2013-11-10 16:00:17 - rFactor2 Frames: 6643 - Time: 199978ms - Avg: 33.219 - Min: 21 - Max: 43 Resolution: 1920x1080 Drivers: 285.62 W7 64bit CPU: Intel i5-3570k @ 3.0GHz GPU: MSI GTX470 @ 650MHz (~7% OC) RAM: 8GB DDR3
I tried the benchmark. I'm running a stock clocked I7-3820 and PNY GTX670 on a Biostar TP X-79. 2013-11-10 08:27:03 - rFactor2 Frames: 1154 - Time: 16396ms - Avg: 70.383 - Min: 62 - Max: 89
Interesting I will do a before-after benchmarks, to know whats the improvement from a HD5870-1GB to a GTX770-4GB. my actual HD5870: with the screenshot settings but: 3840x1024@75Hz +AAx1 +FOV:40 +VehicleVisible:16. 2013-11-10 20:56:24 - rFactor2 Frames: 2682 - Time: 205532ms - Avg: 13.049 - Min: 9 - Max: 23
I don't need assumptions. I already have an AMD 7850 OC, and I can run any car, at any track, @2560x1440 resolution and 4AA/8AF and get in the 50's under normal conditions. Spiking into the 80's. But until cards are out in stores, you can only use logic. But we now have speed1's experience. You need the new beta driver. There was a bug in the launch drivers, that caused the fan to not throttle up, causing the heat to spike to 95c, then it throttles back down (heat protection), causing loss of performance. Try the new 13.11 beta 9.2 which fixes it. This is why your card is silent, it keeps the fans at 20%. You will find the fans are NOT silent. http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/latest-catalyst-windows-beta.aspx
Interesting, I've got a slightly more powerful config than your but lower fps, which driver version do you use and which version of windows ? Frames: 3516 - Time: 199900ms - Avg: 17.589 - Min: 9 - Max: 35 1680x1050 HD6950 - shader unlocked @HD6970 i5-750 @ 4.0 Ghz OS: Win 7 SP1 64bits Drivers: 13.10_Beta I planed to upgrade for a 290 or 290X but now this thread make me worry.. I will probably think twice and go for Nvidia if it's confirmed that the last gen AMD still perform so bad on rF2.
Don't be worry it's a great piece of hardware and the overall performance is due to the config i use atm and we need to wait for further optimising of game and drivers. Don't forget i'm on pcie 2.0 with a 890fx and P955BE at 4000mhz/1600ddr3. Not the best base for a current gen gpu. Furthermore the main performance killer for the 290 on rf2 are the shadows. Seems to be a incompatibility. I have not much time atm, continue later.
HKF0x, thats strange... I use amd_catalyst_13.8_beta and Win 7 SP1 64bits. I forgot one thing, my MSI 6950 is a little bit overclocked by default - 840/1250, instead of 810/1250. I`d like to see more benchmarks with AMD cards here. Especially 7970Ghz, anyone?
What settings the guys benching rf2 are using ? It would be intresting to know the max possible fps with max low settings a pc could generate with rf2. I did as well to leave any issue with any gfx setting out. I haven't tested in detail yet but the fps on max low with a resolution of 1920x1080 on single screen where around ~260. @Shamrock The driver i use is the current beta. I'v startet rf2 in window mode and observated the clock speed, fan and temp. Everything seems to work normal, just the performance with rf2 is bad atm.
For benching we are using settings outlined by paarma at previous page. txt with instructions is in his archive.
i5 760@3.8ghz Gigabyte Gtx 780 Driver 331.65 1920x1080 18148, 200212, 72, 128, 90.644 5960x1080 ( SoftTH ) Multiview On 9002, 200133, 36, 56, 44.980
We have idential cpu and gpu (but PNY with stock clocks) and driver, only my cpu is overclocked to 4.5Ghz and there is literally no difference in performance so we know our CPU at 4Ghz is certainly not a bottleneck with our gpu. Frames: 10925 - Time: 199947ms - Avg: 54.639 - Min: 42 - Max: 75
Did you actually follow the instructions to the letter? Because the first and easiest sign that you did not is that your benchmark time span was only 16 seconds long where as everyone else is 200 seconds, lol. You should be seeing identical results as both my own and paarma's.
CPU: Intel i5 2500k GPU: Gigabyte 7970 13.11 driver 1000/1550 clock RAM: 8GB DDR3 Win 7 64bit i5 2500K @3.3ghz 1920x1080 Frames: 5609 - Time: 200056ms - Avg: 28.037 - Min: 14 - Max: 57 i5 2500K @3.3ghz 5760x1080 (Multiview on, default FOV) Frames: 2510 - Time: 199978ms - Avg: 12.551 - Min: 7 - Max: 22 i5 2500k @4.7ghz 1920x1080 Frames: 5666 - Time: 199994ms - Avg: 28.331 - Min: 14 - Max: 58 i5 2500k @4.7ghz 5760x1080 (Multiview on, default FOV) Frames: 2457 - Time: 200025ms - Avg: 12.283 - Min: 6 - Max: 21
speed1, perfect example of what i mean and this has been the trend for far too long, simply makes no sense. FatnSlo, your card performs some 10-20% better than mine in all other games except in rf2 where mine performs 100% better than yours.
Damn, so I will go from average 20FPS on 6950 to probably average 30-35FPS on R9 280X with 1680x1050 (max settings).
Yeah i know, just not what's the reason. At the moment i have the impression rf2 don't know's the R9 200 Series yet and AMD don't know's rf2 in general.