[pcper] frame metering review 690 vs. 7970 CF vs. Titan

[Keysplayr]

the 690, 7970 crossfire, and Titan are similar price setups. Or, do you think that's just coincidence?

What does it have to do with frame metering. 2x GTX660Ti is about 550 to 600 bucks. So are two 7950s. So what? Has nothing to do with frame metering. We aren't discussing cost here anyway and I don't know why you feel the need to introduce, or possibly derail.

 

[Skurge]

Comes with 5 runt frames instead of just 1

Would be nice to see triple cards because for a while we have been hearing that three helps reduce the problem and I would kind of like to see that considering that 3 7970s are the same price as 2 680s.

When did this happen?

 

[Keysplayr]

When did this happen?

It didn't.

 

[Fx1]

It didn't.

Its not quite the price of 2 but its not far off.

£275 x 3 = 825.

2x 365 = 730.

But you do get 6 £30 games which is easily £120 on ebay.

 

[omeds]

Maybe in the UK. Here in Oz 7970's are $400 and 680's are ~$450.

 

[Keysplayr]

Back on topic perhaps?

 

[USER8000]

TR tests FCAT and FRAPs together:

http://techreport.com/review/24553/inside-the-second-with-nvidia-frame-capture-tools

Despite what AMD and Nvidia says,it still seems to hold up reasonably well.

 

[omeds]

What holds up well? Fraps? no not at all. Its only the results labeled as "filtered" which have had the runt frames removed. The results labeled as FCAT are still the total FPS like Fraps results.

 

[Grooveriding]

Its not quite the price of 2 but its not far off.

£275 x 3 = 825.

2x 365 = 730.

But you do get 6 £30 games which is easily £120 on ebay.

Cheapest I have seen 7970s in Canada is $380, and I think the cheapest 680 I have seen is $450, so $900 vs $1140 here. Although for a while the 680 was at $500, so it would of been closer.

I know nvidia hardware is significantly more expensive than AMD hardware in Europe though, so AMD tends to look a lot more appealing in Europe and nvidia looks pretty overpriced.

 

[Cloudfire777]

Maybe in the UK. Here in Oz 7970's are $400 and 680's are ~$450.

LOL exactly. GTX 680 goes for $469 and the 7970GHz goes for $429 @ NewEgg

2x680 = $938
3x7970Ghz = $1317

 

[BrightCandle]

TR tests FCAT and FRAPs together:

http://techreport.com/review/24553/inside-the-second-with-nvidia-frame-capture-tools

Despite what AMD and Nvidia says,it still seems to hold up reasonably well.

Infact Fraps shows up problems better than FCAT in some cases. They have a video of Skyrim and a 50ms jolt that is clearly visible in the high speed video and in the fraps trace but the FCAT data only shows a tiny variation. It goes to show that fraps catches problems in animation very well indeed and FCAT actually smooths out the data and really all it shows is the runt frame issue.

Once the runt frames are solved I am not really sure people will care about FCAT. It will be a basic check to make sure the game puts out all the frames and does so relatively smoothly but the focus on the problem remains on inconsistent input to the graphics pipeline causing game stutters.

 

[Silverforce11]

disappointed. Crossfire is broken when not using vsync. Vsync is a poor fix, without vsync you can play at settings that only average near 60 FPS and sometimes drop as low as 40 fps and it is still smooth. With vsync, any drops below 60 FPS display as 20 or 30 FPS which to me is very noticeable meaning you need to play at settings that maintain 60 FPS. I really believe that AMD has held off releasing the 7990 because of this issue and agree with Ryan @ PCPer that this needs to be fixed before this card comes out.

Not sure why you all keep saying this, Radeon Pro has a very functional dynamic vsync for radeons, it does NOT drop to 20/30 fps when it goes below 60, its the same as NV's adaptive vsync. Or you can enable frame interval smoothing if you prefer "smoother frames" but with more "latency" (which according to AT's article, is NV's default driver setting).

It takes a few minutes to download and setup and CF users get all the benefit while being faster and cheaper.

 

[Fx1]

LOL exactly. GTX 680 goes for $469 and the 7970GHz goes for $429 @ NewEgg

2x680 = $938
3x7970Ghz = $1317

No one is talking about GHZ. Do you understand? Why would you pay for a factory overclock?

There are 7970's clocked at 1010mhz for £275 rather than £340 for GHZ editions

 

[omeds]

Not sure why you all keep saying this, Radeon Pro has a very functional dynamic vsync for radeons, it does NOT drop to 20/30 fps when it goes below 60, its the same as NV's adaptive vsync. Or you can enable frame interval smoothing if you prefer "smoother frames" but with more "latency" (which according to AT's article, is NV's default driver setting).

It takes a few minutes to download and setup and CF users get all the benefit while being faster and cheaper.

Or, you could just get hardware that does what its meant to do.

None of those are an option for many, as dynamic vsync still applies vsync, which defeats the purpose of not wanting vsync. I want a smooth 125fps cap in online games, not 60fps vsync. Also, dynamic and adaptive vsync simply disable vsync when under the refresh rate, meaning its not a fix at all for CFX when your fps are below the refresh rate.

 

[Silverforce11]

Or, you could just get hardware that does what its meant to do.

None of those are an option for many, as dynamic vsync still applies vsync, which defeats the purpose of not wanting vsync. I want a smooth 125fps cap in online games, not 60fps vsync. Also, dynamic and adaptive vsync simply disable vsync when under the refresh rate, meaning its not a fix at all for CFX when your fps are below the refresh rate.

It IS a fix, because CF without vsync has high variation in frame intervals causing stutters, but enabling normal vsync may fix the frame interval but if it drops below 60fps, it auto jumps to 30 fps due to vsync. Dynamic vsync prevents this dip to 30 fps, and anytime it gets above 60 fps, it caps the frames to give smooth intervals.

The dip to 30fps used to be fixed with tripple buffering, but for some, that adds too much latency to their liking, dynamic vsync does not have this drawback.

If you want 125 fps cap, radeon pro has that option as well, along with smooth frame intervals.

So get with the program. CF is not as good as SLI out of the box, but with a few minutes and a free software, its faster & cheaper. ie. For experienced users only.

 

[Fx1]

Or, you could just get hardware that does what its meant to do.

None of those are an option for many, as dynamic vsync still applies vsync, which defeats the purpose of not wanting vsync. I want a smooth 125fps cap in online games, not 60fps vsync. Also, dynamic and adaptive vsync simply disable vsync when under the refresh rate, meaning its not a fix at all for CFX when your fps are below the refresh rate.

So you want screen tearing instead?

Also 120hz V sync is 8ms delay and no you wont notice that at all.

 

[omeds]

It IS a fix, because CF without vsync has high variation in frame intervals causing stutters, but enabling normal vsync may fix the frame interval but if it drops below 60fps, it auto jumps to 30 fps due to vsync. Dynamic vsync prevents this dip to 30 fps, and anytime it gets above 60 fps, it caps the frames to give smooth intervals.

The dip to 30fps used to be fixed with tripple buffering, but for some, that adds too much latency to their liking, dynamic vsync does not have this drawback.

If you want 125 fps cap, radeon pro has that option as well, along with smooth frame intervals.

No, its not a fix if you don't want to use vsync, nor is it a fix if fps drop under your refresh rate as it simply disables vsync. No matter which way you slice it, its still not going to give a lot of users the results the want.

So get with the program. CF is not as good as SLI out of the box, but with a few minutes and a free software, its faster & cheaper. ie. For experienced users only.

I lol'd :awe:

 

[omeds]

So you want screen tearing instead?

Also 120hz V sync is 8ms delay and no you wont notice that at all.

No I dont want tearing, but I dont want vsync in online fps either. Using a 125 or 250 cap vastly reduces tearing btw, aswell as other benefits without the drawbacks of vsync.

I notice input lag with vsync at 120hz. Vsync isnt an option for online FPS afaic.

 

[Fx1]

No, its not a fix if you don't want to use vsync, nor is it a fix if fps drop under your refresh rate as it simply disables vsync. No matter which way you slice it, its still not going to give a lot of users the results the want.



I lol'd :awe:

If you cant run your game at 60 FPS consistently with CF then there is something wrong. You have the settings to high for your GPU.

 

[omeds]

I agree, it was silverfox that brought up dropping under 60fps with vsync. I want a 125 cap, or 250, 60 is useless to me unless its a single player game, in which case I'd happily use a 59 fps cap + vsync.


Secondly, what about if you have a 120hz display? dynamic vsync is useless if fps drop under 120.

 

[boxleitnerb]

If you cant run your game at 60 FPS consistently with CF then there is something wrong. You have the settings to high for your GPU.

Not, definitely not. Performance varies. In some scenes you may have 40fps, in others 120fps. Would you really leave image quality on the table to always have 60+ fps? Some people are perfectly happy with 50fps for example, me included, especially when you witness those 50fps let's say only 40% of the time. Even if it's 58 or 59 - vsync is useless in those cases when it comes to alleviating CF stuttering. There is no perfect solution. Frame limiters, vsync...they are all just band aids and don't effectively solve the problem in all circumstances.

 

[Fx1]

Not, definitely not. Performance varies. In some scenes you may have 40fps, in others 120fps. Would you really leave image quality on the table to always have 60+ fps? Some people are perfectly happy with 50fps for example, me included. Even if it's 58 or 59 - vsync is useless in those cases when it comes to alleviating CF stuttering. There is no perfect solution.

Rubbish.

If you have a 7970 CF and you cant hit 60 FPS all the time then something is wrong. Adaptive Vsync will sort out the times when you might drop into the 50's but personally i have never seen it.

From my experience there isnt much difference in the feature you turn on that makes your FPS go from 60 to 40 FPS. Its usualy some AA turned up to high or shadows on ultra.

No V Sync = tearing and this is worse than anything

 

[omeds]

Depends, what if you use eyefinity? There are games 7970CFX dip under 60 on a single display anyway. Or what if you use 120hz? Its not really a solution for all, but sure it can help in certain situations. Would just be better that its sorted it out, which they plan to do, the current situation is far from ideal even with work arounds.

 

[Fx1]

Depends, what if you use eyefinity? There are games 7970CFX dip under 60 on a single display anyway. Or what if you use 120hz? Its not really a solution for all, but sure it can help in certain situations. Would just be better that its sorted it out, which they plan to do, the current situation is far from ideal even with work arounds.

Eyefinity requires compromises and that means you shouldnt have an issue going from Ultra to Very High on a few settings.

V sync plus setting your games up optimally means a fluid 60 FPS and no tearing or stuttering or slow downs.

I have far cry 3 setup so it never drops below 55fps at 1900x1200 on one 7970. Its on ultra settings with just 2xAA and Very high shadows. Its not that hard and the quality is perfect.

 

[omeds]

Thats great, I also have Farcry3 set up for 60fps vsync at 1440p ultra with 4xMSAA and it never dips below 60 either. Well actually 59 as I use a 59fps cap + vsync. Still doesnt have anything to do with scenarios when I want 125 or 250 fps caps, use 120hz, eyefinity etc.

Point is your solution doesnt offer any flexibility. You are basically saying if you want 7970CFX you are limited to 60fps vsync, on a single display unless you lower your settings right down in many games.