Tests conducted during the passage of one of the busiest streets in the view behind the car.
Those tests use FXAA that looks horrible in this game. It leaves random pixels all over the screen. Thay didn't test TAA because it introduces performance hit on Nvidia cards much larger than AMD cards.
FXAA vs TAA http://imgur.com/a/ihRcc
GTX 970 faster than 390X on the AMD-sponsored Frostbite engine.
Nuff said.
On true max settings, when TAA is applied other tests here show 390 on par with GTX980 in 1080p, and going over it in 1440p.
980Ti dethroned in Max settings 1440p by Fury X.
It is understandable, because TAA is temporal effect, and its uses an algorithm called sum of absolute differences. This has a default mode for the standard GPUs, and an accelerated mode for GCN, because this architecture can execute the whole algorithm in one native instruction. It's logical that GCN can execute this effect faster.Those tests use FXAA that looks horrible in this game. It leaves random pixels all over the screen. Thay didn't test TAA because it introduces performance hit on Nvidia cards much larger than AMD cards.
FXAA vs TAA http://imgur.com/a/ihRcc
Shill site as usual...
Shill site as usual...
Pure comedy. Just when you think Nvidia finally has a win
http://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzn...speed_komputer_z_nitro_mile_widziany?page=0,8
Also interesting CPU scaling.
http://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzn...peed_komputer_z_nitro_mile_widziany?page=0,11
I really want to see an [H] review :sneaky:
H are bumbling and biased but nvlabs.pl is pure shill. You'll never see a fair test from them ever.
Tell you what, this test isnt all that fair, they put it up against a chip that cost 2 times the price of the AMD. If they wanted to be fair, they should of picked a chip from Intel that cost $109 like the AMD and then see how they did against each other. Doing a test when one is $109, and the other costs $319 isnt really apples to apples there
http://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzn...peed_komputer_z_nitro_mile_widziany?page=0,11
Tell you what, this test isnt all that fair, they put it up against a chip that cost 2 times the price of the AMD. If they wanted to be fair, they should of picked a chip from Intel that cost $109 like the AMD and then see how they did against each other. Doing a test when one is $109, and the other costs $319 isnt really apples to apples there
http://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzn...peed_komputer_z_nitro_mile_widziany?page=0,11
It is understandable, because TAA is temporal effect, and its uses an algorithm called sum of absolute differences. This has a default mode for the standard GPUs, and an accelerated mode for GCN, because this architecture can execute the whole algorithm in one native instruction. It's logical that GCN can execute this effect faster.
It is understandable, because TAA is temporal effect, and its uses an algorithm called sum of absolute differences. This has a default mode for the standard GPUs, and an accelerated mode for GCN, because this architecture can execute the whole algorithm in one native instruction. It's logical that GCN can execute this effect faster.
So it is unoptimized for nVidia and a feature which needs to be disabled for a fair test. :thumbsup:
Go Sandy Bridge-E! Hell yeah ROCK ON!!