Asking Ryan Smith of AT if a special examination could be done?

[Final8ty]

Seeing what Radeon Pro can do, I want AMD to make these features official, there's no point in arguing against it. There's simply NO good reason not to do it. Pay the author a small fee and get it done.

I think it was partially down to Radeon Pro why we have selectable Profiles in CCC.

 

[SirPauly]

http://www.anandtech.com/print/2731

"Early last week Charlie over at The Inquirer posted a story saying that a number of reviewers were cut out of the GeForce GTS 250 launch. We felt a bit hurt, by the time the story launched we weren't even asked to be briefed about the GTS 250. Cards had already gone out to other reviewers but we weren't on any lists. Oh, pout.

Magically, a couple of days after Charlie's article we got invited to a NVIDIA briefing and we had a GTS 250 to test. Perhaps NVIDIA was simply uncharacteristically late in briefing us about a new GPU launch. Perhaps NVIDIA was afraid we'd point out that it was nothing more than a 9800 GTX+ that ran a little cooler. Or perhaps we haven't been positive enough about CUDA and PhysX and NVIDIA was trying to punish us.

Who knows what went on at NVIDIA prior to the launch, we're here to review the card, but for what it's worth - thank you Charlie "

IMHO,

The possible reason for the name changing and relaunch from the 9800GTX+ to the GTS 250 was to create more awareness for that price-point. If one looks at their quarter beforehand their revenue dropped from a cliff and had excessive inventories. There may of been a perception that the 9800GTX+ couldn't compete with the HD 4850 -- this relaunch/renaming may of addressed that.

 

[omeds]

Seeing what Radeon Pro can do, I want AMD to make these features official, there's no point in arguing against it. There's simply NO good reason not to do it. Pay the author a small fee and get it done.

Problem is, then AMD has to officially provide support for the features, with Q&A etc. With the current standard of drivers from both camps, this adds a lot of extra time and overhead, and may not be practical for them atm.
Theres a reason these options are hidden in the drivers, and only exposed via 3rd party tools. Nv for exmaple will not officially support all the options in inspector, but has no issue with inspector exposing them for advanced users.

 

[blastingcap]

IMHO,

The possible reason for the name changing and relaunch from the 9800GTX+ to the GTS 250 was to create more awareness for that price-point. If one looks at their quarter beforehand their revenue dropped from a cliff and had excessive inventories. There may of been a perception that the 9800GTX+ couldn't compete with the HD 4850 -- this relaunch/renaming may of addressed that.

I think you are missing the point; I was responding to BryanW's post regarding sites needing to keep in the good graces of hardware vendors.

 

[SirPauly]

Understood, was just adding a bit to the GTS 250 example offered.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Not true, theres plenty of "average" gamers that want more performance which can only be achieved via MGPU, and can notice issues when they play. Most people dont want to have to mess around with 3rd party tools, finding the best frame caps and setting up profiles for each game. Many just want fast, smooth gameplay with minimal hassles.
I know plenty of pro and semi pro players that couldnt give 2 shiits about their hardware either, but will scream when its not smooth. They dont care about PC's, they care about gaming and want a trouble free experience. You see, most PC gaming enthusiasts are not computer hardware enthusiasts. Those are two different things.

It's also beneficial for both vendors to improve the MGPU plug and play expereience, meaning they can sell more hardware, instead of average consumers being put off by the issues and messing around required.

I dont see the problem anyway, whats it to you if both vendors improve in this area?

I'm sorry, but your argument still makes little sense. Any pro/semi pro player will not being using multi GPU simply because it does have these problems. If they are pro/semi pro they know about these things. These are the guys who modify game configs to lower settings drastically and improve visibility and performance in order to achieve greater performance.

You also state that it would be beneficial for both vendors to improve the Multi GPU plug and play experience which contradicts your argument that many people go SLi/Crossfire with no problems. Either way it's just a matter of opinion.

My personal opinion is that Mutli GPU is a hassle that only enthusiasts are willing to deal with because there are so many driver headaches involved with it that the average pc gamer is not going to mess with it. I didn't state that AMD and NVIDIA do not need improvement with their Multi GPU solutions. I basically said that the average PC gamer doesn't need, want, or most likely even know about anything SLi/Crossfire.

 

[Firestorm007]

This thread is hilarious & transparent as glass. I can't even take it seriously. I have a buddy with SLI and another with Crossfire, and besides a few driver quirks here and there, neither one is perceptively smoother than the other. If I see an issue, it's usually a crap game that runs like garbage on both vendors cards. I do find the AMD smear campaign funny though. Thanks for the laugh OP. :thumbsup:

 

[Zanovar]

This thread is hilarious & transparent as glass. I can't even take it seriously. I have a buddy with SLI and another with Crossfire, and besides a few driver quirks here and there, neither one is perceptively smoother than the other. If I see an issue, it's usually a crap game that runs like garbage on both vendors cards. I do find the AMD smear campaign funny though. Thanks for the laugh OP. :thumbsup:

Posts like this depress me,sigh there are shit load of them in this thread,jesus mother of wept cant you guys forget your nv vs amd for a bit and atleats pretend your enthusiasts for a bit?forget the Ops angle and see it what it is,as 1 or 2 have mentioned give me the data software or hardware measured(Throw in the tools too).

 

[chimaxi83]

This thread is hilarious & transparent as glass. I can't even take it seriously. I have a buddy with SLI and another with Crossfire, and besides a few driver quirks here and there, neither one is perceptively smoother than the other. If I see an issue, it's usually a crap game that runs like garbage on both vendors cards. I do find the AMD smear campaign funny though. Thanks for the laugh OP. p:thumbsup:

As a focus group member, smearing AMD (in any desperate way possible) is quite literally his job

 

[Zanovar]

As a focus group member, smearing AMD (in any desperate way possible) is quite literally his job

You love him really Chimaxi.

 

[omeds]

I'm sorry, but your argument still makes little sense. Any pro/semi pro player will not being using multi GPU simply because it does have these problems. If they are pro/semi pro they know about these things. These are the guys who modify game configs to lower settings drastically and improve visibility and performance in order to achieve greater performance.

You also state that it would be beneficial for both vendors to improve the Multi GPU plug and play experience which contradicts your argument that many people go SLi/Crossfire with no problems. Either way it's just a matter of opinion.

My personal opinion is that Mutli GPU is a hassle that only enthusiasts are willing to deal with because there are so many driver headaches involved with it that the average pc gamer is not going to mess with it. I didn't state that AMD and NVIDIA do not need improvement with their Multi GPU solutions. I basically said that the average PC gamer doesn't need, want, or most likely even know about anything SLi/Crossfire.

It makes perfect sense for people to want, and the vendors to provide, a hassle free experience out of the box without the need of 3rd party tools, you're just being difficult.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

It makes perfect sense for people to want, and the vendors to provide, a hassle free experience out of the box without the need of 3rd party tools, you're just being difficult.

I agree it makes sense for them provide a hassle free experience out of the box. SLi/Crossfire are not a hassle free experience, and that is a fact.

I'm sure any SLi/Crossfire use will corroborate this for me.

 

[Final8ty]

I agree it makes sense for them provide a hassle free experience out of the box. SLi/Crossfire are not a hassle free experience, and that is a fact.

I'm sure any SLi/Crossfire use will corroborate this for me.

Its never going to be by its very nature as its additive technology as games are not built upon it, but drivers are additive to the games and that even included single GPU, so there is no way it could be equal to the hassle of single GPU.

 

[omeds]

I agree it makes sense for them provide a hassle free experience out of the box. SLi/Crossfire are not a hassle free experience, and that is a fact.

I'm sure any SLi/Crossfire use will corroborate this for me.

But it should be, that's the point. You should be able to put the cards in, install drivers and go play games. Not have to mess around with 3rd party tools, create profiles etc.

Btw I know the BF3 world champions, and some of them do use MGPU.

 

[Final8ty]

But it should be, that's the point. You should be able to put the cards in, install drivers and go play games. Not have to mess around with 3rd party tools, create profiles etc.

Btw I know the BF3 world champions, and some of them do use MGPU.

It will never be unless the game devs program for multi GPU from the offset.

 

[omeds]

Vendors curtailing ms will certainly go a long way to improving out of the box experience though.

 

[chimaxi83]

But it should be, that's the point. You should be able to put the cards in, install drivers and go play games. Not have to mess around with 3rd party tools, create profiles etc.

Btw I know the BF3 world champions, and some of them do use MGPU.

None of them use a third party tool to overclock/overvolt/monitor their card(s) then, right?

 

[VulgarDisplay]

But it should be, that's the point. You should be able to put the cards in, install drivers and go play games. Not have to mess around with 3rd party tools, create profiles etc.

Btw I know the BF3 world champions, and some of them do use MGPU.

I honestly don't see BF3 as a competitive game. If they were world champions they would be playing on computers they do not own in a LAN environment.

 

[omeds]

None of them use a third party tool to overclock/overvolt/monitor their card(s) then, right?

They most probably do, but many dont. I have competed with guys that dont know anything about tweaking their PC and have to walk them through steps over vent, yet are awesome players. They just want more performance and throw video cards in because thats what they are told will achieve a solid 120+ or 250+ fps.

I dont see the problem with improving the experience out of the box, lots of gamers dont want to mess around with their PC, they pay big money and just want it to work. They only play on PC because the graphics and performance is better and prefer mouse and keyboard. PC gamer does not = PC hardware enthusiast, and many lack the time or motivation to learn all the nuances of PC hardware.

 

[omeds]

I honestly don't see BF3 as a competitive game. If they were world champions they would be playing on computers they do not own in a LAN environment.

Niether do I, but it was an example, many of them compete in other games too. Point is, they are top level players and many have MGPU in their personal systems, and use them to compete when not at LANS.

 

[Lepton87]

What if CF with radeon pro turns out to be faster AND smoother than SLI, while being significantly cheaper?

Btw, its not really a hypothetical question.. because its actually true, dynamic frame rate control in radeon pro is extremely precise at churning out constant frame times. Been testing it in all my games with fraps monitoring, its spectacular how consistent the frames are, even for a single gpu the improvement is there.

IMO, AMD needs this feature in CCC and not just in a 3rd party tool, even if they support its development, something this important should be official, period.

Where do I turn on that dynamic frame rate control in RADEON pro? I can't find that feature anywhere.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Where do I turn on that dynamic frame rate control in RADEON pro? I can't find that feature anywhere.

Make sure you have the Radeon Pro beta installed first. Then I believe it's in the advanced tab.

That being said for some reason I can't get dynamic framrates to work on my 7970 12.11 Beta 11.

I tried to force it to 60fps, but in BF3 it shows 85fps which is where I have it locked using the game's config. No idea why it will not override the game.

 

[Lepton87]

Make sure you have the Radeon Pro beta installed first. Then I believe it's in the advanced tab.

That being said for some reason I can't get dynamic framrates to work on my 7970 12.11 Beta 11.

I tried to force it to 60fps, but in BF3 it shows 85fps which is where I have it locked using the game's config. No idea why it will not override the game.

I have RadeonPro RC1 BUILD 1.1.0.6 and I can't find any newer builds. Any links?

 

[Mistwalker]

I don't care what your hardware preferences are, more information is good for the consumer. Period.

To that end, I endorse any testing which shows how the differing technologies deliver your experience, and I also like the idea of highlighting which (if any) 3rd party tools can be used to make that experience even better.

If RadeonPro is basically required to get the most out of your Crossfire setup, everyone should know! And I would want as much pressure as possible applied to AMD to incorporate those features, because at the end of the day, "out-of-the-box" absolutely matters. AMD not having the resources to support those features in-house, if true, would be a very unfortunate reality--and consumers should know. (I think they could at least get the groundwork started by adding them as unlockable "Advanced" features within the CCC, or something).

There's the question of presentation, which could be skewed to paint one company or another in a positive light, but more data = good IMHO.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

More data is great. Taking subjective conclusions and making them fact in order paint one hardware vendor in a negative light without any actual facts is not great.

It's like saying "My dad could beat up your dad." We now know how full of crap we were back on the playground when we said that, but some people failed to apply that realization to topics in their adult life.