i7-3960X + R9 290X. Seems you do only get 10% when GPU limited, give or take a bit. Not bad, not really anything amazing. I want to see frametime graphs though.
3960x costs double of 290x. Its was intended to sell and to be paired with dual 290x and stronger setups...
4770k is a 8 thread(the biggest number of threads BF4 engine can handle well) strong processor for 290x. You could start to look overclocked 4770k results with a pair of 290x...
Difference can be done by a bit of overclocking.Still there is no difference.
Do it and put a second 290x on the rig. Mantle shines anyway.
As long as there is no comparision to nVidia it's so hilarious to read the hype material.
Then bring your own tests to the table.
Guru3D test problem is that they paired a $150 CPU with a $550GPU in one test and a $1000 CPU with a $550 GPU in another test. Will not show any tangible gain this way.
As i doubt DICE benchmark that said CF had 58% performance increase is turly for AMD marketing.
http://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.ph...te-ergebnisse-im-kampf-mantle-vs-directx.html
There really not much difference in CF.
Read golem.de tests?
Mid range gpu-bound system:
Since we're talking about a gaming CPU only feature they could tests with machines where at least the
GPU costs Double of the CPU.
This does not surprise. I think i5 systems stand to see the best gains, since they are lacking in BF4 multiplayer. I would of preferred to see at least a 270 used though.
5Ghz 8350 and i5 is very good tests for mainstream/High-End gaming machines. Don't forget 8320 too.
Who cares. What matter is Mantle is aprox 50% faster where it matters most at the big maps. What is then also surprising is actually how cpu bound we often are at bf4. Its aparently at times a damn taxing game on your cpu.
Like BF3 MP was. Mantle is what MP gamers were waiting.
With gains like this on i7 CPUs, i5 gains should be even larger.
i5@stock gains may match i7@stock gains.
No, because here you can reproduce the scene.
With active players is more a gambit than anything else.
A benchmark should always be reproducible. Otherwise you end with something like the Star Swarm test which is quite useless for benchmarks.
Even the Mantle developer says it in a beyond 3D post linked a few posts behind.
So, your problem is that the numbers from the MP part is not in favour for AMD?
Or its because it is only site that shows tremendous results for Nvidia, and it is the only site that who is bashing Mantle is using to argue their posts?
There are none or rare people that pair i3 with GTX 780 or R9 290X.
FX8320 can overclock to FX9370 levels and cost(In Newegg) the same as most of i3 models.
LOL, you post a review from LAST YEAR, shortly after the game launched?!! D:
Driver updates and patches have changed a lot of things since last year dude!
Last week test.
I find those 780Ti scores really hard to believe. We all know that the 780Ti beats a 290X, but it doesn't beat it with a ridiculous margin like that.
Its all core clock based, knowing the awesome performance scaling of the two chips. Game changes if we are comparing a 880Mhz 290x with a 963Mhz 780Ti, or if you are comparing a 1140Mhz GTX 780 with a 900Mhz R9 290. That's why boost clock/powertune blows reviews.