Rise of the Tomb Raider, sketchy benchmarks

Kaotik

Kaotik

Drunk Member
Legend
Supporter
So the game is out.
Most sites got to benchmark it a bit early, and showed GeForce cards dominating the field, especially high end with even GTX 980 and factory overclocked GTX 780 Ti beating Fury X
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_page..._graphics_performance_benchmark_review,7.html
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Rise-...451/Specials/Grafikkarten-Benchmarks-1184288/
http://www.computerbase.de/2016-01/...abschnitt_benchmarks_von_full_hd_bis_ultra_hd

The in comes TPU, they specifically mention using latest, patched public retail build from Steam, and their results tell quite a different storyhttp://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Performance_Analysis/Rise_of_the_Tomb_Raider/4.html
 
A better question is why are all these websites rushing to release benchmarks of the game that was released just yesterday?
IIRC, they usually wait almost a week for the game-specific driver releases from both vendors.

Are they purposely not waiting for the 16.1.1 drivers from AMD that bring a specific profile for this game and should be released within the next few days or hours?
 
ToTTenTranz said:
A better question is why are all these websites rushing to release benchmarks of the game that was released just yesterday?
IIRC, they usually wait almost a week for the game-specific driver releases from both vendors.

Are they purposely not waiting for the 16.1.1 drivers from AMD that bring a specific profile for this game and should be released within the next few days or hours?
Click to expand...
At least one of the german sites did a update to their review, saying AMD is working on a driver and they'll retest it with it.

Arwin, TPU doesn't mention on quick look, the rest have it on, but in general PureHair hurts a bit more NVIDIA than AMD as seen from both pc games & hardware and computerbase tests
 
ToTTenTranz said:
Are they purposely not waiting for the 16.1.1 drivers from AMD that bring a specific profile for this game and should be released within the next few days or hours?
Click to expand...
AMD should try to get their game hotfix drivers out in a timely fashion like their competitor. I know I'm asking too much. :)

Though new drivers may do nothing anyway.
 
Just played this on 970 GTX with the game ready drivers, and the game is certainly nice looking. And pretty enjoyable too, although it is a lot easier to die here than in Uncharted, where it always feels you are telegraphed the correct moves quite clearly. But perhaps I just didn't learn to pick up the signs in this game yet. Not counting the frames, but must be a solid 60 at least most of the time.
 
swaaye said:
AMD should try to get their game hotfix drivers out in a timely fashion like their competitor. I know I'm asking too much. :)

Though new drivers may do nothing anyway.
Click to expand...

Do you happen to remember how long it took NVIDIA to "get their act togehter" on the last Tomb Raider, which was gaming evolved title?
 
Kaotik said:
Do you happen to remember how long it took NVIDIA to "get their act togehter" on the last Tomb Raider, which was gaming evolved title?
Click to expand...
No. I only remember TressFX ran awful on my 6970, was glitchy and looked better disabled. I didn't play much of the game anyway. :D

By the way I never said "get their act together".
 
Last edited:
swaaye said:
No. I only remember TressFX ran awful on my 6970, was glitchy and looked better disabled. I didn't play much of the game anyway. :D

By the way I never said "get their act together".
Click to expand...
hot fix drivers in timely fashion is pretty much the same. tressfx never worked well on the vliw gpus, but it took nvidia iirc (couple?) months and few game patches to get their performance drop on around same level as amd gcn's
 
swaaye said:
AMD should try to get their game hotfix drivers out in a timely fashion like their competitor. I know I'm asking too much. :)

Though new drivers may do nothing anyway.
Click to expand...

Update: Due to playing a pre-release build, I did not have access to Nvidia's Game Ready Drivers while writing this. I can now confirm that installing the Game Ready Drivers that were released today (January 27) did not fix the problems I discuss below.
In fact, I would say it's made things worse: the stuttering is more frequent and the loading times are now two or three times longer than what I saw pre-drivers.

http://www.destructoid.com/pc-port-report-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-336747.phtml

This is what you prefer?
 
Davros said:
Does it shimmer ?
Click to expand...
Shimmy shimmy ya
200.gif
sarah-palin-shimmy-o.gif
 
Sinistar said:
Update: Due to playing a pre-release build, I did not have access to Nvidia's Game Ready Drivers while writing this. I can now confirm that installing the Game Ready Drivers that were released today (January 27) did not fix the problems I discuss below.
In fact, I would say it's made things worse: the stuttering is more frequent and the loading times are now two or three times longer than what I saw pre-drivers.

http://www.destructoid.com/pc-port-report-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-336747.phtml

This is what you prefer?
Click to expand...
That article reads like it's written by a whiney wordy guy who can't possibly play games without 60 fps.

Does this game have visuals that might be legitimately demanding? I'm not planning to own it and haven't seen it.

I think every single AAA game that gets ported around has controversially shitty performance. It's a wonderous modern game industry we enjoy. But then I also think every game receives the bitching regardless of any facts or realities. Teh intarwebz!
 
Last edited:
Kaotik said:
hot fix drivers in timely fashion is pretty much the same. tressfx never worked well on the vliw gpus, but it took nvidia iirc (couple?) months and few game patches to get their performance drop on around same level as amd gcn's
Click to expand...
Maybe it was the game patches? Could be the same story here. Not exactly shocking, unprecedented stuff.
 
Davros said:
Does it shimmer ?
Click to expand...

So far not at all. But I am not that far in. It's a beautiful game, way beyond the first one. Clearly made with 3GB+ texture memory in mind and way more polygon detail.
 
Update: definitely shimmer in some environments. Most clear instance for me was an indoor area with sunlight falling in through a crack in the ceiling. It looks a lot like the kind of HDR aliasing that nAo talked about a long time ago, which would explain why it is hard to get rid of by various AA techniques, but nAo did also suggest how to overcome this issue ... So would be interesting to know why the developers couldn't solve this.
 
I can't find the dx12 thread, though this would also make a good post for 'amd gpus age better' thread as well.

This is the Radeon R9 Fury. Watch and observe it closely, the red line is the one core configuration ... it is the fastest with 43 FPs at 50% of the rendered frames = Average FPS. It is then followed by the 8 core install at 39 FPS, then the 4 core is lower at 36 FPS and finally the 2 core setup does 33 FPS on average. In total there's a 10 FPS differential !
Click to expand...

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_page..._graphics_performance_benchmark_review,9.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Will GPUs with 4GB VRAM age poorly?
11 12 13
Replies
258
Views
77K
DavidGraham
D
J
Watch Dogs 2
2 3
Replies
47
Views
11K
Malo
Malo
S
Rise of the Tomb Raider [XO, XOX, X360, PS4, P4Pro]
33 34 35
Replies
680
Views
84K
Globalisateur
Globalisateur
CarstenS
AMD R9 Nano official specs (and later, reviews)
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
30K
Deleted member 13524
D
Back
Top