Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › The beautiful test method of Tech Report and the ugly results of it
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The beautiful test method of Tech Report and the ugly results of it

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
http://techreport.com/review/23981/radeon-hd-7950-vs-geforce-gtx-660-ti-revisited

Warning! This will most likely get ugly. That's not my intention, but I consider the information really distractive.

I've loved the statistical frame time metering method of Tech Report from the very beginning. I think it gives a much better view on the actual performance you perceive when you're playing the game. It's not the average frame rate that your brain pays attention to, it's the overall smoothness of the rendering.

Tech Report's reviews have shown interesting results before, but this new drivers comparison between 7950 and 660Ti is just mind-boggling. The consensus in here and on most enthusiast forums is that these two cards are not even competitors since the 7950 should be way superior. I've actually agreed on this, recommending 7950 over the 670. There is just so much to love in the 7950: the specs are that of a real high-end GPU, overclocking gives great results, the price has dropped to be very attractive, perhaps the best game bundle of all times, the Never Settle drivers with their incredible performance boost and the Gaming Evolved program looking to make AMD better at reacting quickly to hit game releases...

And then to read something like that Tech Report comparison. They say it's not just the boost BIOS of that Sapphire card they tested. They say it's not just the Never Settle drivers. They say they double confirmed their results. They tested three Gaming Evolved titles, so I'd say no game selection bias either. They even used the 2560x1440 resolution for most of the testing, which should make the 192-bit 660Ti to drop off the chart and give the 384-bit 7950 something to really shine at. So how is it possible the results are a decisive victory to the measly GTX 660Ti?

Is Tech Report wrong, and if they are, how exactly is this comparison borked? I really want to understand what's going on here. I want to know the reasons. So less flaming and more analysis, please.
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 10
1.) It would help if techreport confirmed that all games were patched to the latest available game patches.
2.) Second did they have the latest AMD CAP installed. the CAP improve single GPU performance in few games and also improve compatibility with latest games.
3.) also the OS for the testbed being Windows 8 is a huge letdown and can really make things difficult to compare because its a brand new OS. Windows 7 with Service Pack 1 should have been used as its the most popular and widely used desktop OS.

HD 7950 boost dominates MOH Warfighter at 1440p Ultra 4x MSAA. in hardocp review HD 7950 boost Ultra 4x MSAA performance matches GTX 660 Ti Ultra 2x MSAA.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/11/07/medal_honor_warfighter_gameplay_performance_review/4

"The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 was the first video card that we had to alter graphics options for. We found it playable at 2560x1600 with 2X MSAA and FXAA High, 16X AF and all graphics options on the highest setting. While playing at these settings it averaged 52 FPS. When we tried to play with 4X MSAA enabled on the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 the framerate would often drop in to the upper 30's for extended periods of time. While the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 averaged 41.5 FPS at these settings we did not feel it was playable. We prefer the framerate to be closer to 45 FPS which effectively eliminates most lag."

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/medal_of_honor_warfighter_graphics_vga_performance_review,6.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/603-best-graphics-cards/page8.html

same for sleeping dogs . 20% faster according to hardocp fraps run for 6 min.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/11/12/fall_2012_gpu_driver_comparison_roundup/5

HD 7950 boost dominates Skyrim

http://www.techspot.com/review/603-best-graphics-cards/page9.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/HD_7950_X2_Boost/22.html

hardwarecanucks shows the HD 7900 cards dominate Skyrim. HD

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57894-asus-hd-7970-3gb-matrix-platinum-edition-review-13.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57894-asus-hd-7970-3gb-matrix-platinum-edition-review-17.html

I would never take a single website's word over multiple websites. also hardocp has the most exhaustive and thorough testing methodology. they pick the testing level after playing the game completely and choose the most demanding scenario . their fraps runs are not 1 min or 2 min. but between 6 - 10 min.

hardocp have constantly recommended Nvidia SLI over AMD CF because of Nvidia's frame metering technology. they minced no words in saying the HD 7950 boost demolishes the GTX 660 Ti.

also looks like techreport has some axe to grind with AMD.
http://techreport.com/blog/23638/amd-attempts-to-shape-review-content-with-staged-release-of-info
Edited by raghu78 - 12/5/12 at 2:01am
Fragbox
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2400 DH67BL AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series XFX HD 6950 2GB 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Western Digital Caviar Green SONY DVD-RW AD-7260S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional 32 bit BENQ G2420HD Logitech K200 Seasonic VX550 psu 
CaseMouse
ANTEC 200 V2 Logitech mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
Fragbox
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2400 DH67BL AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series XFX HD 6950 2GB 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Western Digital Caviar Green SONY DVD-RW AD-7260S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional 32 bit BENQ G2420HD Logitech K200 Seasonic VX550 psu 
CaseMouse
ANTEC 200 V2 Logitech mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 10
Thread Starter 
raghu78,

So your explanation is basically that Tech Report is lying or manipulating results because they hold a grudge against AMD? And to show they're wrong you post a load of FPS numbers. If you read closely, Tech Report said the exact same thing about the FPS numbers: they are good with the 7950. It's just that beyond those FPS numbers, the stutters ruin it all for the 7950. What's more, Tech Report isn't just saying it, they show measurements confirming it. You can't argue with frame time analysis by showing FPS numbers: you either need to show errors in their method or show other frame time analysis with different results.

Or was your point that missing CAPs and Win8 explain it? Because I don't buy that at all. Win8 has been tested to show very similar results as Win7 and while CAPs occasionally do introduce profiles for single GPU as well, I have yet to see a measurable difference from using or not using them on a single GPU system.

Edit: While I appreciate HardOCP's method as well, IMO it comes just short of Tech Report's method in quantifying the perceived performance of a gaming PC. [H] has to cover the smoothness factor more by writing about it, Tech Report does it by showing numbers.
Edited by specopsFI - 12/5/12 at 3:40am
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 10
That's new information to me.... so thanks +rep thumb.gif .
Desktop
(16 items)
 
Laptop
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5820K @ 4.40 GHz Asus Rampage V Extreme/U3.1 MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming 6GB  Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (4x4) DDR4-3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Pro 1TB Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 512GB NZXT Kraken X62 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus VG236H 23" 120 Sony XBR43X800D 43" 4K TV CoolerMaster Octane Storm + Razer Turret EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G3 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Graphite 760T Black Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum + Razer Turret Razer Goliathus Asus Xonar Essence STX II 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4720HQ @ 2.60 GHz Asus G751JY Asus GTX 980M 4GB SK hynix HMT41GS6BFR8A-PB 16GB (2x8) DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
SanDisk SD7SB3Q128G1002  HGST Travelstar 7K1000 1TB HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUC0N Windows 10 Home 64-bit 
MonitorAudio
LG Philips LP173WF4-SPD1 + G-SYNC @ 75 Hz Realtek ALC668 
  hide details  
Reply
Desktop
(16 items)
 
Laptop
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5820K @ 4.40 GHz Asus Rampage V Extreme/U3.1 MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming 6GB  Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (4x4) DDR4-3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Pro 1TB Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 512GB NZXT Kraken X62 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus VG236H 23" 120 Sony XBR43X800D 43" 4K TV CoolerMaster Octane Storm + Razer Turret EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G3 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Graphite 760T Black Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum + Razer Turret Razer Goliathus Asus Xonar Essence STX II 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4720HQ @ 2.60 GHz Asus G751JY Asus GTX 980M 4GB SK hynix HMT41GS6BFR8A-PB 16GB (2x8) DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
SanDisk SD7SB3Q128G1002  HGST Travelstar 7K1000 1TB HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUC0N Windows 10 Home 64-bit 
MonitorAudio
LG Philips LP173WF4-SPD1 + G-SYNC @ 75 Hz Realtek ALC668 
  hide details  
Reply
post #5 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by specopsFI View Post

raghu78,
So your explanation is basically that Tech Report is lying or manipulating results because they hold a grudge against AMD? And to show they're wrong you post a load of FPS numbers. If you read closely, Tech Report said the exact same thing about the FPS numbers: they are good with the 7950. It's just that beyond those FPS numbers, the stutters ruin it all for the 7950. What's more, Tech Report isn't just saying it, they show measurements confirming it. You can't argue with frame time analysis by showing FPS numbers: you either need to show errors in their method or show other frame time analysis with different results.
Or was your point that missing CAPs and Win8 explain it? Because I don't buy that at all. Win8 has been tested to show very similar results as Win7 and while CAPs occasionally do introduce profiles for single GPU as well, I have yet to see a measurable difference from using or not using them on a single GPU system.

firstly there is something wrong there. whether its windows 8 or some other problem needs to be found out. even their fps numbers don't agree well for MOH Warfighter. GTX 660 Ti having a faster avg fps at 1440p Ultra 4X MSAA. you take a setting where the missing ROPs and bandwidth hit the GTX 660 Ti badly and show its faster. complete turn around to other reviews where the GTX 660 Ti gets decimated. a 30% performance gap cannot be done away by any kind of factory overclock.

hardocp always gives subjective feedback if they feel one vendor's solution is smoother than the other's . They have done that even in their recent article GTX 680 SLI vs HD 7970 Ghz CF. Even though HD 7970 Ghz CF was clearly faster than GTX 680 SLI and allowed higher image quality settings they still said GTX 680 SLI felt smoother at the highest playable settings respectively. if there was any smoothness issues or microstuttering hardocp definitely would have pointed out in their articles.

also for best single GPU performance some games need latest CAP. specific examples have been Max Payne 3 and Farcry 3.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/06/01/max_payne_3_iq_performance_preview_reviewers_guide/
"AMD Drivers - When it comes to AMD drivers, it is a bit more complicated. The important component about performance in single GPU AND multi-GPU with AMD hardware in Max Payne 3 is the latest Catalyst Application Profile (CAP). Yes indeed, the latest CAP DOES improve performance in this game even on single GPUs. This is one of the rare cases in which a CAP also improves single-GPU performance along with multi-GPU CrossFireX performance. "

another example is Farcry 3
http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/AMDCatalyst1211betadriver.aspx

from the beta driver page
"AMD Catalyst 12.11 CAP2 has just been released, and should be used in conjunction with AMD Catalyst 12.11 Beta11

Improves Far Cry 3 performance for single GPU configurations with AA enabled"

lastly if the same performance numbers can be replicated in Windows 7 SP1 then it might be easier to tell whether its an OS issue.

Multiple websites show the HD 7950 boost faster than GTX 660 Ti. so are we to ignore all that information.
Fragbox
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2400 DH67BL AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series XFX HD 6950 2GB 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Western Digital Caviar Green SONY DVD-RW AD-7260S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional 32 bit BENQ G2420HD Logitech K200 Seasonic VX550 psu 
CaseMouse
ANTEC 200 V2 Logitech mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
Fragbox
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2400 DH67BL AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series XFX HD 6950 2GB 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Western Digital Caviar Green SONY DVD-RW AD-7260S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional 32 bit BENQ G2420HD Logitech K200 Seasonic VX550 psu 
CaseMouse
ANTEC 200 V2 Logitech mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6 of 10
Thread Starter 
raghu78,

I'm not ignoring anything. I've read all the same articles, reviews and comparisons as you. It's just that I appreciate the Tech Report method, always have, and when the site that I've grown to like shows me information that suggests there's more to something I thought was established information, my first reaction is not to ignore it but embrace it. You saying that they're lying without offering proof of error or some other data of the same variable showing different results doesn't move me at all: to me, Tech Report is providing me new information and you are not.

You also didn't show me a measurable different in using CAPs with single GPU. As I said, AMD sometimes recommends using CAPs for single GPU as well but whether or not that has any significant impact on performance is not clear. I find the Win8 explanation more likely, just barely though.
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by specopsFI View Post

raghu78,
I'm not ignoring anything. I've read all the same articles, reviews and comparisons as you. It's just that I appreciate the Tech Report method, always have, and when the site that I've grown to like shows me information that suggests there's more to something I thought was established information, my first reaction is not to ignore it but embrace it. You saying that they're lying without offering proof of error or some other data of the same variable showing different results doesn't move me at all: to me, Tech Report is providing me new information and you are not.
You also didn't show me a measurable different in using CAPs with single GPU. As I said, AMD sometimes recommends using CAPs for single GPU as well but whether or not that has any significant impact on performance is not clear. I find the Win8 explanation more likely, just barely though.

i have PMed the AMD rep asking him to respond to that article and if its a windows 8 driver issue. also techreport uses fraps to get frametimes.

http://techreport.com/review/21516/inside-the-second-a-new-look-at-game-benchmarking

" I was too busy to do much about it as the review season cranked up, but I did make one simple adjustment to my testing procedures: ticking the checkbox in Fraps—the utility we use to record in-game frame rates—that tells it to log individual frame times to disk. In every video card review that followed, I quietly collected data on how long each frame took to render. "

the details of the frametime algorithm are not revealed. Is it at the GPU framebuffer or the monitor. Can the scientific correctness of their algorithm be proven. and if so will the vendors AMD and Nvidia also concur that the method is scientifically correct and be used for objective comparisons. unless there is more detail about the inner workings of the algorithm we cannot say anything.
Fragbox
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2400 DH67BL AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series XFX HD 6950 2GB 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Western Digital Caviar Green SONY DVD-RW AD-7260S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional 32 bit BENQ G2420HD Logitech K200 Seasonic VX550 psu 
CaseMouse
ANTEC 200 V2 Logitech mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
Fragbox
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2400 DH67BL AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series XFX HD 6950 2GB 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Corsair DDR3 1333 Mhz 2 GB Western Digital Caviar Green SONY DVD-RW AD-7260S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional 32 bit BENQ G2420HD Logitech K200 Seasonic VX550 psu 
CaseMouse
ANTEC 200 V2 Logitech mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
post #8 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by raghu78 View Post

i have PMed the AMD rep asking him to respond to that article and if its a windows 8 driver issue.

Excellent! I hope we get some insight to all this. thumb.gif
Quote:
also techreport uses fraps to get frametimes.
http://techreport.com/review/21516/inside-the-second-a-new-look-at-game-benchmarking
" I was too busy to do much about it as the review season cranked up, but I did make one simple adjustment to my testing procedures: ticking the checkbox in Fraps—the utility we use to record in-game frame rates—that tells it to log individual frame times to disk. In every video card review that followed, I quietly collected data on how long each frame took to render. "
the details of the frametime algorithm are not revealed. Is it at the GPU framebuffer or the monitor. Can the scientific correctness of their algorithm be proven. and if so will the vendors AMD and Nvidia also concur that the method is scientifically correct and be used for objective comparisons. unless there is more detail about the inner workings of the algorithm we cannot say anything.

Yes, they use Fraps. AFAIK, there is no software solution to report the actual frame times from monitor. That would mean that recording the GPU buffer is the best available technology. That in itself isn't too complicated, but there are some caveats to it. Tech Report has been quite open on these, too. The way Fraps works is told in more detail here (focusing on multi GPU, but the basics for single GPU in there, too).
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #9 of 10
I would almost be tempted to say it's takes even higher resolutions for that wide bus to really show. For 7680x1440 the 384 bit bus of the 7900 series seems to pull ahead of the 256 bit bus of the 670s/680s. So I imagine that at 2560x1440 it still doesn't really matter.
My Money Pit
(26 items)
 
NAS
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel 3770k @ 4.5 GHz EVGA Z77 FTW Asus R9 290 Asus R9 290 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
MV-3V4G3D/US 480 GB Intel 730 SSD, 2TB WD black A bunch of Gentle Typhoons Win 8 64 bit 
MonitorMonitorMonitorMonitor
CROSSOVER 27Q LED-P CROSSOVER 27Q LED-P CROSSOVER 27Q LED-P LG 55" IPS TV 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
24" LG IPS 24" LG IPS 24" LG IPS Das Ulimate S 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
EVGA 1200watt Gold PSU Fractal Arc Midi  Rat 7 Big Steelseries One 
AudioAudioAudioOther
Schiit Modi DAC Schiit Magni Headphone Amp DT 880 600 Ohm Headphones Fanatec H Shifter, Fanatec Clubsport Base, Fana... 
OtherOther
Rheosmart 6 Fan Controller G27 in holder 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel G1610 Asus P8B75-M LE Corsair ValueSelect 16GB 80 GB boot HDD, 25.64 TB Zfs Pool 
Optical DriveCoolingOSPower
DVD Writer Gentle Typhoons Arch Linux 64 bit Seasonic 640 watt 
CaseOtherOther
Fractal Define R2 Dell Perc H310 Raid Card NZXT| SENTRY MESH R Fan Controller 
  hide details  
Reply
My Money Pit
(26 items)
 
NAS
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel 3770k @ 4.5 GHz EVGA Z77 FTW Asus R9 290 Asus R9 290 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
MV-3V4G3D/US 480 GB Intel 730 SSD, 2TB WD black A bunch of Gentle Typhoons Win 8 64 bit 
MonitorMonitorMonitorMonitor
CROSSOVER 27Q LED-P CROSSOVER 27Q LED-P CROSSOVER 27Q LED-P LG 55" IPS TV 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
24" LG IPS 24" LG IPS 24" LG IPS Das Ulimate S 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
EVGA 1200watt Gold PSU Fractal Arc Midi  Rat 7 Big Steelseries One 
AudioAudioAudioOther
Schiit Modi DAC Schiit Magni Headphone Amp DT 880 600 Ohm Headphones Fanatec H Shifter, Fanatec Clubsport Base, Fana... 
OtherOther
Rheosmart 6 Fan Controller G27 in holder 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel G1610 Asus P8B75-M LE Corsair ValueSelect 16GB 80 GB boot HDD, 25.64 TB Zfs Pool 
Optical DriveCoolingOSPower
DVD Writer Gentle Typhoons Arch Linux 64 bit Seasonic 640 watt 
CaseOtherOther
Fractal Define R2 Dell Perc H310 Raid Card NZXT| SENTRY MESH R Fan Controller 
  hide details  
Reply
post #10 of 10
Thread Starter 
There has been a lot of discussion going on in the comments of this article in Tech Report. It has provided information that the reason for the odd result could really be Windows 8. Although the FPS tests haven't shown much of a difference between Win7 and Win8, the only (?) OS comparison test using frame time analysis paints a different picture. These OS with their proprietary graphics drivers seem to be very different when it comes to latency and thus frame times. Further information would be nice to have.
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Graphics Cards - General
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › The beautiful test method of Tech Report and the ugly results of it