AMD Working on "Dynamic Frame Rate Control" Feature

[boozzer]

People were still buying 700 dollar 780Tis over 550 dollar 290Xs. Nvidia has a reality distortion field.

their pr is 2x more effective than amd's. whatever nv is paying their pr, it is worth it.

 

[soccerballtux]

their pr is 2x more effective than amd's. whatever nv is paying their pr, it is worth it.

all around they're a better run business IMO.

And I used to be such an AMD fanboy.....

 

[Eymar]

Feature makes a lot of sense and should also help with fan noise, unless running a game always using 100% gpu and FPS is below target (like Crysis 3). Another possible benefit is if game is consistently using lower power (> FPS target) prior to more intensive GPU stretch of a game, the videocard can oc to higher boost clocks for a longer time (since starting temp is lower). However, that is an ideal scenario so probably wont happen often.

 

[boozzer]

all around they're a better run business IMO.

And I used to be such an AMD fanboy.....

don't be a fanboy of any brand I buy whatever gives me the most bang for my buck

 

[Silverforce11]

As a gamer who lives for 60fps with vsync on how does this improve my lot in life with an AMD card? Though i'm hoping to live at 120fps 1080p if TV's ever get there.

I also game with vsync on, since I dislike tearing & crazy fps fluctuations. In theory from what is said, it may dynamically lower the clocks further than the standard "3d" clocks to save power. Hawaii already does this though, it will lower clocks if the 3d load isn't demanding, so it doesn't mean much for those users.

as usual, it will probably be poorly implemented and not the most stable; unlike NVidia's solution which will be closed source but work consistently.

It works just fine with Radeon Pro. If all they did was copy & paste into their Catalyst Control Panel, it should be ok. I hope this won't be the first Radeon Pro feature to be included, because the SMAA inject & Sweet FX is very handy to have for some games.

 

[futurefields]

Why do you people keep going on about "framerate limiter".

It's not just a freaking framerate limiter.

What else does it do besides limit the framerate?

I'm going off the one in RadeonPro.

 

[tential]

don't be a fanboy of any brand I buy whatever gives me the most bang for my buck

Same.

I do believe nvidia is a better run company but amd is a better bang for my buck currently. I'm only a fan of sports teams....

 

[bystander36]

I run without vsync due to the lag introduced. If this can give consistent experience and not introduce lag, then it is certainly welcome.

I was thinking this could be useful for those who want to use V-sync and set the FPS to 59 to avoid the latency. Having it in one location, the CCC would make this easier for most.

 

[PPB]

If this is also available under the mantle api its a huge benefit. Also would be nice osd monitoring under mantle.

 

[boozzer]

Same.

I do believe nvidia is a better run company but amd is a better bang for my buck currently. I'm only a fan of sports teams....

who cares about how the company is run? all I care about is the return on my $$$ get the most out of the money I spent.

 

[digitaldurandal]

as usual, it will probably be poorly implemented and not the most stable; unlike NVidia's solution which will be closed source but work consistently.

I wish AMD would just hire a few more developers to get things right. I really prefer them as a company and want to support them. The core setup of one monitor works pretty well but there's lots of fringe cases where things just aren't stable or half-complete. OpenCL comes to mind, it's there for marketing but nobody can use it.

Both teams have released things that were not working consistently.

I used to feel the same way about AMD, but I think things are looking up for them lately. They currently have 1 year old cards competing with brand new cards and in the last year they have brought quite a few features. One of the best for me since I use two cards is XDMA. The reason I originally left for the Nv camp was because the SLI experience had less stutter at the time. Now the opposite is true.

Basically I think it is not fair to judge it before it is released. Skepticism is always smart, but don't take a complete dump on it with no information you know?

 

[digitaldurandal]

I was thinking this could be useful for those who want to use V-sync and set the FPS to 59 to avoid the latency. Having it in one location, the CCC would make this easier for most.

Will that prevent some of the lag from vsync? I know I had read something somewhere about this before. I was thinking I would use it to limit to 72 or so. would 59 be better?

 

[bystander36]

Will that prevent some of the lag from vsync? I know I had read something somewhere about this before. I was thinking I would use it to limit to 72 or so. would 59 be better?

If using V-sync on a DirectX game, if your GPU is capable of creating more than it's refresh rate in FPS, you'll end up with a full frame of latency. So putting a frame cap 1 FPS below the refresh rate will prevent that frame of latency. Of course you will get 1 double long frame every second. While not ideal, if you can't handle the latency, you might find this to be better.

If you have a 60hz monitor, 59 FPS should be ideal for reducing latency. The double frame once a second is something you will have to decide is worth it or not.