Is AMD's Driver Overheard Issue Real?

[Leyawiin]

Specifically the increased CPU usage/lower performance with weaker CPUs with DX11. I'm piecing together a spare parts PC with an Phenom II X4 980 BE and was going to try a lower range AMD GPU this time around (something like an R9 270 or R7 370. Would I really be better off going with what should be a slower GTX 750 Ti (slower that is if it were paired with a power CPU)? Did the recent Catalyst driver release remedy this to any degree? I just don't want to hamstring the Phenom II any more that it already is.

 

[el etro]

Is real, didn't know it was this high.

Is improving very much over the time.

 

[TheProgrammer]

I think everyone has driver overhead with DX11/OGL and below. Vulkan/DX12 will resolve this across the board. Not sure I'd run out and buy a new VPU for a Phenom 2, even though I built a few systems with that chip and like it. Just use whatever you have laying around or whatever is cheapest.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

It's real, but at this point, with the improvements in 15.7, and looking at DX12 on the way, it'd be a mistake to go with a weaker Nvidia card IMO.

 

[Silverforce11]

In theory, AMD will hit the CPU bottleneck point in games sooner than NV. But most games, this bottleneck point can be in the hundreds of FPS. We've seen benches with 4 x Fury X QuadFire and the scaling is amazing, thus, it has not reached its CPU bottleneck in those games.

If you have a stronger GPU, if you encounter a CPU bottleneck at say 45 fps (possible on your old Phenom II in *some* games), but the GPU is not fully loaded 100%, you can always turn up the image quality settings or add MSAA and enjoy better image quality compared to a weaker GPU that cannot.

I've never been concerned with CPU bottlenecks due to this and in fact, gaming has always been GPU limited at the high quality settings.

 

[Leyawiin]

Thanks guys. The AMD GPUs just seem to be a better value vs performance in that range.

 

[casiofx]

It's real only on CPU bottlenecked games.
I sold a HD7870 to a friend and he used it with AMD Athlon II 635 and he played Assassin's Creed 4 smoothly at high settings @1080p.

 

[Leyawiin]

Oops, just remembered why I haven't bought a new AMD GPU in a couple years - no Adaptive Vertical Sync. Tried Radeon Pro's on an HD 7850 several years ago and there was screen tearing on the bottom on the screen with it. /sigh I really would like to go with them in that price range.

 

[futurefields]

If you have a stronger GPU, if you encounter a CPU bottleneck at say 45 fps (possible on your old Phenom II in *some* games), but the GPU is not fully loaded 100%, you can always turn up the image quality settings or add MSAA and enjoy better image quality compared to a weaker GPU that cannot.

Or you could get an NV GPU which will alleviate the CPU bottleneck and enjoy constant 60fps in more games.

When Advanced Warfare came out my 2500k @ 4ghz couldn't sustain 60fps with an AMD 7950 card installed. Even when I dropped settings all the way down and GPU usage was super low.

I took the AMD card out and installed an NVidia card, and can play all maps at the games max framerate (91 fps) constantly and my CPU not having to work nearly as hard in that game now.

 

[shady28]

Oops, just remembered why I haven't bought a new AMD GPU in a couple years - no Adaptive Vertical Sync. Tried Radeon Pro's on an HD 7850 several years ago and there was screen tearing on the bottom on the screen with it. /sigh I really would like to go with them in that price range.

AMD calls it frame rate target control, and it's a new feature that came out with 300 series cards. From the article link below, looks like they support Rx 2xx series now with their latest drivers.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2942...delivers-real-benefits-for-radeon-gamers.html


Normal Adaptive/NV is kinda useless imo.

The half-refresh adapative is great if you have a game that you keep 30+ fps but can't maintain 60+ fps on. I use it all the time on demanding titles with my 750 Ti.

 

[Leyawiin]

AMD calls it frame rate target control, and it's a new feature that came out with 300 series cards. From the article link below, looks like they support Rx 2xx series now with their latest drivers.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2942...delivers-real-benefits-for-radeon-gamers.html


Normal Adaptive/NV is kinda useless imo.

The half-refresh adapative is great if you have a game that you keep 30+ fps but can't maintain 60+ fps on. I use it all the time on demanding titles with my 750 Ti.

Isn't that the same as RivaTuner Statistics Server? Actually, I love Adaptive on my GTX 780 with a 60Hz Dell IPS. For some strange reason its smoother below 60 FPS than when Vsync is turned completely off.

 

[happy medium]

Yes its real and lower CPU power is better with NVidia cards. This is a fact.

A phenom II build clocked @ 3.8 or so can push a gtx960 ,@ 3.2 its good for a gtx750ti. I did my research on this subject. See my system.

 

[shady28]

Isn't that the same as RivaTuner Statistics Server? Actually, I love Adaptive on my GTX 780 with a 60Hz Dell IPS. For some strange reason its smoother below 60 FPS than when Vsync is turned completely off.

I thought RTSS was mostly for monitoring FPS and such.

The half-rate adaptive is accessible via Nvidia Control Panel, one of the adaptive options (not sure if that's what you're asking).

If I'm in a game where I keep 60+ fps 95% of the time, vsync alone does the job.

But most of the newer games with eye candy turned up, I start dropping into the 30-60 realm, which is where I use the half refresh rate 30hz adaptive. It definitely stops tearing and little annoying hitches disappear.

I believe with the new driver set for AMD, this is the first time AMD owners could do that from their control panel. Article says 'most' 200 series cards though, so it appears there are some where it doesn't work.

 

[Skurge]

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Systems/Quad-Core-Gaming-Roundup-How-Much-CPU-Do-You-Really-Need

 

[Leyawiin]

I thought RTSS was mostly for monitoring FPS and such.

It has a frame rate limiter as well. Is the one in the new Catalyst just a limiter or is it like Nvidia's adaptive vertical sync? I can get an R7 360 for $109.99 and the cheapest GTX 750 Ti is $139.99 (has a $20 rebate "card" though). The R7 360 should be just a little slower than a GTX 750 Ti (if both were on a powerful benchmarking PC).

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Systems/Quad-Core-Gaming-Roundup-How-Much-CPU-Do-You-Really-Need

Helpful read. Thanks! According to that those lower midrange cards are such a bottleneck that it doesn't matter what CPU you use with them.

 

[Headfoot]

It's real. What's fake is how much certain posters make mountains out of molehills. In the low-mid range GPU region, even on a Phenom II, you're going to be GPU limited at 1080p in new games.

Each dollar spent to increase CPU beyond oc'd C2Q/PhenomII in this budget range is better spent increasing GPU until you hit around 290/x range, in terms of FPS per dollar spent.

 

[shady28]

It has a frame rate limiter as well. Is the one in the new Catalyst just a limiter or is it like Nvidia's adaptive vertical sync? I can get an R7 360 for $109.99 and the cheapest GTX 750 Ti is $139.99 (has a $20 rebate "card" though). The R7 360 should be just a little slower than a GTX 750 Ti (if both were on a powerful benchmarking PC).



Helpful read. Thanks! According to that those lower midrange cards are such a bottleneck that it doesn't matter what CPU you use with them.

Someone with an AMD card would have to answer that. From the article, it looks like it is a limiter, not adaptive.

Looks like 750 Ti prices went up after a dip last month. At one point I was seeing 2GB 750 Ti for $109 in several places without rebate.

Right now you can get an MSI 750 Ti for $129 and get a mail in rebate for $30 ($99 with that). I also see a 260X for 110.99 or 99.99 using a $10 MIR, provided you have a 6-pin power connector. Both are at Newegg.

 

[SPBHM]

check the DX11 tests and it's obvious that the disadvantage is real

also if you check the digital foundry tests, in some tests the overhead is so bad that a 280 can be as slow as a 750 TI (or worse) in very CPU limited conditions


obviously if you use settings that are to high for the GPU to handle or extremely fast CPU you can hide this stuff (or tests that are not to heavy for the CPU)

 

[MeldarthX]

15.7s reduced cpu overhead by a bit in dx11 - I've got 290 and they are solid drivers -

750 TI is faster - that the 360; not by much though as its slightly faster than 260X - but better deal if you can snag one would be 270X; not sure prices on 370X though - looks like they might be similarly priced.

cheapest I've seen today at newegg - 360 139 - 159 for 265 with rebate; 169 for 750 TI with rebate and 189 for 370.....

where did you see them as low as you have? *not used to searching for US prices anymore as living in the UK now *

 

[Leyawiin]

where did you see them as low as you have? *not used to searching for US prices anymore as living in the UK now *

The R7 360 at both Newegg and Amazon are $109.99 for the 1200 Mhz Gigabyte OC "short" verion. The Evga GTX SC 750 Ti @ Amazon is $139.99 (also the short PCB). The motherboard has a tall copper heatsink that I put on some time ago and it blocks the rear of the first PCI-E slot so I want a short PCB version of whatever I buy. I've looked around at used, but have been burned a few times lately so I think I want new. At this point I'm leaning towards the AMD. I doubt it would be that much slower given the class of the two cards (GPU limited in anything).

Edit: Got the R7 360. It'll be fine for my purpose for this particular budget spare parts build and the price was fair.