Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › GCN Performance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

GCN Performance

post #1 of 5
Thread Starter 
I have checked the Ghost recon wildlands Benchmarks and I noticed something when they used Ultra Quality (UQ) the 470 is even ahead the R9 290X by a big margin when it was on very high Quality(VHQ) the 290x was faster than 480, what could have caused that a 470 that currently is slower than a 290 by a bit, outperform a 290x? and even the R9 Nano is slower here than RX 480 when the R9 nano is always as fast as 1060/Fury OR Faster




Edited by PontiacGTX - 4/15/17 at 7:50am
post #2 of 5
I don't own the game or either of those amd gpu's, but i'm gonna take a shot in the dark and say vram usage. Maybe the textures on very high are enough to saturate a 4gb card to a point were it starts loosing it's raw speed advantage.
Gaming Rig
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4790k Asus Maximus Vii Impact Evga gtx 1070 ftw dt 2x8gb G.Skill Trident X 2133mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingOS
Crucial mx100 512gb Prolimatech Megahalems Black NB pwm e-loops all around Window 7 
MonitorPowerCase
Acer XB270HU EVGA G2 550w Fractal Define Nano S 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Rig
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4790k Asus Maximus Vii Impact Evga gtx 1070 ftw dt 2x8gb G.Skill Trident X 2133mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingOS
Crucial mx100 512gb Prolimatech Megahalems Black NB pwm e-loops all around Window 7 
MonitorPowerCase
Acer XB270HU EVGA G2 550w Fractal Define Nano S 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 5
It is also worth questioning whether the testing was all done under the same conditions. Everything from bios erisons to bios updates to video driver revisions to even windows updates can all have a marginal impact on results. It is possible the 290x results are older and just being used for reference. It can be misleading without proper context and is one reason why you must take all graphs with this much data with a grain of salt. Context and more info is so improtant and so often left out when it comes to these charts.
post #4 of 5
Where do you see the 480 being faster than the Nano? I see Crossfire 480 being faster, but not single card.
Smallblock Power
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 7700k Asus Maximus IX Formula AMD Radeon Fury X Corsair Vengeance LPX 3733 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 960 Pro 5 Radiators 2 Pumps 9 Fans 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Samsung Cf791 34" Curved Ultrawide Hall Effect RGB EVGA 1200P2 Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX TG 
Mouse
Razr Diamondback RGB 
  hide details  
Reply
Smallblock Power
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 7700k Asus Maximus IX Formula AMD Radeon Fury X Corsair Vengeance LPX 3733 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 960 Pro 5 Radiators 2 Pumps 9 Fans 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Samsung Cf791 34" Curved Ultrawide Hall Effect RGB EVGA 1200P2 Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX TG 
Mouse
Razr Diamondback RGB 
  hide details  
Reply
post #5 of 5
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0451 View Post

Where do you see the 480 being faster than the Nano? I see Crossfire 480 being faster, but not single card.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD/ATI
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › GCN Performance