Discussion in 'Videocards - AMD Radeon Drivers Section' started by RexOmnipotentus, Nov 9, 2015.
Probably because you have a more than capable PC
first of all, could you pls set your pictures to something like medium thumbnails or so? Or "spoiler" them at least. You f@cked up page layout for people who reads this page. I won't be even mentioning forum rules on this (ops, I just did) And second, you do realize that forcing 2x adaptive MSAA in CCC does nothing in dx11 games which don't have build-in hardware MSAA support, right?
Cann't this be adressed/redirected at a driverlevel? Offcourse it would be a hell of a job sometimes.
It's allmost unbeleavable when seeing the beautiful The Talos Principle in action running smooth as glass @5K on CF Fury in contrast.
As far as CF is conserned; I tried some other profiles, but only AFR scales quite a bit, but with errors ( SSAO artefacts and HDR).
One thing to note is Boris is working on an enb mod for the game, so lets hope besides a working CF-profile, for many mods
every game is going to be different, each has its own workload idiosyncrasies.
to some extent, yes, but you can only do so much to mitigate any hardware deficiencies.
It was just the road they chose. AMD tends to be more forward thinking, its architectural choices will pay dividends when DX12 becomes mainstream.
CF is a different animal.....
There are already some reshade/sweetfx mods
Guys dont put all on Ultra,you dont see the difference between Ultra - High,even Medium.
The game engine is so old,so unoptimized,dont bother to put all on Ultra.Forget about benchmark with this game(GW).
Fallout 4 HD6870 crossfire
Could someone help me out with some advice here.
I have 2 x HD6870 with crossfire bridge.
I realise my cards are very old but they play all my games great so I don't really want to upgrade just yet.
Inside a vault I can run at 1080p but as soon as I step outside it drops under 5fps.
I dropped the res to 720p and then in a vault it will run everything at ultra at steady 60fps which although not clear is playable for me and looks OK.
Soon as I step outside the vault though I get same issue and fps drops so much it is unplayable.
Right now I am running on low settings at 720p and I still get random freezes and slow downs when above ground, then soon as I am inside somewhere I am at max fps.
I tried running crossfire in all different modes but game refuses to start with it enabled. I tried using the skyrim profile but the second GPU has a little bit of activity when game is loading but then goes to 0.
I have been reading through various threads but everyone is mainly talking about 970s or 390s etc..
Can anyone help me get this game playable on my old cards?
What settings do you have?No Ultra,because Gameworks.
If you put all on Medium,no God Rays,1080p,its ok?
Crossfire & SLI not working,officially.
Thanks for the tip. It helps a lot.
According to the system requirements a HD 6870 is simply to weak. You need a HD 7870 with 2GB of Vram to play this game.
CrossFire might make the game playable for you, if both of your cards have 2GB of Vram.
I bet it's not enough vram for fullhd ultra settings
For me 15.10 is much better than 15.11. With 15.10 I have a few fps more. No shuttering, may be because FreeSync is working (with 15.11 not). 54-75 fps when running to VAULT in intro. (75 is set as maximum in Catalyst.)
here is another review
@dasa2, dude, pclab is not faithfully. Jizz them lie as hell. One of my friends (from Poland) sent me their bench when 750Ti was better in overall than R9 270X, though even 7850 beat this GPU. You have no any better IT portal?
they show fury x winning at higher res and loosening in a cpu limited test i think thats in line with what others have shown so far
considering there running a driver nvidia has released that apparently improves there fallout 4 performance by ~25% and amd still has yet to release anything tweaked for fallout 4 i think amd is doing fairly well at 4k in there review
they sometimes show in a review how amd can lose in one level but win in another
i rather like there tests as they are one of the few review sites that take the time to find cpu\gpu limited parts of a game instead of just running a timedemo from a section of the game thats on rails or a built in benchmark
it will be interesting to see how amd can tweak there drivers and how long it will take
@PR and not "blinded" minds around...
I always found funny when someone has his mind "blinded" by his own decision and try to convince everybody that there is point black everywhere when the fact is he has folded his eyes himself.
It's like the emperor when nobody wants to say he is nude.
When cold facts demonstrates AMD DX11API overhead sh*t performance he calls it bs and name it "less efficient at serialized work load".
Well there is an easy solution for this:
Ask 3DMark to rename his "API overhead test" as "serialized efficience test" and call it a day!
I'm running 15.10 drivers and CF works fine. Just have to make sure full screen is turned on in the .ini
With 290x CF I gave a solid 60fps at 1080p. (frame rate capped)
If I turn down shadows and God rays to high I get around 40fps in eyefinity. Now just need a fix for the horribly stretched HUD.
These numbers look very very wrong to me. I can get AMD being slower than NVIDIA in this game, but I bet that the Fury X somehow doesn't get 33 fps at 1080p. I've heard other people calling this site crap, multiple times.
On Hilbert's test the Fur X seems to be getting triple the performance of what the Polish website is saying. It's still behind the 980Ti by a wide margin, but it's not struggling along with the 7970 at 1080p...
Do you have a shot of this CPU bottleneck (any core)?
Like in AB monitoring graph of CPU cores.
I bet there is no CPU core maxed and no GPU maxed.
That lead us to the very possible "driver bottleneck" commonly know as "AMD DX11 API overhead driver bad efficiency" or rarely reffered as "AMD GPU less efficient at serialized work load".
it depends on the part of the game tested some parts are heavier on the cpu\gpu than others
the pclab review linked above tests different parts of the game in one of there tests the fury x gets much closer to 90fps just like the one you linked
you cant compare different reviews when they are not testing the exact same part of the game