458 replies to this topic

[EternalCore]

WithSilentWings, on 26 November 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

Why do you have to "switch" rather than just getting what's good at the time? It's like you're saying you NEED to be a fanboy of one side or the other.

AMD will always at least be competitive from a price perspective on the low-end. It's hard to imagine them catching up to Intel ever again at this point which is extremely unfortunate. Talking CPUs here exclusively.

For GPUs AMD's drivers are excellent and their GPUs are excellent. nVidia and AMD appear to be fighting back and forth about who can write the worse software

Hah I'm not a fan boy.... I Go by Experience and facts! For AMD's GPU's Their drivers destroy their card's performance... I went from a Rare Sapphire HD6870 gen 2.1 to this card Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Ti OC'd Edition and there's no comparison the Nvidia card and drivers out performed the AMD's GPU and drivers in every way possible. Also The AMD FX CPU's are a major step backwards in performance... My Phenom II x4 965 Out performs the FX series for gaming.

Edited by EternalCore, 26 November 2012 - 05:41 PM.

[yashmack]

silentD11, on 26 November 2012 - 04:31 PM, said:

You don't understand what "minimum" requirements often mean. Any time you see "minimum" you should think "will run like a ******* single digit slide show at all low details and 480p" because that's what it has often meant. It'll start the program and get into a game with those parts at all low details, but you aren't getting more than 5fps, but it will start. I'd actually say 19 fps is high for being around min specs on the CPU, generous even. Read the minimum specs for Windows for a laugh... that means it will boot... eventually, not that you can actually do anything in Windows or you can even run all the services for it. Click IE and go to lunch, it might be up when you get back.

It needs a quadcore. The games you listed use much older engines. Sorry but any sort of AMD Athalon 64 x2 or core 2 duo is beyond ancient right now.

Also your GTS 250 card is the same GPU as a 9800gt and 8800gts, nvidia just kept reselling them and changing the name. So it does not have the proper performance of a 260/280/285 geforce era card, it still has 8800 geforce performance and is the same card just rebadged (some of them they didn't even bother with that LOL) That's minimum spec here, so you have a minimum level GPU.

I completely disagree with everything youve stated

[silentD11]

EternalCore, on 26 November 2012 - 05:30 PM, said:

Hah I'm not a fan boy.... I Go by Experience and facts! For AMD's GPU's Their drivers destroy their card's performance... I went from a Rare Sapphire HD6870 gen 2.1 to this card Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Ti OC'd Edition and there's no comparison the Nvidia card and drivers out performed the AMD's GPU and drivers in every way possible. Also The AMD FX CPU's are a major step backwards in performance...

On the FX CPUs... they actually are an improvement over the old Phenom IIs in... Linux and Win8! Win7 just doesn't properly address the entire module vs core issue properly, the same can be said for a lot of desktop software. Since each of the cores in a module isn't really one things go borky. Each older AMD Phenom II core is a full core. Each FX module is two cores that share a floating point unit, along with fetch and decode functions... this is the problem. Win7 doesn't properly use this and neither do your games.

They aren't all that bad provided your OS can use them properly or provided the software you're using can... if you're gaming on Win7 or XP then obviously there are issues.

I wouldn't completely blame AMD here, they aren't alone, intel sells **** as "for gamers" that isn't either. I got my socket 2011 system because I needed 8 cores, gobs of RAM and SAS support... of course none of that means squat for gaming. And sandybridge-E (my case xeon) CPUs clock for clock aren't as good as ivybridge, quad channel memory doesn't do squat other than add latency unless you have software that can use it... and it sucks power like a mule!

Of course socket 2011 and AMD FX parts are both "better" than socket 1155 or Phenom II when you look at the potential of the platform, but they are both pretty nutty choices for gaming hardware.

[silentD11]

yashmack, on 26 November 2012 - 05:46 PM, said:

I completely disagree with everything youve stated

Start with where...

Let's start here... anandtech explaining how the GTS 250 is actually only a g92b (8800gt/s, 9800gt, 9800gtx) and that the 250 is simply a rebadged (that means sticker swapped) 9800gtx (old g92b that wouldn't die) or if you get the 1gb it has a newer PCB and some power savings.

So... refute it. FYI that was a huge scandal because in many cases they were just ripping the stickers off 9800 cards and slapping on 250 stickers.... but then again, unless it was the power saving 1gb version, it was the same card!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2731

We'll start there, if you can refute it, we can continue.

[GabRaz]

Did not notice a frame rate jump, but felt that in general things were smoother.

[Carmaga]

Just hold your horses.

Let's say that your girlfriend makes a dinner. The food tastes horrible, but you are so kind and say "it was great!" Now you are bond to eat the same awful dinner for the rest of your life.

The problem isn't in our end, it's in the game. You can run Crysis 1&2 and Sniper: Ghost Warrior 2 not to mention about Cryengine3 SDK and other graphically intense games (eg. Assassin Creed III) without problems. The only Cryengine 3 game released (so far) which suffers from FPS problems is MWO. PGI has acknowledged it and they have already stated that they will fix it. The only question is when.

With these duct tape workarounds you just do disservice for the PGI, community and MW lovers. And the core of the problem will never be fixed.

If you are working to fix the problem yourselves -- instead of spending hours to find a workaround without a pay-check, you can simply put a job hiring application to PGI. You can find this from the Footer of this page.

Edited by Carmaga, 26 November 2012 - 07:35 PM.

[EternalCore]

Carmaga, on 26 November 2012 - 07:20 PM, said:

Just hold your horses.

Let's say that your girlfriend makes a dinner. The food tastes horrible, but you are so kind and say "it was great!" Now you are bond to eat the same awful dinner for the rest of your life.

The problem isn't in our end, it's in the game. You can run Crysis 1&2 and Sniper: Ghost Warrior 2 not to mention about Cryengine3 SDK and other graphically intense games (eg. Assassin Creed III) without problems. The only Cryengine 3 game released (so far) which suffers from FPS problems is MWO. PGI has acknowledged it and they have already stated that they will fix it. The only question is when.

With these duct tape workarounds you just do disservice for the PGI, community and MW lovers. And the core of the problem will never be fixed.

If you are working to fix the problem yourselves -- instead of spending hours to find a workaround without a pay-check, you can simply put a job hiring application to PGI. You can find this from the Footer of this page.

I Would but I'm Not anywhere near where PGI is located And I'm not able to move.

[xenoglyph]

Just a heads up...I highly recommend NOT trying to get ATI tools working on Windows 8 x64. After finally tracking down the missing DLL file that ATI tools requires (it's in the 12.1 driver from last January), much bad **** began happening. Apps crashing, major screen glitches at random, all sorts of fun stuff.

It's probably a good idea to avoid it altogether.

Edited by xenoglyph, 26 November 2012 - 09:05 PM.

[J4ckInthebox]

Quote

It's probably a good idea to avoid it altogether.

Windows 8? yes, I completely agree.

Edited by J4ckInthebox, 26 November 2012 - 09:06 PM.

[OneManWar]

Ok, so this helped my framerate for 1 game actually and then back to 60-15 fps. Suckiness.....

[xenoglyph]

Need it for WP8 development
Seriously though, I don't see what the big deal is...runs exactly like Window 7 for me, all of my old software works....have yet to find a single one that doesn't. ATI tray tools has always sucked and probably doesn't work on Windows 7 either.

Edited by xenoglyph, 26 November 2012 - 09:31 PM.

[EternalCore]

J4ckInthebox, on 26 November 2012 - 09:05 PM, said:

Windows 8? yes, I completely agree.

So Do I! It's vista all over again but with the 70's Disco color style...

[EternalCore]

xenoglyph, on 26 November 2012 - 09:31 PM, said:

Need it for WP8 development
Seriously though, I don't see what the big deal is...runs exactly like Window 7 for me, all of my old software works....have yet to find a single one that doesn't. ATI tray tools has always sucked and probably doesn't work on Windows 7 either.

No. It works Quite Well on Win7.

[xenoglyph]

Does it work on Windows 7 x64? Which driver did you rip the DLL from? Last time I tried it (besides tonight) was probably 18 months ago and it just caused me headaches....

Edited by xenoglyph, 26 November 2012 - 10:10 PM.

[Corvus Antaka]

I wouldnt touch ati tray tools buggy software.

[EternalCore]

xenoglyph, on 26 November 2012 - 10:07 PM, said:

Does it work on Windows 7 x64? Which driver did you rip the DLL from? Last time I tried it (besides tonight) was probably 18 months ago and it just caused me headaches....

I haven't used it for a while now because I switched to a Nvidia card But I last used it on the driver version 12.7.

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 November 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

I wouldnt touch ati tray tools buggy software.

Thats the price for using 3rd party software... But then again AMD's drivers are not any better...

Edited by EternalCore, 26 November 2012 - 10:15 PM.

[J4ckInthebox]

I have two rigs, one with an AMD GPU and the other with an Nvidia GPU.

Laptop: core I7-2670QM (8 cores), 6 GB RAM, GTX570M 1.5 GB DDR5
slight increase in overall performance (i'd say 5 FPS), back at pre-patch performance.

desktop: Core I5 750 (4cores), 8GB RAM, two Radeon HD 5850 1GB GDDR5 In Crossfire mode
Impressive increase in FPS cap (at least +15 FPS), but the overall perfs seems to remain the same (you feel the FPS drop even harder )

[xenoglyph]

Dude, the required file for ATI tray tools was removed from AMD Catalyst in version 12.2....which is why I mentioned ripping the file from 12.1

Edited by xenoglyph, 26 November 2012 - 10:19 PM.

[EternalCore]

xenoglyph, on 26 November 2012 - 10:17 PM, said:

Dude, the required file for ATI tray tools was removed from AMD Catalyst in version 12.2....which is why I mentioned ripping the file from 12.1

Ok if you say so!...

[xenoglyph]

You're the one saying it works great and you used version 12.7

12.7 has this file?

atipdlxx.dll

If it was actually working for you then I was going to consider giving it another go, but it sounds like you're full of BS to me

Edited by xenoglyph, 26 November 2012 - 10:22 PM.