Catalyst 15.7 released (Win10)

Why dont people read release notes?

Framerate target works only on DX10+, CS:GO is DX9.

 

I'm assuming that people are thinking of Adaptive VSYNC when discussing NVIDIA, which caps the displayed output at the refresh rate but drops out of that below.

Frame Rate target is obviously more configurable than this and additionally its control mechanism is all done through the PowerPlay control that fundamentally controls the Power/Temp/Voltage/Clock mechanisms.

 

The forums are much more pleasant to browse if people don't resort to passive-aggressive snark in their posts. You obviously knew the answer to the guy's question, isn't that enough?

Right. Adaptive vsynch was what I was thinking of. I haven't used NV boards for over a year now so the name of the feature slipped my mind. Thanks!

Okay, well, that's more than I know about. Maybe someone could write up a short comparison between the two for those who aren't AMD users, or like me, haven't gotten around to installing the new driver just yet?

 

Well, adaptive V-Sync can only work up to the monitors refresh rate. FRTC can limit frame rate to an arbitrarily set number (currently between 55 and 95 IIRC).

 

I have 3200x1800 since ages (Hawaii) and I'm running 2560x1440 screen

 

You know these are up on AMD's site for windows 7 & 8 now too, right?

 

The original leaker of Fury X is reporting some impressive gains with the new driver.

More than 20% in Far Cry 4 and Thief up by 12% at 1440p.

http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/h...]-sapphire-amd-r9-fury-x-rise-5087633-59.html

Meanwhile Greggy isn't seeing any improvements in the games he tested, perhaps except for GTA V, and even decreases especially with Witcher 3.
VRAM usage down 200MB in Grid and up by 1.4GB in GTA V...





Maybe the discrepancy might be due to different CPU and clocks besides of course the game selection.

 

It is kind of expected that over time Radeon R9 Fury X will only improve with drivers.

That is why it is extremely early to compare the card with 980Ti because after some time with modern games, it may turn out that Fury X completely destroys the competition.

 

Cause they are annoying to find. All the links went to some marketing page about a new driver.

FRTC would be more useful for dx9 games IMO. There arent many dx11 games with insanely huge framerates even after maxing everything.

 

To be honest i cant seem to find VSR any more. I had it in beta but now its gone. I guess they disabled VSR completely for 21:9 monitors.

 

Aww, thats a shame. Explains my patchy results in messing with it.
As jakobx said, would be more useful on those old games that do like 500fps.

 

Yes, the long history of that never happening gives great faith in such an evolution of events.

 

Well it is the firt implantation of it, i dont know what the technical reason is for get it work on DX10+ games and not on DX9 ones, this dont mean they will not extend it to DX9 then. I can imagine that as most games are today DX11... they have start by that.

I dont know, maybe it is different from a windows7 - vista, that how it should implemented on DX9 for windows 8-10.

In reality, i remember pretty well seeing AMD and Nvidia offtly gaining pretty much 10-15% performance after release on newer driver, this was the case with 5870, this was the case with 7970 ( who was suddenly close the 680 even before the Ghz updated gpu's ).. Nothing magical there. This will not change much the situation, but at least i can imagine, some work can be done when so far only 1 driver for Fury have been released.

If i speak for the 5870 and 7970 its because i know well the case, as overclockers we was wait the second, third drivers, because we was know we will obtain for free a 15-20% gain on score only by them. ( it was allways the case with AMD and 3Dmark at release ). And even today with the 15.7, everyone have got a nice suprise ( score increase and physic score fixed on Firestrike ).


But somewhat i think he think to the 290x vs 780TI situation where now, the 290x is clearly and largely in front of the 780TI in most review. And the 780TI was slighty faster of the 290x when released.
This is not a question of driver ( even if some games have been patched, performance fixed ), but too the games used and resolution who have change ( 1080p was the main res, with some 1440p result, now 1440p is main resolution on most reviews with "4K" on upper res ). ( in addition the 700 series seems dont get much love for newer games )

Easy too see as suddenly. the 290x seems closer of the 980 performance that the 780TI.

 

If they don't maybe a third party tool will make it available for all games same as NV cards w/o restrictions.

 

And will an up to 15% improvement over some undetermined amount of time will make the Fury X completely destroy the competition? Because that was the initial and utterly nonsensical claim. A 15% (which would be non-trivial in the general case) would not even make it tie the competition's top SKU. The great saving driver has been a historically recurring theme whenever a particular piece of hardware did not live up to some hype or another - NV30, R600, XGI Volari, you name it. I struggle to remember one occasion wherein the great reversal of fortunes came by way of a driver update - do you have any particular example in mind? Fixing an egregious bug or another does not really count, mind you.

 

You had my response allready in my initial post. this will not change the situation. ( intended if there's not a real performance problem to fix ). You will never see me waiting or saying a magical driver is coming as i will not wait about it.

Its allready there, RadeonPro, MSI afterburner have the options for set a fps limiter. I will even prefer the RadeonPro tools outside overclocking who have a tons of other options available for AMD gpu's, SweetFX, adaptative V-sync, frame limiter, different AA modes etc.

 

The performance boost on the older R9 290/290X cards is massive with these drivers, showing that the actual performance difference between the 390/390X and the older non-reference cards is actually tiny (despite what AMD's unwillingness to provide the 15.15 drivers for other cards, during the 300 series' release, made us believe).

Had these driver optimizations been available back in September 2014 when the 980/970 released, AMD would have ruined the party on nVidia's GM204 cards.
Perhaps they could've even prevented the 290 series from going down in price that much.

 

The best I remember, for a specific game, is 7970 leapfrogging 680 after getting beaten black and blue by it since launch in BF3. Of course half of the folks had stopped playing it by then.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-R...atalyst-1211-Beta-Test-Battlefield-3-1031558/

A 15% performance improvement overall would land Fury X top of the pack at least going by TPU's numbers.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/31.html

 

For some reason this driver gives me more fluid experience in TW3 and a lot less small stutters which I had occasionally on older driver. It really looks like in some places I've got 5-10FPS more!
Good job AMD!
As a reward I bought 2nd R9 290X today because going Fury was too expensive per FPS and I decided to try out how Frame Pacing helps compared to the stutter fest I remember when I had 2xR9 290X CF without it. Having a deal on brand new Sapphire Vapor-X 4GB @£215 also helped

Heat and power consumption will be quite high but winter is coming and I don't game as much as before so not a big issue for me