Jump to content


Photo

Skyrim Revisited GPU


  • Please log in to reply
115 replies to this topic

#16 Besidilo

Besidilo

    Jarl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:23 AM


The only differences between AMD and Nvidia are AO et AF. You can't use AO on an AMD without an ENB and the AF quality via driver is beter on AMD.
The rest can be put on drivers issues, driver options, monitor parameters or the idiot between the chair and the keyboard :D
That is particulary true with gamma and color when going from AMD to Nvidia (or the other way), you have to recalibrate your monitor.
But I agree, for Skyrim stick to Nvidia.


Speaking of gamma and calibration, Nvidia drivers still don't allow users to force ICC/ICM profiles in games.

https://forums.gefor...on-thread-on-t/

And on the subject of additional rendering effects, I don't think it's possible to force FXAA without an injector in AMD drivers (they have MLAA) or various forms of SuperSampling AntiAliasing (such as SGSSAA), which either don't exist in AMD's drivers or don't work with a number of games.

Well AMD have their own version of FXAA. SSAA exist in AMD drivers and there are various form of AA in AMD that doesn't exist in Nvidia.
Contrary to popular belief AMD drivers are now very good and provide as much options as Nvidia's. Each constructor has their own proprietary technologies only available via their drivers and sometime in game if they had a partnership with the game developer.


Yes, AMD has their own post-processing AA (not a version of FXAA), and I've already mentioned it in my previous post. SuperSampling on AMD cards doesn't work in every game, NVIDIA has better support for a few engines out there. And you certainly can't enabling anything like SGSSAA in Skyrim on AMD cards. Even though their own SSAA method works OK.

However, contrary to what you have said before, AMD graphics cards can use Ambient Occlusion with RadeonPro. See the post below.

https://forums.guru3...28&postcount=12
  • 0

#17 Besidilo

Besidilo

    Jarl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:48 AM

After watching benchmarks showing that nvidia outperforms amd in skyrim and that end developers have problems with amd i ordered the nvidia card.

What benchmarks?

You mean like this one here:

Posted Image

kotaku.com/5964022/the-best-graphics-cards-nvidia-vs-amd-current+gen-comparison


Or perhaps one of the Techpowerup's benchmarks, showing NVIDIA  in the pole position i not-so-taxing scenarios, but once you up the resolution, Radeon cards pull ahead. Think what happens when you disable MSAA and enable SSAA (where effective resolution rendered is higher):

https://www.techpowe...ature_2/22.html

Posted Image

Posted Image


Some interesting results by Tom's Hardware, including frame latencies:

https://www.tomshard...iew,3442-7.html


And this review by Techpowerup presents another point of view on multiple GPUs:

https://www.techpowe...tan_SLI/19.html
  • 0

#18 dreadflopp

dreadflopp

    High King

  • Pack Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,312 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 08:57 AM

Haha you are right Besidilo. I looked back at my browser history at the benchmarks and couldn't find anything to back my statement. Very strange haha. Must have been tired. So I think I'll cancel my Nvidia card order then. How about ENB and amd cards? They work well together? Other bugs with amd? Edit: Canceled my order and ordered a gigabyte 7970 3GB GHz edition
  • 0

#19 Redferne

Redferne

    Commander

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 213 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:14 AM



The only differences between AMD and Nvidia are AO et AF. You can't use AO on an AMD without an ENB and the AF quality via driver is beter on AMD.
The rest can be put on drivers issues, driver options, monitor parameters or the idiot between the chair and the keyboard :D
That is particulary true with gamma and color when going from AMD to Nvidia (or the other way), you have to recalibrate your monitor.
But I agree, for Skyrim stick to Nvidia.


Speaking of gamma and calibration, Nvidia drivers still don't allow users to force ICC/ICM profiles in games.

https://forums.gefor...on-thread-on-t/

And on the subject of additional rendering effects, I don't think it's possible to force FXAA without an injector in AMD drivers (they have MLAA) or various forms of SuperSampling AntiAliasing (such as SGSSAA), which either don't exist in AMD's drivers or don't work with a number of games.

Well AMD have their own version of FXAA. SSAA exist in AMD drivers and there are various form of AA in AMD that doesn't exist in Nvidia.
Contrary to popular belief AMD drivers are now very good and provide as much options as Nvidia's. Each constructor has their own proprietary technologies only available via their drivers and sometime in game if they had a partnership with the game developer.


Yes, AMD has their own post-processing AA (not a version of FXAA), and I've already mentioned it in my previous post. SuperSampling on AMD cards doesn't work in every game, NVIDIA has better support for a few engines out there. And you certainly can't enabling anything like SGSSAA in Skyrim on AMD cards. Even though their own SSAA method works OK.

However, contrary to what you have said before, AMD graphics cards can use Ambient Occlusion with RadeonPro. See the post below.

https://forums.guru3...28&postcount=12

I was referring to Morphological Filtering which is the counterpart of FXAA for AMD.
On my 5850 at work I have Multisampling, adaptive Multisampling and Supersampling as AA method available in the driver. There is also a filter box which contains the following options I have to admit I have no idea what they do: box, edge-detect, narrow-tent, wide-tent.
In my opinion that way too much choices for the average user, especially for most times a small quality difference for a high framerate cost.
RadeonPro or Nvidia Inspector are not part of the drivers themselves. I am not very comfortable with these tool because they touch the driver itself which can be very unsafe.
In my opinion those options should be in the games, adapted and optimized by the developer for their game or more likely the game adapted and optimized for a specific method. The result would be a better quality and framerate than if forced by the driver.
Isn't SSGS proprietary to Nvidia? Like Morphological Filtering is to AMD?
  • 0

#20 Besidilo

Besidilo

    Jarl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:57 AM

I was referring to Morphological Filtering which is the counterpart of FXAA for AMD.

I know what you were referring to, I've said it once already, I had mentioned MLAA in my second post in this thread:

I don't think it's possible to force FXAA without an injector in AMD drivers (they have MLAA)

On my 5850 at work I have Multisampling, adaptive Multisampling and Supersampling as AA method available in the driver. There is also a filter box which contains the following options I have to admit I have no idea what they do: box, edge-detect, narrow-tent, wide-tent.

I've had several AMD cards in my rigs over the past few years, I know what options are there in the control panel. Whilst AMD includes a number of deferred AntiAliasing options in their Control Panel, many of them don't work in some games, Skyrim not excluded, therefore rendering them useless. Some, like the Adaptive Multisampling (which is basically transparency MSAA) are known to have issues in many games, whilst forced Supersampling doesn't work in the titles where you'd really want it to work. NVIDIA's drivers have a distinct advantage in this area.

In my opinion that way too much choices for the average user, especially for most times a small quality difference for a high framerate cost.

I'd rather have options than no options at all. If you don't want to get the best out of your rig for the specific task, just stick to the in-game method of AA, but bear in mind that it sucks in comparison.

RadeonPro or Nvidia Inspector are not part of the drivers themselves. I am not very comfortable with these tool because they touch the driver itself which can be very unsafe.

In what environment are they unsafe? Setting up a game profile has never screwed anything up on my PC (I fail to comprehend how that would be dangerous at all) and most advanced users would know the risk of tweaking other settings. If you don't feel safe using those options, then don't. But please, don't practice scaremongering here, as your information is at best flawed when it comes to the actual use of RadeonPro or NVIDIA Inspector software.

In my opinion those options should be in the games, adapted and optimized by the developer for their game or more likely the game adapted and optimized for a specific method. The result would be a better quality and framerate than if forced by the driver.

Yes, we'd all love that, wouldn't we. But the reality isn't so beautiful, unfortunately. Case in point, Skyrim. Neither the in-game multisampling AA method used nor Anisotropic Filtering can compete with the driver solutions. And this is just one examples, whereas the vast majority of old and new games out there requires tweaking to get the most quality out of them.

Isn't SSGS proprietary to Nvidia? Like Morphological Filtering is to AMD?

https://www.dahlsys....lias/index.html

I think this will be better at explaining things than I could ever attempt to do.

I don't believe MLAA is proprietary (not to mention, it's a post-processing form of AA, not a deferred one), as you can enable it on NVIDIA cards in a few games (Deux Ex and Shogun 2 come to mind).
  • 0

#21 Nshell

Nshell

    Citizen

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 66 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 02:41 PM

Besidilo Techpowerup review  is comparing a card of 1000Euros  with a card of 370Euros... i dont think its logic. imho and by that price i rather use CFX 2x 7970 than 1 titan and I still keep some extra euros. and again... results by Tom's Hardware is comparing a 690 with 2 builtin chips with a 7970 with a single chip... is this even fair? or are they mocking Nvidia? I have 2 7970 and to OC them is just a walk in the park, they are very stable and with RadeonPro I can push them even better with all new options japamd added to the new preview.
  • 0

#22 Redferne

Redferne

    Commander

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 213 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 03:23 PM

I was referring to Morphological Filtering which is the counterpart of FXAA for AMD.

I know what you were referring to, I've said it once already, I had mentioned MLAA in my second post in this thread:

I don't think it's possible to force FXAA without an injector in AMD drivers (they have MLAA)

On my 5850 at work I have Multisampling, adaptive Multisampling and Supersampling as AA method available in the driver. There is also a filter box which contains the following options I have to admit I have no idea what they do: box, edge-detect, narrow-tent, wide-tent.

I've had several AMD cards in my rigs over the past few years, I know what options are there in the control panel. Whilst AMD includes a number of deferred AntiAliasing options in their Control Panel, many of them don't work in some games, Skyrim not excluded, therefore rendering them useless. Some, like the Adaptive Multisampling (which is basically transparency MSAA) are known to have issues in many games, whilst forced Supersampling doesn't work in the titles where you'd really want it to work. NVIDIA's drivers have a distinct advantage in this area.

In my opinion that way too much choices for the average user, especially for most times a small quality difference for a high framerate cost.

I'd rather have options than no options at all. If you don't want to get the best out of your rig for the specific task, just stick to the in-game method of AA, but bear in mind that it sucks in comparison.

RadeonPro or Nvidia Inspector are not part of the drivers themselves. I am not very comfortable with these tool because they touch the driver itself which can be very unsafe.

In what environment are they unsafe? Setting up a game profile has never screwed anything up on my PC (I fail to comprehend how that would be dangerous at all) and most advanced users would know the risk of tweaking other settings. If you don't feel safe using those options, then don't. But please, don't practice scaremongering here, as your information is at best flawed when it comes to the actual use of RadeonPro or NVIDIA Inspector software.

In my opinion those options should be in the games, adapted and optimized by the developer for their game or more likely the game adapted and optimized for a specific method. The result would be a better quality and framerate than if forced by the driver.

Yes, we'd all love that, wouldn't we. But the reality isn't so beautiful, unfortunately. Case in point, Skyrim. Neither the in-game multisampling AA method used nor Anisotropic Filtering can compete with the driver solutions. And this is just one examples, whereas the vast majority of old and new games out there requires tweaking to get the most quality out of them.

Isn't SSGS proprietary to Nvidia? Like Morphological Filtering is to AMD?

https://www.dahlsys....lias/index.html

I think this will be better at explaining things than I could ever attempt to do.

I don't believe MLAA is proprietary (not to mention, it's a post-processing form of AA, not a deferred one), as you can enable it on NVIDIA cards in a few games (Deux Ex and Shogun 2 come to mind).

Oh my... Please don't assume anything.
I'm not scaremongering anyone. I'm just separating your average user from the advanced user you refer to.
And for the rest of your sarcasms, you'll excuse me if I'm going back to play..
I just wanted this thread not becoming the usual troll war AMD/Nvidia by stating that for the vast majority of player won't see the difference. And that's as fact (sadly).
  • 0

#23 Besidilo

Besidilo

    Jarl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 03:26 PM

Besidilo Techpowerup review  is comparing a card of 1000Euros  with a card of 370Euros... i dont think its logic. imho and by that price i rather use CFX 2x 7970 than 1 titan and I still keep some extra euros.

and again...

results by Tom's Hardware is comparing a 690 with 2 builtin chips with a 7970 with a single chip... is this even fair? or are they mocking Nvidia?



I have 2 7970 and to OC them is just a walk in the park, they are very stable and with RadeonPro I can push them even better with all new options japamd added to the new preview.


You're misinterpreting the results. Most review websites don't test 20 different graphics cards in the same test run, as that is simply way too time consuming. What they do, however, is establish a testing baseline and renew the tests every now and then, when a new graphics card comes out that brings something refreshing to the market.

The Titan review was simply linked to with the assumption that it will contain some of the latest testing results. The rest are for comparison purposes only and are totally legitimate reference points if what you're looking for are the closest cards performance-wise.
  • 0

#24 Nshell

Nshell

    Citizen

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 66 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 03:48 PM

Glad you clear it out:thumbsup:, but as I misinterpreted the results other users will also thats why i comment on the results.
  • 0

#25 Aiyen

Aiyen

    Dragon King

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,536 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:13 PM

Think this discussion have gone a bit too far away from the core issue that started it all! 3Gb card is the best choice regardless of who makes it. 4Gb cards only really makes sense if you are doing some serious graphical editing since those programs are the only ones who can make use of that extra VRAM. Also SLI/Crossfire setups would only improve your FPS when running ENB and the like, you still only have access to one set of VRAM. And since most performance versions of the newest generation cards laugh at ENB then even one card can run them at decent FPS depending on how much you crank up the quality parameters.

#26 Nshell

Nshell

    Citizen

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 66 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:17 PM

best choice would be 7990 or 690.
  • 0

#27 dreadflopp

dreadflopp

    High King

  • Pack Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,312 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:24 PM

Just tried my new gigabyte 7970 3gb ghz card and it works good with skyrim revisited. I have only ran around a bit outside whiterun but it seems to give good framerates with skyrim revisted 2k and enb. With 1k normals on official bsa:s and the three major texture overhauls. Not too pleased with the lack of settings in the amd software though but maybe it doesn't matter. Far cry 3 didn't work that well though. I think it was ambient occlusion or something giving a blue shine on rocks.
  • 0

#28 Nshell

Nshell

    Citizen

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 66 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:32 PM

sorry but how about your Drivers? Catalyst 13.2 Beta 7, Atiman Uninstaller 7.0.2 (used to thoroughly clean out Catalyst drivers - highly recommended) (Source Overclock.net)

RadeonPro   [font]Not for the faint heart

If you wanna know what's coming up to next version while it's being developed, try the Preview build with upcoming features and bug fixes, but with new bugs as a bonus maybe.

Download it here[/font]
(Source Guru3d)
  • 0

#29 Besidilo

Besidilo

    Jarl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:25 PM

Just to give peeps another point of view, here's an interesting comparison made using quite recent drivers and what kind of improvements. https://www.hardocp....ummary_review/4 Bear in mind, AMD cards may seem slower as Hard OCP used older reference models of the cards in comparison (which is fair enough by the way). The new models (7950 Boost and 7970 1GHz editions) are what "should" be used when you're making a new purchase decision (in reality, the equivalent cards are very close to each other, with Radeons having an edge in some games and NVIDIA having a handful of titles where support is noticeably better). I don't recommend buying a GTX670 4GB, since it costs more than what you would pay for the 7970 3GB 1GHz Edition that is overall a faster card and overclocks like a beast. The myth about bad drivers support from the AMD team has been just taht in recent years, since we've had numerous examples of NVIDIA not performing up to scratch on new games' releases (Tomb Raider being a very recent example). There are issues with framerate latencies and less configurable options compared to NVIDIA cards, though, so it's swings and roundabouts in many aspects.
  • 0

#30 dreadflopp

dreadflopp

    High King

  • Pack Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,312 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 03:46 AM

sorry but how about your Drivers? Catalyst 13.2 Beta 7' date=' Atiman Uninstaller 7.0.2 (used to thoroughly clean out Catalyst drivers - highly recommended) (Source Overclock.net)

RadeonPro   Not for the faint heart

If you wanna know what's coming up to next version while it's being developed, try the Preview build with upcoming features and bug fixes, but with new bugs as a bonus maybe.

Download it here
(Source Guru3d)

Thanks. I downloaded lastest stable driver. I'll try the beta. And RadeonPro. Is the uninstaller recommended before every driver upgrade?
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users