited about spending ~$800 on two cards that launched a year ago.
__________________
PC - Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H | Intel Core i5-4670K @ 4.0GHz | Phanteks PH-TC14PE | 16GB Kingston DDR3 1600
Radeon R9 290 Tri-X | Kingston V300 120GB SSD | HGST 2.5" 750GB & 500GB RAID 1 | Corsair AX850 | Lian Li PC-7A | Win 8.1 Pro
MacBook Pro 15" - Corsair Neutron 256GB SSD | 16GB G.Skill DDR3 1600 | MOTU Track 16 | JBL LSR305
Shared I/O - Deck Legend Blue | Logitech G500s | NEC PA271W
Console - Xbox 360 Elite
nitromullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 09:09 PM   #30
Will Robinson
Golden Member
 
Will Robinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,402
Cool

Balla said "
Quote:
It should also be noted that current the 690, a dual gpu is the best card of it's type on the market.
How about this bad boy...kinda demoralizing if you have a 690...
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/...1#.URcN62chQ-V
__________________
Intel CPUs and AMD GPUs.


Will Robinson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 09:30 PM   #31
chimaxi83
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Robinson View Post
Balla said "How about this bad boy...kinda demoralizing if you have a 690...
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/...1#.URcN62chQ-V
The 690 is about $500 cheaper though, so price/performance makes 690 better
__________________
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 02-09-2013, 10:18 PM   #32
Will Robinson
Golden Member
 
Will Robinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,402
Cool

Blimey,I'll say!
Ugh $1500 is wicked expensive...still...if you note Balla's quote...it owns the dual GPU market.
__________________
Intel CPUs and AMD GPUs.



Last edited by Will Robinson; 02-09-2013 at 10:24 PM.
Will Robinson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 10:30 PM   #33
BallaTheFeared
Diamond Member
 
BallaTheFeared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,128
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Robinson View Post
Balla said "How about this bad boy...kinda demoralizing if you have a 690...
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/...1#.URcN62chQ-V
lolz that card... I laugh every time I see it's puny little 120 rad.

You should have linked 7950 quad fire for $1100, or put it in a bundle for $1700 you'd have quad fire 7950's with EK custom water cooling (But I guess that wouldn't be part of the dual gpu market)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Robinson View Post
Blimey,I'll say!
Ugh $1500 is wicked expensive...still...if you note Balla's quote...it owns the dual GPU market.
lol yeah all 100 of them for the states, but hardware was never AMD's problem >.<

Last edited by BallaTheFeared; 02-09-2013 at 10:34 PM.
BallaTheFeared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 10:50 PM   #34
Tsaar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 228
Default

I would look at the games you play. I use a gtx 560 ti 448 and for the games I play (WoW, Skyrim, GTA, etc, etc) it actually performs very well even on my 2560x1440 monitor.

I upgraded to a 7950 on a great sale, and my FPS performance improvements were very small (even with a clean OS install). I am not saying the 7950 is bad, just for the games I am playing the AMD line is not quite as strong.

I actually returned that card and I am waiting for the 670 to drop below $300 with a custom cooler. Honestly the game that runs the worst for me is MOP. If I max it out I get around 30-40 FPS in the MOP zones, and I feel every frame.

The other games I am playing right now (Sleeping Dogs, Skyrim, Dishonored, etc) all feel buttery smooth still. I don't max out AA, but at my resolution it doesn't seem to make a huge difference anyway.
Tsaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 04:17 AM   #35
Carfax83
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 2,889
Default

Sage advice all around guys. I'll consider everything you've said..

For now, I think I'll take RussianSensation's advice and wait until Crysis 3 and the Titan launches, so I can see how the various GPUs perform in the final version at max settings..

If the Titan retails for $899 as rumored, then the only way I'd buy it is if it came within striking distance of the 7970 CF; something which I think is unlikely, but we'll see..
__________________
Intel Core i7 4930K || AsRock Extreme6 x79 || 16 GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z DDR3 2400 10-12-11-31 CR1 || Samsung 850 Pro 1TB SSD || Western Digital Raptor 600GB || Asus 12x Blu-Ray burner || Gigabyte G1 GTX 970 SLI || Yamakasi Catleap Q270 SE || Creative Sound Blaster Zx || Windows 8.1 Pro x64 || Antec HCP-1200w Power Supply || CyberPower 1500VA 900w UPS backup
Carfax83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 11:12 PM   #36
Will Robinson
Golden Member
 
Will Robinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,402
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared View Post
lolz that card... I laugh every time I see it's puny little 120 rad.

You should have linked 7950 quad fire for $1100, or put it in a bundle for $1700 you'd have quad fire 7950's with EK custom water cooling (But I guess that wouldn't be part of the dual gpu market)



lol yeah all 100 of them for the states, but hardware was never AMD's problem >.<
And yet its benchmark scores for both temps and FPS are very solid so lol at the little radiator all you wish...you noted of course how it trounces GTX 680 SLI etc...
__________________
Intel CPUs and AMD GPUs.


Will Robinson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 11:24 PM   #37
raghu78
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,577
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax83 View Post
Sage advice all around guys. I'll consider everything you've said..

For now, I think I'll take RussianSensation's advice and wait until Crysis 3 and the Titan launches, so I can see how the various GPUs perform in the final version at max settings..

If the Titan retails for $899 as rumored, then the only way I'd buy it is if it came within striking distance of the 7970 CF; something which I think is unlikely, but we'll see..
good decision. wait for titan and crysis 3. Titan should be around 85% performance of GTX 690. but given its a single GPU and can be overclocked to match GTX 690 it might be the best option. HD 7970 Ghz CF will have more raw power but multi GPU issues like microstuttering make the Titan a more appealing choice.
raghu78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 03:44 AM   #38
Fx1
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsaar View Post
I would look at the games you play. I use a gtx 560 ti 448 and for the games I play (WoW, Skyrim, GTA, etc, etc) it actually performs very well even on my 2560x1440 monitor.

I upgraded to a 7950 on a great sale, and my FPS performance improvements were very small (even with a clean OS install). I am not saying the 7950 is bad, just for the games I am playing the AMD line is not quite as strong.

I actually returned that card and I am waiting for the 670 to drop below $300 with a custom cooler. Honestly the game that runs the worst for me is MOP. If I max it out I get around 30-40 FPS in the MOP zones, and I feel every frame.

The other games I am playing right now (Sleeping Dogs, Skyrim, Dishonored, etc) all feel buttery smooth still. I don't max out AA, but at my resolution it doesn't seem to make a huge difference anyway.
Im pretty sure if your getting "not much improvement" with a 7950 vs a 560 Ti then its something your doing or the rest of your rig since the 7950 smashes the 560 in every game
Fx1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 07:39 AM   #39
Eureka
Diamond Member
 
Eureka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,826
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fx1 View Post
Im pretty sure if your getting "not much improvement" with a 7950 vs a 560 Ti then its something your doing or the rest of your rig since the 7950 smashes the 560 in every game
Or that these qualifier words means nothing, such as "improvement" or "smashes". Depending on what settings you were on before, or what framerate you were pulling before, going from a 560 Ti to a 7950 might not be noticeable in actual usage. If you can already pull 50+ frames, you won't see a difference. He could also be CPU limited, which is another thing to look at.

But that being said, even with the 12.11 drivers in TPU's review, the 560Ti works out to around 65%-75% performance of a stock 7950 in terms of average framerates. There's a lot of talk about upgrades on this forum but less talk of what a worthwhile upgrade would be. The jump to a 670 is going to be roughly the same, with game differences coming in a factor in choosing a 670 vs a 7950.
__________________
San Francisco: ASRock Z87E-ITX | Intel i7-4770k | 16 GB DDR3 1600 | Gigabyte WF3 7950
Honolulu: Gigabyte MA790X-UD4P | AMD Phenom II X4 955 | 8GB DDR2 800 | Sapphire HD4890
London: ASRock 4CoreDual-VSTA | Intel Dual Core E7400 @ 3.1ghz | 2GB DDR2 667 | ATi X850 XT @ 540/590
Eureka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 07:57 AM   #40
BallaTheFeared
Diamond Member
 
BallaTheFeared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,128
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Robinson View Post
And yet its benchmark scores for both temps and FPS are very solid so lol at the little radiator all you wish...you noted of course how it trounces GTX 680 SLI etc...
Pity you can't just toss hardware at a software problem.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...x2,3329-9.html
BallaTheFeared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 09:11 AM   #41
chimaxi83
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared View Post
Pity you can't just toss hardware at a software problem.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...x2,3329-9.html
Lol nice cherry puck of a launch review. Son, I am disappoint. I'm sure you've seen the stutter/latency issue has been massively improved. [H], who routinely call out either vendor on crappy game play experience, gave the Ares II a gold award. What a software problem, eh?
__________________
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 02-11-2013, 09:41 AM   #42
BallaTheFeared
Diamond Member
 
BallaTheFeared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,128
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chimaxi83 View Post
Lol nice cherry puck of a launch review.
Do you have any others for 7990 or CF with frame latency testing? 10 months after the release of the base product isn't a "launch" review either

Quote:
Originally Posted by chimaxi83 View Post
Son, I am disappoint.
It's ok.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chimaxi83 View Post
I'm sure you've seen the stutter/latency issue has been massively improved.
For some games, in some titles, yes we've seen some improvements. For single cards, not dual gpu. Correct me if I'm wrong there, I'm just happy we can see the fixing of something that was never an issue as a positive, +1 AMD.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chimaxi83 View Post
[H], who routinely call out either vendor on crappy game play experience, gave the Ares II a gold award. What a software problem, eh?
Yes but this is a special case. You don't burn bridges when ASUS provides you with a limited run, $1500 *special* graphics card. You simply run it through it's paces, no mention at all of smoothness in the review. A lack of omission isn't an indirect removal of it. Considering it's been in everyone one of his CF vs SLI reviews, you'd think something so amazing as the first 7xxx CF setup he ever tested that was as smooth, or smoother than SLI would have been given, you know, a sentence, a six letter word couldn't have been all that hard to fit in his conclusion...
BallaTheFeared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 10:52 AM   #43
chimaxi83
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,612
Default

Oh, so it's a "special" case because it's a "special" card, so they don't mention gaming smoothness in this one particular instance, even though it's in EVERY OTHER REVIEW of theirs? Oh ok.

Why don't they worry about "burning bridges" when they point smoothness out every other time?

Gotta love people making crap up out of thin air to prove their point and try to reinforce their stance. Par for this course though
__________________
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 02-11-2013, 11:05 AM   #44
Fx1
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eureka View Post
Or that these qualifier words means nothing, such as "improvement" or "smashes". Depending on what settings you were on before, or what framerate you were pulling before, going from a 560 Ti to a 7950 might not be noticeable in actual usage. If you can already pull 50+ frames, you won't see a difference. He could also be CPU limited, which is another thing to look at.

But that being said, even with the 12.11 drivers in TPU's review, the 560Ti works out to around 65%-75% performance of a stock 7950 in terms of average framerates. There's a lot of talk about upgrades on this forum but less talk of what a worthwhile upgrade would be. The jump to a 670 is going to be roughly the same, with game differences coming in a factor in choosing a 670 vs a 7950.
If you are GPU limited then there is no comparison between a 560 ti and a 7950. This is the only real point to be made.
Fx1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 11:06 AM   #45
BallaTheFeared
Diamond Member
 
BallaTheFeared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,128
Default

I'm sorry, I thought you wanted my thoughts since you offered none of your own, nor any proof outside of what isn't there. Please, go ahead and link your frametime graphs with the ARES II or any recent CF frame time tests that directly counter the Tom's one I linked.

I'm sorry I said the 690 was the best dual gpu, but this has gone way off track. So unless you have proof that Nvidia doesn't produce a smoother experience in MGPU, I think we're done here.

Last edited by BallaTheFeared; 02-11-2013 at 11:32 AM.
BallaTheFeared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 04:56 PM   #46
RussianSensation
Elite Member
 
RussianSensation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 14,665
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendesert View Post
I had to turn off hardware acceleration years ago due to how it crashed all the time. Flash is such a turd.
Adobe warns of critical Flash vulnerability
Published on 8th February 2013 by Gareth Halfacree
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/bits/20...e-flash-vuln/1

"A similar emergency patch was released in August last year, itself following multiple emergency patches dating back to the launch of the software. Those who have Flash Player installed as a plug-in in their browser are advised to download and install the update as soon as possible, while users of Google Chrome and Microsoft Internet Explorer 10 will need to sit tight and wait for the companies to patch the built-in Flash Player code."

Flash needs to disappear ASAP.
__________________
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; 02-11-2013 at 04:59 PM.
RussianSensation is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 04:42 AM   #47
mikeymikec
Diamond Member
 
mikeymikec's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 4,356
Default

As much as I dislike Flash (and I very much appreciate that the number of "entirely Flash" websites has dropped sharply over the years), I think people need to be more aware of the fact that most big-name Internet-connecting software products have an awful lot of serious vulnerabilities that are being patched all the time. I doubt that Adobe Flash has a much different share of the vulnerability market (though admittedly they get targetted more because its cross-platform nature makes it a juicy target).

Admittedly I detest Adobe's lack of care and attention towards vulnerability patching, there have been in the past vulnerabilities that have gone unpatched for quite a few years.

However I think that certain companies' denial of the truth that there isn't yet a completely valid replacement for Flash makes getting rid of it a premature decision that hurts users. I think that the companies in question are more interested in their own reputation ("we've got a safe platform, honest!") rather than usability and feature parity in this situation.
mikeymikec is online now   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 04:56 AM.


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