[PCGAMESHARDWARE.DE] DOOM Benchmarks

DownTheSky

Senior member
Apr 7, 2013
785
154
106
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Doom-2016-Spiel-56369/Specials/Benchmark-Test-1195242/
Game/Version
Doom (Final; Steam), PCGH-Benchmark 'Devil's Dance'
Details
Max. details except shadows (Ultra instead of Nightmare) Vsync off
Software/Drivers
Windows 10 x64, Geforce 365.19 WHQL, Radeon Software 16.5.2 Beta; (HQ-AF)


The game is running AMD in OpenGL 4.3 while on nVidia in OpenGL 4.5.
Looks like there's a serious problem in AMD drivers with GCN 1.0/1.1 cards. 290x is getting spanked by a 380x.
Disabling V-Sync and Shadows on Low seem to give >60 fps @ 1080 on 290/390 cards. Still, miles away from nVidia.
 
Last edited:

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
5,059
413
126
complex OpenGL game... I certainly didn't expect AMD to perform well on this one.

also OGL 4.3 being used? that means the game works with pre GCN AMD cards? when I tried the beta with a 5850 it refused to work, I assumed the game required 4.5, but the 5850 had 4.4 drivers and it didn't work.

380x ahead of 290X, that's some seriously broken software (maybe drivers, maybe game, probably both!?)
 

selni

Senior member
Oct 24, 2013
249
0
41
complex OpenGL game... I certainly didn't expect AMD to perform well on this one.

also OGL 4.3 being used? that means the game works with pre GCN AMD cards? when I tried the beta with a 5850 it refused to work, I assumed the game required 4.5, but the 5850 had 4.4 drivers and it didn't work.

380x ahead of 290X, that's some seriously broken software (maybe drivers, maybe game, probably both!?)

As shintai pointed out a 280X gets obliterated by a 380X too and fury isn't quite as disastrous - there's something here that really likes GCN 1.2 over previous versions.

But yeah, doesn't look like everything is working as intended here.
 

dark zero

Platinum Member
Jun 2, 2015
2,655
140
106
Fury is a DISSASTER. Its performance is subpar
Also... nVIDIA game oriented to new extremes... that a 960 is OUTPERFORMING a 290 levels... that is really insane.

The only chip that went well from AMD is Fury Nano... GTX 970 levels...

Definately something is screwed up BIG time... even the GTX 780Ti is on 960 levels, which is nuts....
 

psolord

Platinum Member
Sep 16, 2009
2,089
1,234
136
380X and 960 above 290X? lol

Some fine tuning is obviously needed me thinks.
 

railven

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2010
6,604
561
126
Game runs great, and so far, it's pretty damn good. Traffic screwed me so I don't have much time to play today

I know what I'm doing tomorrow!!!!
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,715
2,012
126
Amazing how AMD's newer architecture performs better than its older one. It's almost as if the micro-architects learned a thing or two in crafting a new GPU arch with each generation!
 

Hi-Fi Man

Senior member
Oct 19, 2013
601
120
106
Wow, the game performs radically different then what was shown here:



Why are the results so different?
 

JDG1980

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2013
1,663
570
136
The game is running AMD in OpenGL 4.3 while on nVidia in OpenGL 4.5.
Looks like there's a serious problem in AMD drivers with GCN 1.0/1.1 cards. 290x is getting spanked by a 380x.

My Pitcairn card does terrible in OpenGL (at least on the few applications I've tried). Apparently GCN 1.2 does better, which is encouraging, as it means Polaris probably will too.
 

ThatBuzzkiller

Golden Member
Nov 14, 2014
1,120
260
136
OpenGL is an issue ...

Sacrificing performance to be pseudo cross-platform just isn't worth it. Apple doesn't intend to support newer versions of OpenGL anymore and I don't want to mention about the horrors of other mobile GPU vendor's OpenGL drivers ...

The situation on Linux is hardly improving when the two other IHVs don't want to put up either performant (AMD) or rich feature sets (Intel) in their OpenGL drivers ...

Hopefully Khronos and the ARB decides to withdraw updating the OpenGL spec altogether and forget about the nightmarish days. May as well just make it a legacy API and leave it to the Mesa team so no point in boggling them down with more work ...
 

sam_816

Senior member
Aug 9, 2014
432
0
76
Anybody remembers what were the 1080's performance numbers in that showcase NVIDIA&id did? How much better were those numbers compared to 980ti & titanx performances in these benchmarks?
 
Last edited:

railven

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2010
6,604
561
126
Anybody remembers what were the 1080's performance numbers in that showcase NVIDIA&id did? How much better were those numbers compared to 980ti & titanx performances in these benchmarks?

Don't recall the resolution, probably 1080p, but they were hitting 200 FPS if I remember right.

EDIT"
http://bgr.com/2016/05/12/nvidia-gtx-1080-doom-demo/

Using the GTX 1080, Nvidia was able to run the game smoothly at an astounding 200 frames per second on Ultra graphics settings.

EDIT #2:
Pretty sure this was the event:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y3LaLJoo0s

Dunno where they got 200 from, in that clip it definitely doesn't hit 200 and I'd say the average was probably 140-150, but that was gameplay not a benchmark.
 
Last edited:

JDG1980

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2013
1,663
570
136
OpenGL is an issue ...

Sacrificing performance to be pseudo cross-platform just isn't worth it. Apple doesn't intend to support newer versions of OpenGL anymore and I don't want to mention about the horrors of other mobile GPU vendor's OpenGL drivers ...

The situation on Linux is hardly improving when the two other IHVs don't want to put up either performant (AMD) or rich feature sets (Intel) in their OpenGL drivers ...

Hopefully Khronos and the ARB decides to withdraw updating the OpenGL spec altogether and forget about the nightmarish days. May as well just make it a legacy API and leave it to the Mesa team so no point in boggling them down with more work ...

Some form of cross-platform API is necessary. For desktops (and perhaps game consoles in the future), Vulkan will probably fill that need, supplanting traditional OpenGL. For tablets and smartphones, OpenGL ES isn't going anywhere any time soon.
 

tential

Diamond Member
May 13, 2008
7,348
642
121
Wouldn't be surprised if this is all fixed after a driver update, or game update.

Unless you think it's normal for Hawaii to underperform a 380x, then which case your bias is showing....
 

IllogicalGlory

Senior member
Mar 8, 2013
934
346
136
Could it be MSI Afterburner not playing well with id tech and AMD GPUs? Like we saw in Wolfenstein the New Order?

These results are weird. I'm waiting for Digital Foundry tests.
 

ThatBuzzkiller

Golden Member
Nov 14, 2014
1,120
260
136
Some form of cross-platform API is necessary. For desktops (and perhaps game consoles in the future), Vulkan will probably fill that need, supplanting traditional OpenGL. For tablets and smartphones, OpenGL ES isn't going anywhere any time soon.

What we don't want are cross-platform APIs, what we want are cross-platform ENGINES and GAMES!

Vulkan is hardly cross-platform when you can write valid code that won't run on other platforms!

A Vulkan app that is designed to take every advantage of desktop GPU probably won't run on ultra mobile devices!
 

MTDEW

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 1999
4,284
37
91
Wow, the game performs radically different then what was shown here:


Why are the results so different?

Wouldn't be surprised if this is all fixed after a driver update, or game update.

Unless you think it's normal for Hawaii to underperform a 380x, then which case your bias is showing....

Beta was a mix of medium settings you couldn't change.
The full version allows for ultra settings.
And yes it seems AMD is working on it according to a tweet by @idSoftware Tiago
DOofy87 ... What happened between the beta and release that caused the 390 to lose to a 960?
idSoftware Tiago ... looks like ultra settings ( beta was a mix of medium ), particularly shadows ( and couple other things ) - AMD working on it
 
Last edited:

tential

Diamond Member
May 13, 2008
7,348
642
121
Beta was a mix of medium settings you couldn't change.
The full version allows for ultra settings.
And yes it seems AMD is working on it according to a tweet by @idSoftware Tiago
Yup because things working under the beta are no longer working under the full version. This is what happens when studios focus on one gpu and why this whole thing of Nvidia and amd courting devs just leads to this launch day idiocy.

But hey people like to pay to beta test my games I'm fine.
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,715
2,012
126
Yup because things working under the beta are no longer working under the full version. This is what happens when studios focus on one gpu and why this whole thing of Nvidia and amd courting devs just leads to this launch day idiocy.

But hey people like to pay to beta test my games I'm fine.

Seems to me that NVIDIA put more resources into optimizing its drivers for launch day, while AMD is taking a bit longer to get them sorted out. Hopefully for Hawaii users, AMD will get the drivers fixed up soon.
 

tential

Diamond Member
May 13, 2008
7,348
642
121
Seems to me that NVIDIA put more resources into optimizing its drivers for launch day, while AMD is taking a bit longer to get them sorted out. Hopefully for Hawaii users, AMD will get the drivers fixed up soon.

That's just speculation on your part that it's AMD drivers. You don't know what's causing the issue.
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,715
2,012
126
That's just speculation on your part that it's AMD drivers. You don't know what's causing the issue.

Tiago said that AMD is working on it.

@D0ofy87 looks like ultra settings ( beta was a mix of medium ), particularly shadows ( and couple other things ) - AMD working on it

What do you think this means?
 

Shmee

Memory & Storage, Graphics Cards Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
7,721
2,700
146
I already beat the campaign, pretty cool
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |