Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › GTX 580 Or Radeon 6970
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

GTX 580 Or Radeon 6970 - Page 6  

post #51 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by RawFoodPhil View Post
Wow AMD.....VERY shady marketing practices.
Indeed. Ironic, since according to Lev, Nvidia's the one cheating by having better tessellation hardware. Is enabling MSAA cheating now too?
post #52 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdr09 View Post
i don't know how reliable is this review . . .

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/298?vs=308
It is actually a little nvidia favored I believe. If I recall correctly, they put those up when the 6900 series was brand new and the drivers hadn't squeezed that extra bit of performance out yet.
But it still shows the main point. The 580's in SLI are better, not by a lot and not an insignificant amount either. However, the price increase is significant. Depends on what it is worth to you.
Me personally, I'd suggest 2GB 560ti's or 2GB 6950's. I'd suggest 2.5GB 570's if they were more common.
 
Cheesecake
(16 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500k Gene-Z Gen3 R9 290 G.Skill Sniper 8 GB 1866 9-9-9-28-1T 
CoolingCoolingPowerCase
Kraken Lots of airflow :P TX850 version 2 Plasti-Dipped 350D 
AudioAudioAudio
Xonar DX [sold] Sennheiser HD 555 FiiO E10 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
Phenom II X4 @ 4000/2800 ASRock Extreme4 970 Big Air Cheesecake  Tr Silver Arrow 
CoolingCase
Tr Shaman Centurion 590 
  hide details  
 
Cheesecake
(16 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500k Gene-Z Gen3 R9 290 G.Skill Sniper 8 GB 1866 9-9-9-28-1T 
CoolingCoolingPowerCase
Kraken Lots of airflow :P TX850 version 2 Plasti-Dipped 350D 
AudioAudioAudio
Xonar DX [sold] Sennheiser HD 555 FiiO E10 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
Phenom II X4 @ 4000/2800 ASRock Extreme4 970 Big Air Cheesecake  Tr Silver Arrow 
CoolingCase
Tr Shaman Centurion 590 
  hide details  
post #53 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booty Warrior View Post
Indeed. Ironic, since according to Scott Wasson from The TechReport, Nvidia's the one cheating by having better tessellation hardware.
Sigh. I just rectified your post.

Why put my name there when I didn't write that article? See the name up there? Scott Wasson wrote that. I'm using my real name, not an alias.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/21404

Those guys are saying that, not me. So if you're not happy with that, go flame Scott Wasson, the writer.

''There is another possible explanation. Let's connect the dots on that one. As you may know, the two major GPU vendors tend to identify the most promising upcoming PC games and partner up with the publishers and developers of those games in various ways, including offering engineering support and striking co-marketing agreements. As a very high-profile title, Crysis 2 has gotten lots of support from Nvidia in various forms. In and of itself, such support is generally a good thing for PC gaming. In fact, we doubt the DX11 patch for this game would even exist without Nvidia's urging. We know for a fact that folks at Nvidia were disappointed about how the initial Crysis 2 release played out, just as many PC gamers were. The trouble comes when, as sometimes happens, the game developer and GPU maker conspire to add a little special sauce to a game in a way that doesn't benefit the larger PC gaming community. There is precedent for this sort of thing in the DX11 era. Both the Unigine Heaven demo and Tom Clancy's HAWX 2 cranked up the polygon counts in questionable ways that seemed to inflate the geometry processing load without providing a proportionate increase in visual quality.

Unnecessary geometric detail slows down all GPUs, of course, but it just so happens to have a much larger effect on DX11-capable AMD Radeons than it does on DX11-capable Nvidia GeForces. The Fermi architecture underlying all DX11-class GeForce GPUs dedicates more attention (and transistors) to achieving high geometry processing throughput than the competing Radeon GPU architectures. We've seen the effect quite clearly in synthetic tessellation benchmarks. Few games have shown a similar effect, simply because they don't push enough polygons to strain the Radeons' geometry processing rates. However, with all of its geometric detail, the DX11 upgraded version of Crysis 2 now manages to push that envelope. The guys at Hardware.fr found that enabling tessellation dropped the frame rates on recent Radeons by 31-38%. The competing GeForces only suffered slowdowns of 17-21%.

Radeon owners do have some recourse, thanks to the slider in newer Catalyst drivers that allows the user to cap the tessellation factor used by games. Damien advises users to choose a limit of 16 or 32, well below the peak of 64.


As a publication that reviews GPUs, we have some recourse, as well. One of our options is to cap the tessellation factor on Radeon cards in future testing. Another is simply to skip Crysis 2 and focus on testing other games. Yet another is to exclude Crysis 2 results from our overall calculation of performance for our value scatter plots, as we've done with HAWX 2 in the past. We haven't decided exactly what we'll do going forward, and we may take things on a case-by-case basis. Whatever we choose, though, we'll be sure to point folks to this little article as we present our results, so they can understand why Crysis 2 may not be the most reliable indicator of comparative GPU performance.''
    
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
i7-5930k @ 4.9  i7-3930k @ 5.1 (2nd rig) Asus Rampage V (X99) + Asus Rampage IV (2nd rig) 2X Nvidia 1080 Ti SLI watercooled 
GraphicsRAMRAMHard Drive
2X Nvidia 980 Ti SLI watercooled (2nd rig)  4X8GB=32GB G.Skill DDR4-2700 4X4GB=16GB Ripjaws DDR3 2400 CL9 (2nd rig) 3X Samsung 840 Evo 1TB SSD 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 Pro 250GB 3XSeagate 3TB LG Blu-ray writer 2X Quad-120 MCR420 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
2X Triple-120 MCR320 + 1X Triple-120 Feser 2X Dual-120 XSPC RX240 32 Gentle Typhoon fans (mix of 3000 and 1850rpm) Reservoir 2X Koolance RP-452x2 with 4X MCP655 p... 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
2X EK Supreme HF CPU waterblock Windows 10 Pro x64 Acer XB270HU IPS G-Sync 2440p (main rig) 3X 30'... CoolerMaster Masterkeys Pro S MX blue switch, C... 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec HCP1200 + AX850 dual PSU main rig, AX120... Mountain Mods Extended Ascension + Pedestal 24 ... Logitech G502 x 2 PSB speakers 5.1 
  hide details  
    
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
i7-5930k @ 4.9  i7-3930k @ 5.1 (2nd rig) Asus Rampage V (X99) + Asus Rampage IV (2nd rig) 2X Nvidia 1080 Ti SLI watercooled 
GraphicsRAMRAMHard Drive
2X Nvidia 980 Ti SLI watercooled (2nd rig)  4X8GB=32GB G.Skill DDR4-2700 4X4GB=16GB Ripjaws DDR3 2400 CL9 (2nd rig) 3X Samsung 840 Evo 1TB SSD 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 Pro 250GB 3XSeagate 3TB LG Blu-ray writer 2X Quad-120 MCR420 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
2X Triple-120 MCR320 + 1X Triple-120 Feser 2X Dual-120 XSPC RX240 32 Gentle Typhoon fans (mix of 3000 and 1850rpm) Reservoir 2X Koolance RP-452x2 with 4X MCP655 p... 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
2X EK Supreme HF CPU waterblock Windows 10 Pro x64 Acer XB270HU IPS G-Sync 2440p (main rig) 3X 30'... CoolerMaster Masterkeys Pro S MX blue switch, C... 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec HCP1200 + AX850 dual PSU main rig, AX120... Mountain Mods Extended Ascension + Pedestal 24 ... Logitech G502 x 2 PSB speakers 5.1 
  hide details  
post #54 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levesque View Post
Sigh. I just rectified your post.

Why put my name there when I didn't write that article? See the name up there? Scott Wasson wrote that. I'm using my real name, not an alias.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/21404

Those guys are saying that, not me. So if you're not happy with that, go flame Scott Wasson, the writer.

''There is another possible explanation. Let's connect the dots on that one. As you may know, the two major GPU vendors tend to identify the most promising upcoming PC games and partner up with the publishers and developers of those games in various ways, including offering engineering support and striking co-marketing agreements. As a very high-profile title, Crysis 2 has gotten lots of support from Nvidia in various forms. In and of itself, such support is generally a good thing for PC gaming. In fact, we doubt the DX11 patch for this game would even exist without Nvidia's urging. We know for a fact that folks at Nvidia were disappointed about how the initial Crysis 2 release played out, just as many PC gamers were. The trouble comes when, as sometimes happens, the game developer and GPU maker conspire to add a little special sauce to a game in a way that doesn't benefit the larger PC gaming community. There is precedent for this sort of thing in the DX11 era. Both the Unigine Heaven demo and Tom Clancy's HAWX 2 cranked up the polygon counts in questionable ways that seemed to inflate the geometry processing load without providing a proportionate increase in visual quality.

Unnecessary geometric detail slows down all GPUs, of course, but it just so happens to have a much larger effect on DX11-capable AMD Radeons than it does on DX11-capable Nvidia GeForces. The Fermi architecture underlying all DX11-class GeForce GPUs dedicates more attention (and transistors) to achieving high geometry processing throughput than the competing Radeon GPU architectures. We've seen the effect quite clearly in synthetic tessellation benchmarks. Few games have shown a similar effect, simply because they don't push enough polygons to strain the Radeons' geometry processing rates. However, with all of its geometric detail, the DX11 upgraded version of Crysis 2 now manages to push that envelope. The guys at Hardware.fr found that enabling tessellation dropped the frame rates on recent Radeons by 31-38%. The competing GeForces only suffered slowdowns of 17-21%.

Radeon owners do have some recourse, thanks to the slider in newer Catalyst drivers that allows the user to cap the tessellation factor used by games. Damien advises users to choose a limit of 16 or 32, well below the peak of 64.


As a publication that reviews GPUs, we have some recourse, as well. One of our options is to cap the tessellation factor on Radeon cards in future testing. Another is simply to skip Crysis 2 and focus on testing other games. Yet another is to exclude Crysis 2 results from our overall calculation of performance for our value scatter plots, as we've done with HAWX 2 in the past. We haven't decided exactly what we'll do going forward, and we may take things on a case-by-case basis. Whatever we choose, though, we'll be sure to point folks to this little article as we present our results, so they can understand why Crysis 2 may not be the most reliable indicator of comparative GPU performance.''
Nicely written article....It goes into a few things that I was unaware of. However, if AMD would've built a better gpu from the start, to handle heavy tessellation more efficiently, we wouldn't have this problem....I'm curious to see what AMD has in store with their next generation of gpus....
post #55 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by RawFoodPhil View Post
Nicely written article....It goes into a few things that I was unaware of. However, if AMD would've built a better gpu from the start, to handle heavy tessellation more efficiently, we wouldn't have this problem....I'm curious to see what AMD has in store with their next generation of gpus....

They're going to make you wait another year.

People will release "fake" benchmarks when they're actually legit.

They'll release.

Then for everyone who waited will be just sitting there looking at the computer screens like this.

Attachment 236549

Then after getting an nVidia card they'll be all like..

Attachment 236550


Ballin'.

 
Dell UltraSharp U2412M IPS Panel
Dell UltraSharp U2412M
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Apple A7 Cyclone x64 Chip @ 1.3Ghz Apple PowerVR G6430 1GB DDR3 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
16GB Internal Storage Passive iOS 7.0.3 4.0" 1136x640 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
On-Screen 1560mAH Battery Apple iPhone 5S Space Grey Touch ID Finger Print Scanner 
AudioOtherOther
3.5mm Jack Nano SIM Lightning Connector 
  hide details  
 
Dell UltraSharp U2412M IPS Panel
Dell UltraSharp U2412M
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Apple A7 Cyclone x64 Chip @ 1.3Ghz Apple PowerVR G6430 1GB DDR3 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
16GB Internal Storage Passive iOS 7.0.3 4.0" 1136x640 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
On-Screen 1560mAH Battery Apple iPhone 5S Space Grey Touch ID Finger Print Scanner 
AudioOtherOther
3.5mm Jack Nano SIM Lightning Connector 
  hide details  
post #56 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levesque View Post
Sigh. I just rectified your post.

Why put my name there when I didn't write that article? See the name up there? Scott Wasson wrote that.
I've read that article and it seems decidedly slanted. They speculate that Nvidia is somehow behind Crytek's questionable tessellation just because they were a sponsor.

The fact that water tessellation is left running below the map surely couldn't be a result of sloppy programming for an after-thought DX11 patch that was rushed out under a very tight deadline. Occam's razor, etc.

Even if it were true, I'd hardly call it "cheating." The fact that Nvidia cards can handle that level of tessellation is a real advantage of their architecture. As Raw said, none of this would even be an issue if AMD's tess support didn't lag behind. If you're going to blame anyone, blame AMD.

I'm willing to bet this will all be moot once the next generation of hardware rolls around.
post #57 of 57
Locking ... I think everyone's had a chance to make their argument, and this is just turning into a flame-fest at this point.

The fact is, these cards have VERY different architectures, not to mention both gpu makers (nV especially) work with game developers, which leads to code that favors one brand over the other at times. So there's a huge degree of variability in perf betwixt nV and AMD when you look across all games, settings, and resolutions.

The best way to decide which to get is to look at as many benching sites as possible, focusing on performance at the resolution you want to play at, and on the games you want to play. If it's of major import to you to be able to 'max' a game, then you should also pay attention to the settings the review sites use.

Sometimes, YES, they are biased (sometimes accidentally, believe it or not) and will choose games and/or settings that favor one company over another. That's why you should check a whole bunch of sites and never rely on any single one.

I consider [H] to be one of the most reputable review sites, personally, and LOVE their 'max playable settings' reviews with the fps-per-second graphs, because you can get Avg FPS comparisons from like 50 other sites. Their benches provide a unique and meaningful perspective, IMHO.

Something else to keep in mind re: the two brands cards, and that's 'features'.

To it's advantage, AMD has Eyefinity (basically much better multi-monitor flexibility) and Morphological AA which allows AA to be 'forced' on pretty much any game. nV doesn't have an equivalent of it yet.

nV cards OTOH support physX, have much better 3D support, and support more gpu-accelerated non-graphics apps (such as video transcoding) through CUDA.

This is just stuff off the top of my head, I'm sure there's many other features that are unique to each brand's cards.

Lastly ... for all the talk of nV's supposed 'cheating' upthread, I would point out that evidence suggests that AMD 'cheats' with it's Crossfire implementation, achieving their much-balleyhooed 'better scaling' by coding their drivers to allow considerably more microstutter than nV does with their drivers.

IOW, neither side are exactly 'angels' ...
Edited by brettjv - 10/29/11 at 11:46am
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Graphics Cards - General
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › GTX 580 Or Radeon 6970