[PCGAMESHARDWARE.DE] DOOM Benchmarks

[Bacon1]

The AMD problem was fixed after 2 drivers for doom, the day 1 and the ops we didnt do oure jobb one that came after.

It was actually -2 day drivers since they came out before the game did, but since AMD didn't know there were issues with the release settings they had to issue a driver the next business day (Monday) to fix them.

That's what happens with Nvidia sponsored releases.

I'd say that's pretty good considering.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Oh, and a confirmation that 2GB cards are dead

Yeah, it's amazing how much faster the 960 4GB is, versus its older 2GB variant. I remember all the FUD being spread here by some members, how 960 was fine with only 2 gigs.

Just lol. It hasn't even been two years

 

[railven]

Since this thread is rising back up.

I'm reading conflicting posts. Some people are saying even after the update turning on metrics in DOOM still shows OpenGL 4.3 for them.

Can anyone confirm this? I don't want to download 60GBs over wifi to the basement PC.

EDIT:
For example, FIJI owners were showing OpenGL 4.3 but they had no issues unlike Hawaii/Grenada users:

 

[frowertr]

Yeah, it's amazing how much faster the 960 4GB is, versus its older 2GB variant. I remember all the FUD being spread here by some members, how 960 was fine with only 2 gigs.

Just lol. It hasn't even been two years

I've been playing Doom on my GTX 960 2GB for the last several days. Works great! Despite RS's claim, my 2GB cards isn't "dead" and works great with this game. As fluid as ever...

 

[RussianSensation]

I've been playing Doom on my GTX 960 2GB for the last several days. Works great! Despite RS's claim, my 2GB cards isn't "dead" and works great with this game. As fluid as ever...

You are right that on HQ, 960 2GB is doing well, but the 960 4GB can go up to UQ. As you can see from the scores, even 3GB cards start to suffer at 1440p. It's just a matter of time before more and more games require 3GB or more for 1080p and 4GB for 1440p. That's not even touching games such as ROTTR or GTA V which eat VRAM. Since NV and AMD are moving their next gen cards to 4-8GB, VRAM demands will continue increasing.

 

[4K_shmoorK]

Since this thread is rising back up.

I'm reading conflicting posts. Some people are saying even after the update turning on metrics in DOOM still shows OpenGL 4.3 for them.

Can anyone confirm this? I don't want to download 60GBs over wifi to the basement PC.

EDIT:
For example, FIJI owners were showing OpenGL 4.3 but they had no issues unlike Hawaii/Grenada users:

Don't you have green cards in both rigs? You're fine. I notice a definite performance boost on my 290X after the 16.5.2.1 release. Dunno about OpenGL versions but I thought that was a non-issue for nV owners.

 

[Arachnotronic]

You are right that on HQ, 960 2GB is doing well, but the 960 4GB can go up to UQ. As you can see from the scores, even 3GB cards start to suffer at 1440p. It's just a matter of time before more and more games require 3GB or more for 1080p and 4GB for 1440p. That's not even touching games such as ROTTR or GTA V which eat VRAM. Since NV and AMD are moving their next gen cards to 4-8GB, VRAM demands will continue increasing.

Who the heck buys a $199 card to play games at 1440P?

 

[frowertr]

Yeah, I bought my 960 2GB to play at 1080. I have since moved to a 1440 monitor so I realize that my 2GB card won't cut it at that resolution and above.

But everything at 1080 is as fluid as ever. Good little card.

 

[xthetenth]

Who the heck buys a $199 card to play games at 1440P?

Thus the mention of 3 GB (> 2 GB) for 1080, and 4 GB (> 3 GB, such as on some Kepler cards that most certainly didn't cost $200) for 1440.

 

[IEC]

Who the heck buys a $199 card to play games at 1440P?

Did you miss all the $200-220 Radeon R9 290s? Best bang for the buck for 1440p on 28nm.

Heck, I'm still running one (down from 3) on a 34" Ultrawide...

 

[sirmo]

Did you miss all the $200-220 Radeon R9 290s? Best bang for the buck for 1440p on 28nm.

Heck, I'm still running one (down from 3) on a 34" Ultrawide...

R9 290 for $200 is one helluva deal. Especially considering that they still have in some aspects a more modern architecture than Pascal even.

 

[railven]

Don't you have green cards in both rigs? You're fine. I notice a definite performance boost on my 290X after the 16.5.2.1 release. Dunno about OpenGL versions but I thought that was a non-issue for nV owners.

I was just curious if the patch changed the render for those cards. I'm reading it didn't but the issues were resolved.

I also have a 290X but it's not wired to my network so I'd rather not download a 50GB+ file to it just to see if the render changed.

 

[IEC]

I was just curious if the patch changed the render for those cards. I'm reading it didn't but the issues were resolved.

I also have a 290X but it's not wired to my network so I'd rather not download a 50GB+ file to it just to see if the render changed.

If you got it via Steam, you can always transfer the game files to a machine over external hard drive or USB stick and then have Steam verify the installation files.

I do that all the time between my desktop and laptop (960m).

 

[railven]

If you got it via Steam, you can always transfer the game files to a machine over external hard drive or USB stick and then have Steam verify the installation files.

I do that all the time between my desktop and laptop (960m).

While you are correct, but it seems easier to just ask someone if they can confirm it for me haha.

But I guess if I have to confirm it myself, I'll have to confirm it myself :\

 

[Red Hawk]

You are right that on HQ, 960 2GB is doing well, but the 960 4GB can go up to UQ. As you can see from the scores, even 3GB cards start to suffer at 1440p. It's just a matter of time before more and more games require 3GB or more for 1080p and 4GB for 1440p. That's not even touching games such as ROTTR or GTA V which eat VRAM. Since NV and AMD are moving their next gen cards to 4-8GB, VRAM demands will continue increasing.

I'd still maintain that 2 GB should be good for visual parity with consoles on well-optimized multiplatform games. Keep in mind that on consoles, Doom runs with an adaptive resolution to maintain a high frame rate, just like Rage did. And that option is available with the PC version (which I welcome). But if you want to try to exceed console performance/resolution/visuals, or if you want to be insured against particularly badly optimized console ports, yeah, 2 GB isn't going to cut it.

Anyways, good on AMD for releasing a performance fix so quickly. Not going to point fingers for blame, just happy the driver is here. And glad to see that it applies to the 290 series, not just the 390 series as the release notes say.