(gamegpu.ru) assassins-creed-syndicate-test

[ShintaiDK]

I'm not really convinced that the average joe is buying the 970 because at max overclocks it's faster than the 390 (probably by quite a small margin as well). I don't think most people assume they'll win the silicon lottery and get a beast of an overclocking card anyway. I'm more convinced that for almost a year when it was still only the AMD 200 series cards that were available (which had the reputation for being hot/loud from reference coolers) they generally went the NVIDIA option without even considering an AMD card. To be honest - I don't think you can really go wrong with either choice - just that it in this case it seems pretty one sided when it shouldn't be.

Half the power usage, much better drivers and actual game support from day 1. And much more than that. Plenty of reasons if you ask me.

Its not fun sitting with a supposed faster card if it doesn't deliver. And only got the downsides.

 

[littleg]

Half the power usage, much better drivers and actual game support from day 1. And much more than that. Plenty of reasons if you ask me.

Its not fun sitting with a supposed faster card if it doesn't deliver. And only got the downsides.

Ironic considering the broken SLI in this game. Great drivers and game support .

 

[linaaslt]

ShintaiDK, from all the people that i met on any forum, you the only one that i sincerely hate. your ignorance and BS is just going trough the roof sometimes. i'll need to put you in ignore list.

Warning issued for personal attack.
-- stahlhart

 

[lehtv]

The lighting conditions are pretty similiar - the sun.

And like in the real world picture the shadows are getting blurrier with the distance from the object in Syndicate.

Maybe you should show us a example with proof your point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0MreRSammI#t=24s

See that blur? Me neither.

 

[AtenRa]

This is why people that bought the R9 290 at $240-250 were the actual winners vs those who bought the GTX970 at $330.

Now days the R9 390 is on par with R9 290X.

Those two are gameworks titles.

Most people follow the trend, others follow perf/$. You know who wins every time dont you ??

 

[PhonakV30]

Ohhhh, Nvidia's method is worst than others.AMD and Soft shadow are more sharper than Nvidia and does this mean Nvidia's Method gives better performance than Both ?

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTQzMjQ0NjMyNWt1bjU1ODVvcmFfNF83X2wucG5n
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTQzMjQ0NjMyNWt1bjU1ODVvcmFfNF84X2wucG5n
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTQzMjQ0NjMyNWt1bjU1ODVvcmFfNF85X2wucG5n
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTQzMjQ0NjMyNWt1bjU1ODVvcmFfNF8xMF9sLnBuZw==

this one is much sharper than others.
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTQzMjQ0NjMyNWt1bjU1ODVvcmFfNF8xMl9sLnBuZw==

Ok i found Article for Soft shadow :

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/04/20/grand_theft_auto_v_video_card_performance_preview/6

 

[SlowSpyder]

Screenshots look decent, but not for that performance. I see at least one person is on top of the moon because Gameworks likely hurt performance for everyone who buys this game.

 

[Techhog]

Ohhhh, Nvidia's method is worst than others.AMD and Soft shadow are more sharper than Nvidia and does this mean Nvidia's Method gives better performance than Both ?

No, not at all! It's a huge performance hog, just like every GameWorks feature. If you're not satisfied with your performance in GTAV, the first thing you need to do is make sure that crap is turned off! :thumbsdown:

 

[tential]

No, not at all! It's a huge performance hog, just like every GameWorks feature. If you're not satisfied with your performance in GTAV, the first thing you need to do is make sure that crap is turned off! :thumbsdown:

So you see my confusion right? Nvidia "fans" love to say things like "This is why people bought the GTX 970!" but if you have to turn off every gameworks feature to play the game how is Gameworks benefiting 95% of Nvidia GPU owners?

I'd say it's not. And for the games where you may actually be able to use those features, you're using it on the LOWEST setting, or tweaking the game to allow it to work as such.

Look, if Nvidia wants to add features that only benefit their GPUs fine. I don't even care if Nvidia vendor locks Godrays and whatever. The problem is, once Nvidia features are implemented into a game, the game as a whole has MASSIVE performance issues for ALL users. Getting an Nvidia GPU may get you from 15 FPS to 35 FPS, but you're still at an unplayable FPS.

If Nvidia has well optimized features that were Vendor locked, I may consider their GPUs for those gameworks vendorlocked features.

Instead, the features are horrendous optimized, so I'm NEVER looking forward to gameworks games or features, it doesn't matter what GPU I'm rocking, I hate Gameworks performance.

 

[sontin]

So, you hate Gameworks performance?
That doesnt make sense. Gameworks features cost performance because they are adding graphical effects to the game.

Syndicate runs at 900p@30FPS or less on a PS4. And you are expecting that this game runs at 1080p with next gen effects with 60FPS on a GTX970? :\

 

[AtenRa]

And you are expecting that this game runs at 1080p with next gen effects with 60FPS on a GTX970? :\

Obviously no, how NV will sell the GTX980Ti to 1080p players ???

 

[SlowSpyder]

So, you hate Gameworks performance?
That doesnt make sense. Gameworks features cost performance because they are adding graphical effects to the game.

Syndicate runs at 900p@30FPS or less on a PS4. And you are expecting that this game runs at 1080p with next gen effects with 60FPS on a GTX970? :\

A PS4 @ 900P getting 30FPS
A 5960X @ 4.6GHz with a Fury X can't crack 50FPS at 1080P. Yea, I'd say something is borking performance.

 

[Techhog]

So, you hate Gameworks performance?
That doesnt make sense. Gameworks features cost performance because they are adding graphical effects to the game.

Syndicate runs at 900p@30FPS or less on a PS4. And you are expecting that this game runs at 1080p with next gen effects with 60FPS on a GTX970? :\

They improve visuals by a very small amount usually and even look worse in some cases, yet will cut the frame rate in half for even the most simple effect. If that's perfectly fine to you, you can keep that opinion but I refuse to share it. The effects need to either be optimized or removed, period.

 

[tential]

They improve visuals by a very small amount usually and even look worse in some cases, yet will cut the frame rate in half for even the most simple effect. If that's perfectly fine to you, you can keep that opinion but I refuse to share it. The effects need to either be optimized or removed, period.

This is why I like HardOCP's reviews. They do a "Maximum Playable Settings" test to show the best settings you can use for a GPU, along with the performance you get. To me, it lets me see the benefits of stepping up a GPU.

In this case, the GTX 970 vs the R9 390 in the Witcher 3 in an older review has both GPUs neck and neck as long as the person with the 390 turns post processing down 1 setting....

Especially since HardOCP reviews usually include a lot of Gameworks titles, for me, it shows just how much both GPUs struggle, and how the GPUs are a setting apart usually, but when you're outside of those games, you get a pretty nice boost. When you have Crossfire, it's even better(as long as the title supports it of course). It all comes down to the games you play, but I wish Nvidia would improve Gameworks performance as a whole. Then, even if their GPUs do vastly better in it, at least more of their users can benefit, rather than 980Ti owners.

 

[Azix]

Unfortunately the longer devs use gameworks the worse their ability to make competent PC games will be. Ubisoft is not doing itself any favors not bringing itself up to level with better optimized games.

This stuff is making me worried about division next year.

Half the power usage, much better drivers and actual game support from day 1. And much more than that. Plenty of reasons if you ask me.

Its not fun sitting with a supposed faster card if it doesn't deliver. And only got the downsides.

tell your much better drivers to all the people who had issues with nvidia drivers over the months. half the power usage? no. And good luck getting the same level of efficiency once you overclock it to catch up. Game support from day one apparently only is necessary when its a broken nvidia supported game.

meanwhile the company is being wonderful and objectively crapping on their users' experiences with expensive games

 

[railven]

So you see my confusion right? Nvidia "fans" love to say things like "This is why people bought the GTX 970!" but if you have to turn off every gameworks feature to play the game how is Gameworks benefiting 95% of Nvidia GPU owners?

That's the power of marketing! They already bought the NV card. Win for NV. AMD card flounders. More win for NV.

If people have to turn of a feature/option to get playable performance on their NV card they'd still have to do the same for their AMD card. Difference is, they don't get the check list.

NV is killing it in sales, market share, and game involvement. There is a reason people are buying NV cards and turning off options/features because of marketing. AMD should try it.

 

[Techhog]

That's the power of marketing! They already bought the NV card. Win for NV. AMD card flounders. More win for NV.

If people have to turn of a feature/option to get playable performance on their NV card they'd still have to do the same for their AMD card. Difference is, they don't get the check list.

NV is killing it in sales, market share, and game involvement. There is a reason people are buying NV cards and turning off options/features because of marketing. AMD should try it.

Jesus... *shakes head*

 

[ThatBuzzkiller]

The lighting conditions are pretty similiar - the sun.

And like in the real world picture the shadows are getting blurrier with the distance from the object in Syndicate.

Maybe you should show us a example with proof your point.

Again you don't know that without knowing what the entire scene was like ...

Soft shadows don't just come into existence because of an object distancing from it's projection, they come from indirect illumination ...

I don't need proof or any examples when it's obvious that PCSS is not at all comparable to a ray traced solution ...

Simulating a penumbra requires multiple light bounces in a scene for high quality soft shadows. PCSS only takes into account the nearest occluder to a light source but when you have multiple overlapping occluders the apparent discontinuities become clear enough that banding artifacts will appear for simple scenes like a single house. What's more is that even with a good implementation, PCSS is often sparsely sampled introducing noise artifacts ...

 

[tential]

That's the power of marketing! They already bought the NV card. Win for NV. AMD card flounders. More win for NV.

If people have to turn of a feature/option to get playable performance on their NV card they'd still have to do the same for their AMD card. Difference is, they don't get the check list.

NV is killing it in sales, market share, and game involvement. There is a reason people are buying NV cards and turning off options/features because of marketing. AMD should try it.

Yup so it's all marketing....
and if it's a marketing battle, AMD lost. It's over. Just throw the towel in. AMD hasn't even heard of marketing before. I'm convinced AMD could have a better chip than Pascal with 20% more performance in each bracket and still struggle to sell chips due to marketing.

 

[Azix]

Look at this crap. seriously? Its maybe worse than the god rays in fallout 4. At least that doesn't completely destroy the god rays. This is completely messing up the shadows and performs worse than AMDs CHS on nvidia's hardware.

Shadows lose detail depending on how strong the light source is or how far the object is from the place the shadow falls. Even then they just get softer around edges. If it looks worse than soft shadows and performs worse, whats the point?

 

[3DVagabond]

That's the power of marketing! They already bought the NV card. Win for NV. AMD card flounders. More win for NV.

If people have to turn of a feature/option to get playable performance on their NV card they'd still have to do the same for their AMD card. Difference is, they don't get the check list.

NV is killing it in sales, market share, and game involvement. There is a reason people are buying NV cards and turning off options/features because of marketing. AMD should try it.

Surely you are joking? Why should I support a company that operates like that (rhetorical question)? I don't understand the winning on game involvement part. AMD supported games run far better on everyone's equipment.

 

[3DVagabond]

Yup so it's all marketing....
and if it's a marketing battle, AMD lost. It's over. Just throw the towel in. AMD hasn't even heard of marketing before. I'm convinced AMD could have a better chip than Pascal with 20% more performance in each bracket and still struggle to sell chips due to marketing.

I don't really care who wins. As long as they both keep producing and driving the market. People who gloat over nVidia taking more of their money than AMD does just baffle me.

 

[railven]

Surely you are joking? Why should I support a company that operates like that (rhetorical question)? I don't understand the winning on game involvement part.

I know YOU wouldn't support a company that is detrimental to your PREFERRED company's livelihood. But others seem to not care.

Getting their hands in the game involvement is just another means to promote their products. It's all tied to marketing and brand recognition.

AMD supported games run far better on everyone's equipment.

Sure, but it isn't making them money. They go full-ham pioneering new things and come out broke.

Yup so it's all marketing....
and if it's a marketing battle, AMD lost. It's over. Just throw the towel in. AMD hasn't even heard of marketing before. I'm convinced AMD could have a better chip than Pascal with 20% more performance in each bracket and still struggle to sell chips due to marketing.

That's probably true. They had 7970 for 3 months uncontested and I doubt they sold as many as they would have liked. If you ask me it has to do with the negative brand recognition AMD (the name) has. Should have kept it ATI.

 

[tential]

That's probably true. They had 7970 for 3 months uncontested and I doubt they sold as many as they would have liked. If you ask me it has to do with the negative brand recognition AMD (the name) has. Should have kept it ATI.

I agree. Should have kept both brands separate, and only integrated it into one brand when both were successful apart. Instead, the GPU sector had been successful, CPU sorta, and when both were integrated, they lost a TON of people on the GPU side who just hadn't used an AMD CPU before. Then, when their AMD CPUs flopped, it carried over to the GPU division, rather than just keeping both brands separate.

 

[sontin]

Again you don't know that without knowing what the entire scene was like ...

Look at the picture. Pretty clear there is just one light source.

Soft shadows don't just come into existence because of an object distancing from it's projection, they come from indirect illumination ...

Not when the sun is the only light source:

The farther away the shadow is from the object creating the shadow, the more blurry the shadow becomes. For instance, move your hand away from its shadow on the sidewalk, and the shadow becomes more of a blob. If light traveled only in perfectly straight lines and there were only point sources of light, all shadows would be perfectly crisp because the light would reach a spot and then not reach a spot right next to it. There are therefore two effects that blur out shadows: 1) light does not travel only in straight lines, but can bend around corners ("diffraction"), and 2) light does not come only from point sources.
[...]The sun is not a point source of light. Rather, the sun has an extended shape with a finite width. Light generated by the sun emanates from different points in space along the sun's surface.

http://sciencequestionswithsurprisi...-does-diffraction-make-a-trees-shadow-blurry/

I don't need proof or any examples when it's obvious that PCSS is not at all comparable to a ray traced solution ...

What do you compare here? PCSS is a technique to mimic the realistic behaviour of shadows. It is a concept. Not the only way in this world.

But great to see that you dont need any proof for you claims. :thumbsup: