Discussion in 'Videocards - AMD Radeon Drivers Section' started by AMDMatt, May 29, 2015.
This driver gave me 0 extra FPS in Witcher 3 (vs 1023.0), also frame times are worse:
Sammarbella - I entirely agree, my whole rig is badly out of date, just seems strange that this game and this game alone has issues. I can play Witcher 3, CoD, Crysis 3 amongst others without a problem.
My suspicion is that Physx is killing the cpu
Ten pages before someone has actually done it properly. Thanks bud.
Re:frametimes might look worse (slightly thicker mid line), but they seem same to me.
1-2ms vs 2-3ms local fluctuations is not a big deal. And in such case one with more fps wins for me.
So just by looking at your graph, frametimes are about the same to me, except in the beginning, and at the very end, when there is more pronounced fluctuation on 15.5. Like 3-5ms local deltas.
Again not a deal breaker. But certainly no point upgrading over 1023 for single GPU
Did single GPUs even need driver updating anyways? I was running perfectly fine with the .1023 drivers on windows 10. Those frametimes look pretty much exactly the same to me. The second graph is just zoomed in making it appear worse than it probably is. It seems like this is more of an official release of the .1023 driver + CFX support.
Agree on the zoom they look identical to me.
What pCARS settings are you trying to use?
Hotlapping alone, you should be able to raise settings somewhat, but for ~10+ drivers online or AI offline, try...
"low" env map; reflections; track; shadow
"off" detailed grass; particles
and in Steam launch options for pCARS try...
-pthreads 4 -skipcrowds
Edit: Forgot the other big boost I got with a slightly weaker system than yours, I run my DDR2 overclocked on a 4:5 divider (my CPU runs overclocked at 400FSB)
stupid question possibly?
are these any different to the 15.4.1 Betas? exl CCC version, cant say ive noticed anything
If you are bored of those two 290x's, you know ho to get rid of them too
This is a hardware problem. If you overclock, try upping the voltage a notch, or lowering your overclock, or both.
I had a similar experience. I have actually kept the "R9 3xx" drivers posted by asder00.
As for the hopes that sammarbella expressed, I'm more or less on the same camp. In the middle of the year they will probably have the new drivers ready, hopefully all the "forks" will have merged at that point, so that we can get both the absolute framerate increases that some of the "normal channel" drivers have, as well as the increases from the leaked Windows 10 drivers. The combo should be something, and if Windows 10 seem to progress as they do performance wise, it will be more than something.
I know that CFX users have their right to complain for the profiles being late, but I want proper driver VSYNC/Double Vsync/Triple Buffering/Frame Limiter damnit!
I can't accept that a whole driver team cannot do what two individual guys (Matauri and Unwinder) have done SEPARATELY from each other. Let's not even mention that their tools work cross-platform for all vendors...
That, VSR (which is already working anyways), and replace MLAA with SMAA.
GTA-5: Tested against 15.4, Fps slightly higher with 15.5. Kind of like 220.127.116.11, only not as smooth. They still FEEL like the 15.4 for the most part.
Finally smooth Witcher 3 experience with these drivers.. But I had to turn off vsync and FPS lock..
So i found these benchmarks and wanted to share it with the rest,
Test setup: Radeon R9 290X @ 1.040/2.500 MHz, Core i7-3770K, 4 x 4 GByte DDR3-1333; Windows 8.1 Update x64, Catalyst driver (HQ, 16:1 AF)
I've messed with TW3 settings some more. I had custom SMAA settings, switched to default instead and performance improved a bit. I decided to give HairWorks another try and with VSync I'm hardly losing any performance at all at 8x tessellation and 4x hair AA (8x is default, 2x looks terrible IMO). 16x tessellation is almost just as smooth but it hitches a bit more, so I'm sticking to 8x for now.
So now I'm running 2560x1440 with SMAA, 8x tessellation, HairWorks on, in-game AA off and it's holding 60FPS almost constantly. There's some minor hitching when galloping and sometimes when entering villages, but it's pretty minor stuff. Playing at 35FPS before the driver was way worse. There's some flicker in puddles in Novigrad and there's flicker in the UI (this one is as bad as 15.4).
Here's a screenshot too, left the overlay in so everyone can see CF is running.
295x2, i7 4790k and I'm getting 30-45fps running @ 1440p hairworks on and on ultra.
Feels like I should be getting more.
Well, drivers are good overall, but can't match modded w10 drivers in other games. Once you've had that extra torque from lower overhead, there's no getting over it.
What I don't understand is why AMD haven't included those for their newer drivers on w7/8(.1). They must know those benefits are there.
Matt can you ask your driver team about it, even We know modded drivers are quite sacred topic.
I'm not the one defending AMD driver Team but....
W10 is moving at fast pace with new builds delivered almost each week now.
I doubt AMD driver dept has enough work forces to improve (as they are) the W10 (also at a fast pace) and at the same time translate automatically this improvements to W8.1/7 drivers.
They are also supposed to be working hard on new drivers for series 300 to be released next month, maybe WHQL (Omega Phase II?),
It seems to be too much work for a little and/or short in resource team.
Hair works is not all that, and I’m not just saying out of cognitive dissonance try VSR 3200x1800 with the sharpness post processing all the way up it will make your eyes bleed. You will have to turn down some other settings a bit to get 60 but damn is it worth it
I love catch phrases.
Anyway, yeah or nay on these drivers for cfx TW3?
Anyone else randomly getting the mouse clicks through W3 to desktop, like for example the right click suddenly opens desktop context menu?
I get about the same without any HairWorks "tweaks." HairWorks in its default state runs terribly on AMD, or rather on anything that isn't Maxwell it seems. Still with 4x AA and 8x tessellation you get 90% of the way there IMO with a much, much lower performance hit. 16x tessellation is doable too.