New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by sumitlian

You don't calculate gflops like that.For 1050 MHz, ( 1050 MHz x 16 bits per Cycle ) / 8 = 2100 Mega FLOPSAnd, 2100 x no. of shader processor, 2100 x 1664 (GTX 970) = 3494400 Mega Floating Point Operations per Second or 3494.4 GFLOPS or 3.4944 TFLOPS1600 MHz core frequency w/ GTX 970 will be 5.324 TFLOPS.There may be other ways also to calculate flops though.I didn't mean that 280X is faster than 970. 280X can almost never be faster than 970. But there might be some very...
Oh I got it ! I though you were calling Roy a fanboy. It actually looked like when you uploaded Roy's tweets.Forget it, don't mind.
1.0 GHz R9 280X = 4.0 Terra Floating Point Operations per Second.1.05 GHz GTX 970 = 3.5 Terra Floating Point Operations per Second.May be this game is using some compute features that GTX 970 might not have.Just saying, But I am sure at 2k or more resolution, GTX 970 is gonna win.
Very well written ! Well, whatever it is, AMD Radeon is running this game (Edit: or benchmark ) with older drivers too.Game launch date: 10 October, Catalyst Driver date: 29 September Now guess future drivers.....Its all Catalyst 11.12 deja vu thing is happening again all over the place.
For gaming at 8K 60 fps7680 x 4320 = 33177600 pixels.33177600 x 4 = 132710400 bytes per frame. (Since, True Colour = 32 bits or 4 bytes per pixel)Or 126.5625 Mega Bytes per frameFor 60 FPS, you would need almost 7.6 GB VRAM.This requirement is for frame buffer only.For 8K 23.976 fps videos33177600 x 3 = 99532800 bytes per frame. (Since, most videos are 24 bit colour or 3 bytes per pixel ).or 94.92 MB per frame, you would need at least 2.276 GB VRAM.I am not sure but...
Wow ! One year older AMD card seems to be better choice for future, imo. I think I had taken Maxwell too seriously.How many games are there where AMD wins after GTX 980/970 launch ? LOL
He presently works for AMD. Don't you think it would be inappropriate to call him a fanboy ?Though you and even I can call him "silly" for what he has done there.
Strange, Thief ran fine even on my 1GHz 280X (1.02v) at Max settings.Played that game for a week, benchmark is showing 43 min but afair it never went below 45 fps in actual gaming. Avg fps were 60+ everywhere.Here is my benchmark of Thief.that min fps on 900p dx always shows lower fps than 1080p dx. Looks like more stable fps with more load.
Thank you for this. It indeed looks great. Would have looked even better in PNG. JPEG image compression significantly reduces quality over PNG.You can see it yourself, take a snapshot of desktop or anything by snipping tool and save it in both formats and compare it side by side, you'll definitely see the difference.
New Posts  All Forums: