Again with this s*** (Concerning Metal gear solid ground zeros)

Exactly how I feel mate. Really poor showing from AMD...

 

To be fair, there are plenty of other uses for multi-GPU setups outside of gaming.

 

I'm hoping this is just something that'll be fixed in newer drivers or a patch. The game isn't even very demanding, despite looking quite amazing. On my "lowly" 280X, if I just drop shadows to one step below the max (From extra high, to whatever was below that), the game pretty much always runs at 60 FPS.

 

Gamers investing into SLi / CF care most about multi-GPU uses inside of gaming...

 

This is pretty much exactly me.

 

I don't know, but my 7970 gets 51-60FPS on Ultra settings... I cannot understand the gap between 7970 and 280X also... I may be hasty... but I call that bench a bit rubbish...

 

You are lucky then.
I'm getting EXACTLY the same fps as the benches...

 

Wow - I expected to take a bit of a kicking on here for expressing my opinion. Bit depressing that there's agreement from other 295X2 owners.

Admittedly I have it lucky. In most games a 290X is still a good card at 1440p, (great at 1080p) but this must be particularly annoying for people with a 7990 or 2 x 280X cards. For them, they get a great experience if Crossfire works and a mediocre one when it doesn't. This is what worries me as it's the position I'll be in 12-18 months from now.

Re the post above about other uses for dual GPU, yes you're absolutely right. Sadly none of those uses interest me. I suspect they only interest a very small percentage of dual GPU users too.

 

That s what I do too.

No complaints from multi-gpus, I know what to expect. I will keep having those kind of setups.

 

Ive tried both a 7950 and a 760 in my rig, the 7950 works better in almost all games. I was thinking far cry 4 had jitter issues because of amd drivers, it was no better on the 760... but assassins creed unity was actually playable without stutter on the 7950. I just wish amd had more options like adaptive vsync in ccc, but radeonpro fills most of that gap.

 

good point! Ive seen all kinds of benchmarks that make no sense, and aparently Far Cry 4 runs awesome on nvidia(it doesnt).

 

Don't blame AMD. Blame Nvidia and their practices.

Why does this game run bad on AMD? Same as any other game that collaborates with GameWorks. Following linked article is from 25 June:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...d-potentially-the-entire-pc-gaming-ecosystem/

Maybe the game developers need wake up and realise Nvidia's ulterior motive is to shaft the GPU opposition. Yes Gameworks are helping them make the game, but GameWorks (Nvidia) are in it for themselves first and foremost. So AMD get shafted and the developer ends up wearing some of the disaffection from 40% of the gaming market (the AMD users).

 

I'm seeing some user related issues in this thread to be honest, complaining that quadfire doesn't work for a start. I'd be genuinely shocked if a single person recommended anyone make a move like that for AMD or Nvidia, the more cards you run the more problems you're going to see. As for the main topic, it's an Nv game -- of course it's going to run better on Nv hardware. It's not AMD's fault in paticular, it's the dev's and this ridiculous sponsorship practice (which both companies are guilty of). We'd all be better off if it was banned from happening.

 

MGS5 doesn't use GameWorks, though, and the games that do use GameWorks can have all the NVIDIA exclusive effects turned off. How can GameWorks negatively affect AMD GPUs when all of the effects are turned off by the player?

 

That is old.AMD has only less than 30% dgpu market.Nvidia has more than 70% dgpu market.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2412380

 

I stand corrected. No GameWorks involved it appears. But it is definitely a TWIMTBP - so a title created on and developed for NVIDIA graphics with help from Nvidia. That better? (Guess that explains the listed system requirements. Intel CPU and Nvidia GPU. Where is the AMD CPU and GPU minimums? And no surprise, Nvidia has a game specific driver optimization and SLI support ready to go day 1).

And as for the 'How can Gameworks (or Nvidia) negatively affect AMD GPUs, did you read the linked article? Don't say it don't happen. So GameWorks aren't involved in this title, but can be sure Nvidia did no favours for AMD in helping out with the PC MGS. Certainly would explain the performance graphs.

 

u cannot do anything because Nvidia is dominating DGPU market by more than 70% of market.
This year Nvidia had more 70% Nvidia sponsored PC games but only u can do buy Nvidia or just accept the facts.

 

It doesn't change the fact that the current generation consoles are GCN based. The optimizations made for the consoles should mostly be transferred over to the PC, I know the memory system is different, but there's more to game dev than memory functions.
AMD cards are very capable of a smooth gaming experience. Look at Bioshock Infinite, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Alien: Isolation, not the most intensive games, but they run very good on both AMD and NVIDIA. You'll see most AMD partnered games run fine on NVIDIA hardware, just not the other way round.

 

This is one of the main reasons I switched to AMD. Logic would suggest that AMD should benefit from their supply of console GPUs. It's a shame that hasn't happened so far. I live in hope...

To those of you saying that you simply won't buy games that aren't optimised properly/ won't run on AMD well, I admire your patience and principled stance. As said above though, it's both nVidia and AMD encouraging developers into partisan sponsorship and development practices that causes this.