PCPer on Crossfire problems in the Titan review

[Nintendesert]

This board has been in need of some heavy handed moderation until the BS stops for a long time.

As product releases get fewer and fewer every year the only thing we have in VC&G is BS.

 

[Lonyo]

Coming from you I laughed so hard. Almost like pot to kettle, only in this case pot is grasping to create a kettle.

I'm guessing you wouldn't say anything bad about AMD no matter what you experienced since your post history demonstrates just that.


There is a reason they continued to test SLI while not testing CF, it's because what you said was wrong.

Surely SLI is also creating frames you can't really see?
Is it better or worse to show 50% of two frames, or 80% of one frame and 20% of another?
Either way you're only seeing a total of 100% out of 200% (this is assuming the game is running >60fps).

My understanding is that if a game is running >60fps, and your monitor is at 60Hz, you aren't seeing 100% of every frame.
Surely it doesn't matter what portion of frames you aren't seeing, since it happens on any card outputting >60fps? It's still doing the damned work, even if you can't see all of the end result, and you can't see all of the end result with SLI either.

Showing graphs where they decide to remove Crossfire frames but don't remove SLI frames is meaningless. Just pretend the second GTX680 isn't there as well, since effectively you aren't seeing all of every frame it renders either, although because it's slower, you are seeing more of more some frames to make it up to 60.

Surely if one card gets 60fps or close to it, the second card on a 60Hz monitor is more likely to display less, since it's over-rendering for what can be displayed anyway.
If you are only outputting 40fps with one card, and a second doubles it to 80, then assuming even frame times, you are seeing 100% of 60 frames, so 20 "wasted" frames.

If a single card puts out 55 fps, and 2 doubles it to 110, you are seeing 100% of 60 frames still, meaning 50 frames worth of wasted rendering. One card being faster, on that basis, means two cards is worse because hey, more wasted frames! Unless you make it so you see half of every frame, instead of 100% of one frame and 0% of the next, which doesn't really make the experience better, surely?

Unless my understanding of the whole "issue" they have discovered is wrong...

 

[Ferzerp]

As product releases get fewer and fewer every year the only thing we have in VC&G is BS.

The only thing left is BS because we have far too many individuals that quickly hijack anything and make *every* thread BS. It isn't about video cards or graphics anymore.

It's two sets of people cheerleading and being nasty to one another with nothing of merit resulting.

 

[Keysplayr]

The only thing left is BS because we have far too many individuals that quickly hijack anything and make *every* thread BS. It isn't about video cards or graphics anymore.

It's two sets of people cheerleading and being nasty to one another with nothing of merit resulting.

Yes. It appears the "act" of debating far outweighs the actual technology being debated. F'ed up.

 

[Annisman*]

What I see is not so much fanbois vs fanbois, this new era has been brought on by:

1. A new way to 'measure' true fps, which apparently websites can't agree on, and can't get coinciding numbers.
2. AMD drivers finally getting the wrath from the consumers that it has deserved for a while.
3. Nvidia releasing 'Premium' graphics cards that the plebs could never afford.

All of this is just way too much overload to digest at one point in time, and I'll be happy when it's all over so we can get back to the regular fanboi flaming contests.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

All I saw in this thread up until a certain post was people debating technology and testing methodology. Then as soon as it was becoming apparent that the new end all be all testing methodology may not be all it's cracked up to be the damage control squad comes in trying to derail the thread talking about how the thread is derailed...

This thread was doing fine up until that happened. Now there have been nothing but off topic posts about AMD vs. Nvidia flame wars.

 

[Fx1]

Personally i dont fully understand their point on CF.

If the monitor cant display the frame because its limited to 60hz then why would you choose to take it out of the benchmark? Surely frames are rendered internally then sent to the screen for display. if the display cant display them then they are runt frames? how is this AMD's fault?

Surely you need 120hz monitor to see if these runt frames actually produce full frames on a 120fps monitor.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Personally i dont fully understand their point on CF.

If the monitor cant display the frame because its limited to 60hz then why would you choose to take it out of the benchmark? Surely frames are rendered internally then sent to the screen for display. if the display cant display them then they are runt frames? how is this AMD's fault?

Surely you need 120hz monitor to see if these runt frames actually produce full frames on a 120fps monitor.

This is something I'm seriously interested in. With my 120hz monitor I rarely see tearing and it's always pretty smooth on my 7970. The only game where I saw odd stuttering was Far Cry 3 which just has problems in the engine.

 

[Fx1]

This is something I'm seriously interested in. With my 120hz monitor I rarely see tearing and it's always pretty smooth on my 7970. The only game where I saw odd stuttering was Far Cry 3 which just has problems in the engine.

i noticed that stuttering on 4xMSAA even when on 55-60 fps. You dont see it on 2xAA. The game would stutter but the FPS didnt seem to be affected. No idea why its weird.

if i had another 7970 then id turn on 8xAA to see how much the FPS went up

 

[Keysplayr]

All I saw in this thread up until a certain post was people debating technology and testing methodology. Then as soon as it was becoming apparent that the new end all be all testing methodology may not be all it's cracked up to be the damage control squad comes in trying to derail the thread talking about how the thread is derailed...

This thread was doing fine up until that happened. Now there have been nothing but off topic posts about AMD vs. Nvidia flame wars.

Nah, this is just another BS post trying to one up the other guy. You have no interest in the actual fps or frametime testing. What interests you is how people react to it and if it differs from your own reaction. That, and you said you like to get a rise out of people.

 

[Nintendesert]

This is something I'm seriously interested in. With my 120hz monitor I rarely see tearing and it's always pretty smooth on my 7970. The only game where I saw odd stuttering was Far Cry 3 which just has problems in the engine.

FarCry 3 is a mess. My 680 has weird stuttering issues with that one. I thought it was fixed but it's still there with the last beta drivers. I have to disable all Vsync for it to be playable.

 

[Ferzerp]

This thread was doing fine up until that happened. Now there have been nothing but off topic posts about AMD vs. Nvidia flame wars.

The *very first reply* started it.


Half the posters immediately try to undermine anything negative for AMD, the other half Nvidia. Post 1 was part of the first. If you can't see that, you need to exampine your own motives.

There was never any discussion here, just a bunch of "this is wrong" "no this is right". If that passes for meaningful discourse to you, I'm sorry.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Nah, this is just another BS post trying to one up the other guy. You have no interest in the actual fps or frametime testing. What interests you is how people react to it and if it differs from your own reaction. That, and you said you like to get a rise out of people.

Yes, because all the posts of mine discussing frametime measurements in a civil manner are just trolling.

I think I may need to just block the usual suspects because all they do is get me to react and I honestly don't feel the need to bother the mods with this trash.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

FarCry 3 is a mess. My 680 has weird stuttering issues with that one. I thought it was fixed but it's still there with the last beta drivers. I have to disable all Vsync for it to be playable.

There is just something odd with the engine itself. Lowering settings to get over 50fps seems to do wonders for stuttering in that game. Anything 40-50fps is just an absolute mess in that game.

A game like Crysis 1 feels fine at 40-50 fps.

 

[Fx1]

There is just something odd with the engine itself. Lowering settings to get over 50fps seems to do wonders for stuttering in that game. Anything 40-50fps is just an absolute mess in that game.

A game like Crysis 1 feels fine at 40-50 fps.

i also have the problem with shaky enemies when they try and take cover the fix is to turn off vsync strangely.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

i also have the problem with shaky enemies when they try and take cover the fix is to turn off vsync strangely.

Set a frame limiter to 59fps.

 

[Fx1]

Set a frame limiter to 59fps.

this is the 2nd game where i have had to do this.. why is this a pattern with the 7970?

 

[VulgarDisplay]

this is the 2nd game where i have had to do this.. why is this a pattern with the 7970?

It's not on my 7970. As long as I get over 50fps the engine wonkyness isn't an issue regardless of vsync or not. I invested in a 120hz monitor though and I think that makes a huge difference.

 

[Fx1]

It's not on my 7970. As long as I get over 50fps the engine wonkyness isn't an issue regardless of vsync or not. I invested in a 120hz monitor though and I think that makes a huge difference.

i dont think i could live with 1080p again after 1900x1200

 

[Rezist]

It would be nice to get frame latencies as well in this testing since with any competitive gaming it could be a huge deal breaker.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

i dont think i could live with 1080p again after 1900x1200

I can't go back to 60hz after 120hz. Resolution be damned for gaming. That's all I use my desktop for so I'd rather have the smoothness of 120hz than a few extra pixels.

 

[Fx1]

I can't go back to 60hz after 120hz. Resolution be damned for gaming. That's all I use my desktop for so I'd rather have the smoothness of 120hz than a few extra pixels.

i might take a look when i upgrade next. i really need to move to dvi lol

 

[3DVagabond]

No, they're not, they can use your magical vsync, that's the point.

Do you think the ever observant PCPer or TR caught this? Or did they just bench Titanic and show the potentially skewed results?

Just curious being they are in the pursuit of 'bettering' the information for all.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=34664254&postcount=54

Very good point, as far as testing needs to be done with a warm card.

 

[Rikard]

Watched that video and my mind exploded. So, basically all this stutter nonsense is just visual tearing and all these review sites are harping on AMD because theirs is worse.

It's 100% due to a lack of using Vsync. All those proponents of this testing are still caught up in the max fps benchmarks which is causing this whole smoothness fiasco. Do away entirely with the Maximum FPS number and use Vsync or cap to your refresh rate and the problem is solved.

I saw those videos quite a while ago and I had a similar reaction. Right, there IS a stuttering moment, but honestly I would already say that example is unplayable due to that crazy tearing they are seeing. I think it only makes sense to look at micro stuttering when there is not any glaringly obvious tearing, otherwise it is like "Hey we take this example which is completely unplayable and we found a second, less noticeable, problem with it". If vsync is the best solution, I do not know, but it is one solution. I would rather have tearing free experience without having to turn on vsync though.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

I saw those videos quite a while ago and I had a similar reaction. Right, there IS a stuttering moment, but honestly I would already say that example is unplayable due to that crazy tearing they are seeing. I think it only makes sense to look at micro stuttering when there is not any glaringly obvious tearing, otherwise it is like "Hey we take this example which is completely unplayable and we found a second, less noticeable, problem with it". If vsync is the best solution, I do not know, but it is one solution. I would rather have tearing free experience without having to turn on vsync though.

I think it's the main reason why 120hz monitors feel so much smoother. Your frame rate has a much harder time outrunning 120hz so you get far less tearing and it displays more complete frames. No site has released numbers at 120hz yet and that drives me nuts.