I sent a tweet to https://twitter.com/CatalystCreator He wrote earlier that he reads all of the responses. I guess he means Battlefield4, but its worth trying. Can`t think of anything else.
Even it doesn't help anybody with AMD's, it's a honest statement. Otherwise i really don't understand why is that. Don't get me wrong, i really don't know anything about coding, so attention it could be well BS what i'm talking about but still i would like to ask you what is the reason for the bad performance ( sure if you would know, it was already eliminated ) when the AMD's never change something signifantly in therms of technics until the current gen gpu's come out. So where is the issue when ISI is working on a API for year's which is developed by MS in cooperation with AMD/ATI ? I can't remember rf1 or any ISI engine based sim was performing that bad on AMD.
I actually have no complaints for rF1. I can run 4xSupersampleAA and everything on max, except shadows medium and have 100+ FPS stable (HD6950).
My new GTX770-4GB with screenshot settings but: 3840x1024@75Hz +AAx1 +FOV:40 +VehicleVisible:16 2013-11-12 18:27:43 - rFactor2 Frames: 12029 - Time: 205906ms - Avg: 58.420 - Min: 42 - Max: 76
That's fine. But with nVidia card for a similar price youwould probably get 200-300fps (or even more). That's what I am talking about.
Ok I have done just as you instructed and here are my results with comparisons between 13.11 & 12.11: CPU: Intel i5 2500k @4.7ghz GPU: Gigabyte 7970 1000/1550 clock RAM: 8GB DDR3 Win 7 64bit 1920x1080 with 13.11 driver Frames: 5666 - Time: 199994ms - Avg: 28.331 - Min: 14 - Max: 58 1920x1080 with 12.11 driver Frames: 11080 - Time: 200056ms - Avg: 55.384 - Min: 43 - Max: 77 5760x1080 (Multiview on, default FOV) with 13.11 driver Frames: 2457 - Time: 200025ms - Avg: 12.283 - Min: 6 - Max: 21 5760x1080 (Multiview on, default FOV) with 12.11 driver Frames: 5528 - Time: 200103ms - Avg: 27.626 - Min: 22 - Max: 34 So basically a 100% increase for the average FPS. Also, I was worried going to an older driver would hurt AC's performance so I did some benchmarks on 3 different tracks with 3 different cars before reverting to 12.11. The 12.11 driver provided about a 2% increase over 13.11 so happy going to an older driver did not hurt AC's performance.
What's the point of installing an SDK? I doubt anyone here is going into AMD software development Even the CAP profiles are sort of useless unless you're using multi GPU solutions.
Thank you, will do the same! For the moment here my results (with my displays I can't run 1920*1080 but only triple screen res): CPU: AMD FX6300 stock GPU: Sapphire 7950 Flex ed. 1000/1385 clock RAM: 12GB DDR3 Win 7 64bit 3072x768 with 13.11 driver Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 5453, 199713, 15, 46, 27.304 3072x768 with 12.11 beta 11 driver Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 7274, 201366, 29, 47, 36.123 3072x768 with 13.11 driver BUT reflections off and using RadeonPro SMAA (NO visual difference!): Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 12339, 201865, 34, 110, 61.125 This last result should also ring a bell on ISI side... EDIT: added results with 12.11 beta 11
I don't know, installed to the instructions, may be for the smooth operation of two GPUs. And without the SDK has not tried to run ;-)
Ye definitly, if you have 2 GPU's the CAP's are essential but on a single card it's pretty much irrelevant. The SDK definitly, I don't even tick it during the drivers install process. SDK = software development kit so unless you are going to use you don't need that installed.
The Cap Profiles aren´t only for dual GPu usage. in some Kind they are usefull for single gpu too. You can read it in the release notes.
Nice find and thanks for sharing, these one year old drivers effectively give a nice boost over the new ones. 13.10_Beta (oct 2013) : Avg: 17.589 - Min: 9 - Max: 35 12.11 beta 11 (nov 2012) : Avg: 19.229 - Min: 12 - Max: 35 12.11 beta 11 + CAP 2 (nov 2012) : Avg: 33.611 - Min: 25 - Max: 49 12.11 beta 11 + CAP 2 + SDK (nov 2012) : Avg: 33.595 - Min: 22 - Max: 49
Im with a x2 biggest resolution and still have highest frames, Im very happy with my decision going to GTX770 and not with that R9-290 My gpu is <70ºC while that R9-290 is >90ºC, eat less wattage, and I practically cannot ear his noise (I have two noisy fans in my case hehe)
Yeah, after my crapy calculation base for the 290 atm i really don't know where the other 300% missed are should coming from I assume it''s a big mistake anywhere in, any bug or whatever and it can't be something little but invisible for some
For those of you using 12.11 beta, those are PRE-frame pacing drivers. This is why you get good fps. speed1, cannot use the 12.11's at all. They don't support his r290 card.
I upgraded to a Zotac GTX 770 2GB from a PNY GTX 670 2GB and here are the results... GTX 770 Stock Clocks: Avg: 66.384 - Min: 51 - Max: 135 117.3% GTX 670 results GTX 770 Overclocked (+130Mhz core / +225Mhz mem) - stable: Avg: 71.329 - Min: 56 - Max: 95 126.0% GTX 670 results I could not overclock my gtx 670 more than 10 Mhz so it was always on default clocks. The gtx 770 clocks are backed down 20Mhz each from the just before artifacts start to appear zone. This zotac card is also dead quite when both idle and load, sounds the same. I bought the Zotac gtx 770 for £240 and for me in order to have the same price/performance ratio as the gtx 670 it must not retail less than £190 which it doesn't so it was an ok upgrade i think. Need to sell the 670 quick.
Oh, you're wrong, a pre-finished product should never be the bar. Actually it looks very different for AMD in current AAA title.
