Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Guru3D] Call of Duty: Black Ops III PC graphics performance benchmark review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Guru3D] Call of Duty: Black Ops III PC graphics performance benchmark review - Page 2

post #11 of 94




I hope this doesn't count as meme and doesn't break the forum rules. I expertly photoshopped it myself biggrin.gif
current rig
(4 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsGraphicsKeyboard
2500k R9 290X Tri-X GTX 680 Filco Majestouch 2 Brown Ninja 
  hide details  
Reply
current rig
(4 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsGraphicsKeyboard
2500k R9 290X Tri-X GTX 680 Filco Majestouch 2 Brown Ninja 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by BradleyW View Post

Also, check out this memory management!



Something is a miss here.

 

Why would that be amiss? AAA Game's can actually dynamically allocate memory resources, and to a degree base some of this on GPU VRAM (available & Total VRAM).

 

Last I heard, if a texture is in a game's cache memory (preloaded), it's still loads faster to swap it to GPU memory from installed RAM than from Hard Disk.

 

So I could see some simulated "Ramdisk" type useage within the allocated "memory space" of the game. Again beats loading textures slowly off the hard drive. But what do I know. 

 

And of course the game would check and "Size/Malloc" that Game_Ramdisk to the GPU's Vram size...who would have thunk it.?? omg

 

Yet some seem insulted by this?


Edited by Ghoxt - 11/6/15 at 3:22pm
post #13 of 94
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghoxt View Post

Why would that be amiss? AAA Game's can actually dynamically allocate memory resources, and to a degree base some of this on GPU VRAM (available & Total VRAM).

Last I heard, if a texture is in a game's cache memory (preloaded), it's still loads faster to swap it to GPU memory from installed RAM than from Hard Disk.

So I could see some simulated "Ramdisk" type useage within the allocated "memory space" of the game. Again beats loading textures slowly off the hard drive. But what do I know. 

And of course the game would check and "Size/Malloc" that Game_Ramdisk to the GPU's Vram size...who would have thunk it.?? omg

Yet some seem insulted by this?

Only 40MB added to VRAM on the 290X between 1440p and 4K. Not the case with the 980 Ti. We should have expected around 3800MB of VRAM usage on the 290X with a little left over for internal swap at such resolution. Also look at 290X vs 390X at 1080p. Something is very wrong here.
Edited by BradleyW - 11/6/15 at 3:29pm
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 94
The difference between the 290x/390x must be the clock speeds of the core or the memory. The Vram difference is negated by the 1440p result.

The chips are pretty much identical, i don't see what else it could be.

From what people are saying the game is just a damn mess anyway, people with identical systems are having completely different experiences with it.
post #15 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by BradleyW View Post


Only 40MB added to VRAM on the 290X between 1440p and 4K. Not the case with the 980 Ti. We should have expected around 3800MB of VRAM usage on the 290X with a little left over for internal swap at such resolution. Also look at 290X vs 390X at 1080p. Something is very wrong here.

 

Admittedly, Looking at what you say, I see there is a discrepancy there. Would be interesting to see what one of the 6GB or 8GB 290X look like. (I cannot remember the size of those aftermarket cards lol)

post #16 of 94
Ouch. Even top tier cards at 4k cant hit 60 frames. we gonna need some optimized drivers stat! Thanks for the timely posting BradleyW.
3770K
(14 items)
 
R7 1700
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
RYZEN 1700 ASROCK AB350 GAMING K4 ZOTAC 1080TI REFERENCE MODEL G SKILL 8 GIG (2X) 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WESTERN DIGITAL 250 M.2 2280 WINDOWS 10 64 CORSAIR SF600 LIAN LI PC-O10 
  hide details  
Reply
3770K
(14 items)
 
R7 1700
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
RYZEN 1700 ASROCK AB350 GAMING K4 ZOTAC 1080TI REFERENCE MODEL G SKILL 8 GIG (2X) 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WESTERN DIGITAL 250 M.2 2280 WINDOWS 10 64 CORSAIR SF600 LIAN LI PC-O10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 94
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GorillaSceptre View Post

The difference between the 290x/390x must be the clock speeds of the core or the memory. The Vram difference is negated by the 1440p result.

The chips are pretty much identical, i don't see what else it could be.

From what people are saying the game is just a damn mess anyway, people with identical systems are having completely different experiences with it.

I doubt the slightly higher core clock nets an extra 25 fps so. I'm not sure why the 390X did so well. As for different experiences, gamegpu.ru has the 290X @ min fps = 24, max fps = 38 @ 1080p.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghoxt View Post

Admittedly, Looking at what you say, I see there is a discrepancy there. Would be interesting to see what one of the 6GB or 8GB 290X look like. (I cannot remember the size of those aftermarket cards lol)

Yup, it is certainly a noticeable discrepancy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by keikei View Post

Ouch. Even top tier cards at 4k cant hit 60 frames. we gonna need some optimized drivers stat! Thanks for the timely posting BradleyW.

You are welcome.
Edited by BradleyW - 11/6/15 at 4:11pm
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by BradleyW View Post

I doubt the slightly higher core clock nets an extra 25 fps so I'm not sure why the 390X did so well. As for different experiences, gamegpu.ru has the 290X @ min fps = 24, max fps = 38 @ 1080p.

They are identical GPU's though, and have been in every other title when you factor in the clock difference lol, wth?

This game has some inherent memory problem, it must be the Vram clocks. headscratch.gif So weird..
post #19 of 94
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GorillaSceptre View Post

They are identical GPU's though, and have been in every other title when you factor in the clock difference lol.

This game has some inherent memory problem, it must be the Vram clocks. headscratch.gif So weird..

It would be interesting to test a 290X with a VRAM overclock to see how the FPS reacts.
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
post #20 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by BradleyW View Post

I doubt the slightly higher core clock nets an extra 25 fps so. I'm not sure why the 390X did so well. As for different experiences, gamegpu.ru has the 290X @ min fps = 24, max fps = 38 @ 1080p.
maybe they used a ref R9 290X and it was throttling?then the 390x have slighly improved power values and a better cooling that wonr allow throttling
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Software News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Guru3D] Call of Duty: Black Ops III PC graphics performance benchmark review