another Fun fact is that it is not Sp it is MP.The fun fact is that it isn't even a GTX 780 Ti, it's a GTX 780 Ghz.
another Fun fact is that it is not Sp it is MP.The fun fact is that it isn't even a GTX 780 Ti, it's a GTX 780 Ghz.
Same result. Besides the slower older drivers. HardOCP looks like a mess tho.
Oh, and here is another benchmark from Hardwareluxx on a 64-man server - the same map Golem.de used:
http://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.ph...nisse-im-kampf-mantle-vs-directx.html?start=1
That's the problem with MP.
Off the topic but i dont know about HardOCPs but Anandtech and Guru3d provides honest and good review.HardOCPs first enlarged result is almost always misleading. Its terrible.
I have no knowledge of this MT dx nvda driver ... but it should be pretty simple, before and after numbers for the MT driver. Where can we dig em up? Anyway, if they'd given the massive increase in min fps's as reported for mantle, this forum section would have lightened up as a beacon seen from space.. So I doubt it.... I didnt see it.
Lies, they did post how many people were on the server.. Someone translated the statement on the previous page..
The fun fact is that it isn't even a GTX 780 Ti, it's a GTX 780 Ghz.
HardOCPs first enlarged result is almost always misleading. Its terrible.
Tested on a i7-3960X 3,3 GHz @3,9 Ghz--> more GPU bound than CPU bound.
That is really a huge number if it is true.Nobody has cared about this. Now with the focus of the MP part and the Star Swarn test demo it is getting more and more obviously that AMD has a DX driver problem and not that the Windows world has a DX problem.
Fact is the Star Swarm test demo archives 85-90% of the performance of Mantle with a nVidia card and Deferred Contexts.
Golem.de used a Core i7-3770K. So the difference shouldn't be so huge.
Same result. Besides the slower older drivers. HardOCP looks like a mess tho.
In BF4 no there is not4 cores vs 6 cores. Big difference.
Tested on a i7-3960X 3,3 GHz @3,9 Ghz--> more GPU bound than CPU bound.
In bf4 no there is not
with 3770k or 4770k u can minimize the difference by overclocking and even benchmark shows that
3960X@ stock has only 10% of advantage over 4770k@ stock.
Why ? Because you say so ? If so, that's not good enough.
Because the first assumption is its directly compared, and its not. Not exactly lacking examples of people going wrong with it either.
HardOCPs first enlarged result is almost always misleading. Its terrible.
yup my english is a bit bad and sorry for that.See? Right there, even in your own typing. Should read your own post, its an argument against you.
Because the first assumption is its directly compared, and its not. Not exactly lacking examples of people going wrong with it either.
I don't understand the spite in people over such a thing. I'm always exited to see new developments and increase of competition, which are all good things for the end user. Even if Mantle is a failure ultimately it's still a good thing that it came out because it shows that the involved parties still care about trying to innovate
So, ShintaiDK, those mantle numbers look good so far, dont you agree?
That's 780 NOT EVEN 780TI, no way those results are true NO WAY.I dont understand the complains about pclab. They tested the MP after the release of BF4:
http://pclab.pl/art55318-5.html
And a GTX780 was 28% to 43% faster than the 290X.