AMD Working on "Dynamic Frame Rate Control" Feature

[csbin]

http://www.techpowerup.com/208152/amd-working-on-dynamic-frame-rate-control-feature.html

AMD is working on a new software feature for its Radeon graphics cards, which it calls "Dynamic Frame Rate Control." Revealed informally to the web, by AMD director of PR Chris Hook, who goes by the handle "AMD_Chris" on various forums, Dynamic Frame Rate Control, or DFRC, is a frame-rate limiter, which gives you power savings when you reduce frame-rates. This probably works by reducing clock speeds to achieve the desired frame-rates.

Sounds a lot like V-Sync? Well the way AMD describes it, DFRC is a frame-rate limiter with a slider. Whereas V-Sync makes the GPU spit out frame-rates to match the monitor's refresh-rate. When a game runs, say, 100 FPS, and you enable V-Sync to bring that down to 60 FPS, your GPU is still running at 3D-performance clocks, unless the 3D load is way too low, and the driver decides to change the power state altogether. DFRC probably achieves lower frame-rates by underclocking the GPU, and increasing the clocks, whenever the scene gets more demanding, and the output FPS drops below the target. Hook describes the energy savings with DFRC as "mind blowing." This peaks our curiosity.

 

[SPBHM]

that's good, I've been using msi afterburner (RTSS) for this purpose.

 

[tidy]

.

 

[Saylick]

Sounds like NV's Battery Boost tech...

 

[5150Joker]

No wonder these guys keep losing market share.

Thread-crapping is not allowed. You know better than that.
-Elfear

 

[WittyRemark]

No wonder these guys keep losing market share.

Elaborate?

 

[5150Joker]

Elaborate?

If they care so much about power saving, they should put out designs like Maxwell which are efficient, not gimmicky driver updates like this.

 

[metalliax]

If they care so much about power saving, they should put out designs like Maxwell which are efficient, not gimmicky driver updates like this.

You've got to be kidding... Having a max framerate makes sense in so many scenarios. What's the point of delivering 120-200 fps during non-demanding scenes when you deliver 40-80 fps during the demanding times? Setting a max framerate at 80 or so, will significantly help with power consumption, all while keeping gameplay very smooth and enjoyable. I don't know how comments like yours don't get users banned from these forums... oh wait, I know why.

 

[5150Joker]

You've got to be kidding... Having a max framerate makes sense in so many scenarios. What's the point of delivering 120-200 fps during non-demanding scenes when you deliver 40-80 fps during the demanding times? Setting a max framerate at 80 or so, will significantly help with power consumption, all while keeping gameplay very smooth and enjoyable. I don't know how comments like yours don't get users banned from these forums... oh wait, I know why.[

So your favorite company's new gimmick is brushed off (for good reason) and you want the user (who's been around way longer than you) banned? Way to make a point.

 

[boozzer]

You've got to be kidding... Having a max framerate makes sense in so many scenarios. What's the point of delivering 120-200 fps during non-demanding scenes when you deliver 40-80 fps during the demanding times? Setting a max framerate at 80 or so, will significantly help with power consumption, all while keeping gameplay very smooth and enjoyable. I don't know how comments like yours don't get users banned from these forums... oh wait, I know why.

you are wasting your time. please pick your battles. don't waste your time and energy.

 

[Jovec]

If they care so much about power saving, they should put out designs like Maxwell which are efficient, not gimmicky driver updates like this.

Eh, AMD has to deal with market perceptions. Nvidia (like Apple) has the mindshare to tell people what they "need." Nvidia was pushing CUDA and GPGPU like no tomorrow, but after AMD outdid them on that front with consumer cards (and crushed them with bitcoin mining) suddenly power efficiency is what is important in NVs last two gens. Not to mention that slowing GPGPU adoption hurts AMD on the APU front too.

Both sides play up their strengths and attack their competitor's weaknesses.

 

[Ancalagon44]

It will make benchmark comparisons slightly more difficult. Or at least, if a card is able to get over 60FPS at a given setting, you won't be able to compare both power and performance at the same time, unless you really need more than 60FPS.

What I mean is, let us say that Nvidia and AMD both have the same tech (eventually). You load up Crysis 5, and both cards are capable of running it at 75FPS, so you cap the framerate to 60FPS. Both now produce the same framerate, meaning the only thing you can compare is how much power each card draws while producing 60FPS.

If both cards can only do 45FPS, then it is different.

Also, could this mean that a card that can easily do 90FPS might end up being more power efficient (at a 60FPS target) than a card that just barely does 60FPS?

 

[5150Joker]

Eh, AMD has to deal with market perceptions. Nvidia (like Apple) has the mindshare to tell people what they "need." Nvidia was pushing CUDA and GPGPU like no tomorrow, but after AMD outdid them on that front with consumer cards (and crushed them with bitcoin mining) suddenly power efficiency is what is important in NVs last two gens. Not to mention that slowing GPGPU adoption hurts AMD on the APU front too.

Both sides play up their strengths and attack their competitor's weaknesses.

AMD having done well with Bitcoin is nothing new (and it didn't really benefit them) and CUDA is still a large factor for professionals. As for power efficiency, the adoption and accolades of Maxwell speaks volumes about need vs perception. If AMD wants similar accolades and market adoption, it should follow suit with similar efficient architectures and get ahead of nVidia for once instead of following.

 

[AnandThenMan]

AMD is bringing out features that benefit their users, stop whining. And AMD has been ahead of Nvidia many, many times as is the reverse so stop with the flamebait nonsense.

 

[SPBHM]

the only negative thing is that they took so long,

it's a big win because you are not forced to use it, and if you do you can save power and generate less heat/noise, also make gameplay smoother, more consistent... and avoid 1000FPS menus and things like that which bring no benefit only potential problems

I would also like them to add adaptive vsync

 

[dacostafilipe]

Mixed with FreeSync this could be interesting.

I mean, for games that you can play at 40fps, this could bring great power improvements.

 

[Bateluer]

No wonder these guys keep losing market share.

. . . because they're working on a feature thats beneficial to many users? Are you retarded?

I've been using Radeon Pro to limit Witcher 1 and Risen 1 to 60fps; they skyrocket to 120+ and max out my 290X's clock speed. No reason at all my my 290X to be pegged at 1050Mhz, its max clock, in these old games. I'll be all over this when its released. Hopefully in the Catalyst 15.1s.


Personal attacks aren't allowed and don't help anyone.
-Elfear

 

[digitaldurandal]

If they care so much about power saving, they should put out designs like Maxwell which are efficient, not gimmicky driver updates like this.

So when Fermi came out you were upset right?

 

[tidy]

.

 

[lyssword]

weird, I've been using radeon pro for years to do exact same thing (frame limiter)

 

[DarkKnightDude]

How dare AMD comes out with a new feature.

Hopefully it works perfectly well.

 

[tidy]

.

 

[futurefields]

you guys really this confused about a framerate limiter?

its simple, you limit fps to the minimum to avoid fluctuations

ill take a locked 40fps over a jerky 40-60fps any day

 

[futurefields]

the guy who made radeonpro works at amd now, probably why this is coming to ccc finally

 

[Skurge]

the guy who made radeonpro works at amd now, probably why this is coming to ccc finally

They should have hired him way earlier. Also, it's pretty funny that one man can make such a difference to, what i assume is a team of highly qualified software engineers.