Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
  1. #1
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphic...Configurations

    Well done Ryan!

    AMD has been misleading the public far too long with CFx.

    Earlier this year, I added a second 7970 to my primary gaming rig because they were the best deal going for high end cards.

    Big difference in the CFx experience compared to the SLi I was used to.

  2. #2
    Joined
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Yountville
    Posts
    5

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Installed Catalyst 13.9 driver today and noticed a change in MSI afterburner Useage graphs. Before with driver 13.4? I would see the gpu useage graphs vary up and down during game play as one would expect, but after installing 13.9 now the GPU1 graph looks as before, but the GPU2 graph is fixed at 100% useage during gameplay. So somethings different. Gameplay seems good/maybe better. I know PC per mentioned AMD wouldn't effect any changes to Crossfire in 13.9, but its changed something. At least on my system. Win 7 64, 2 x 7970gpu's, i7 920 o/c to 3.2ghz, Asus 6pt deluxe mobo, 3 x 1920/1080 monitors. Just thought I'd mention it in case others are hoping/looking for solution to recent problem as PCPer testing etc.
    Last edited by soldierguy; 09-23-2013 at 12:24 AM.

  3. #3
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    21

    Thumbs up Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Quote Originally Posted by soldierguy View Post
    Installed Catalyst 13.9 driver today and noticed a change in MSI afterburner Useage graphs. Before with driver 13.4? I would see the gpu useage graphs vary up and down during game play as one would expect, but after installing 13.9 now the GPU1 graph looks as before, but the GPU2 graph is fixed at 100% useage during gameplay. So somethings different. Gameplay seems good/maybe better. I know PC per mentioned AMD wouldn't effect any changes to Crossfire in 13.9, but its changed something. At least on my system. Win 7 64, 2 x 7970gpu's, i7 920 o/c to 3.2ghz, Asus 6pt deluxe mobo, 3 x 1920/1080 monitors. Just thought I'd mention it in case others are hoping/looking for solution to recent problem as PCPer testing etc.
    I see alot of words and no facts & proof. Love it how these guys keep defending a brand/company that has no interest in fixing their drivers or keeping their customers happy.
    Intel Core i5 2500K @5.3Ghz - 1.485v - Water cooled
    GTX680 SLI @1.306Mhz Core/7150Mhz Mem
    G.SKILL Ripjaws X 2x4GB @2133Mhz 9-9-9-24
    Asus p8z68-v pro
    Samsung SSD 840 Pro 250GB, 2x 1TB Western Digital Caviar Black
    OCZ Z Series 850W GOLD

  4. #4
    Joined
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    5,358

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Naturally the results in Ryan's review are correct, but they are actually what should be expected, since already the Catalyst 13.8 beta release notes do state about the crossfire frame pacing fix: Supported for DirectX 10 and DirectX 11 applications, and resolutions up to and including 2560x1600 (single display).

  5. #5
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    11,090

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Quote Originally Posted by soldierguy View Post
    Installed Catalyst 13.9 driver today and noticed a change in MSI afterburner Useage graphs. Before with driver 13.4? I would see the gpu useage graphs vary up and down during game play as one would expect, but after installing 13.9 now the GPU1 graph looks as before, but the GPU2 graph is fixed at 100% useage during gameplay. So somethings different. Gameplay seems good/maybe better. I know PC per mentioned AMD wouldn't effect any changes to Crossfire in 13.9, but its changed something. At least on my system. Win 7 64, 2 x 7970gpu's, i7 920 o/c to 3.2ghz, Asus 6pt deluxe mobo, 3 x 1920/1080 monitors. Just thought I'd mention it in case others are hoping/looking for solution to recent problem as PCPer testing etc.
    I've been seeing this in afterburner as well with the second GPU usage (13.10 beta), but its either at 99% or 0% depending on whether the GPU has any load on at all. I'm confident this is a glitch of some kind in the reporting of the load rather than the actual GPU usage, especially because it this doesn't occur regularly on my system.
    Quote Originally Posted by Pehu View Post
    Naturally the results in Ryan's review are correct, but they are actually what should be expected, since already the Catalyst 13.8 beta release notes do state about the crossfire frame pacing fix: Supported for DirectX 10 and DirectX 11 applications, and resolutions up to and including 2560x1600 (single display).
    True. We knew CFX had problems and the fact that the released a fix for single display but not eyefinity shows there are issues other than frame pacing at work. Ryan's work definitely does a good job at quantifying the result rather than using ambiguous words like "microstutter" or "artifacts", but actually displays them and can analyze the root cause.


    Quote Originally Posted by klapcos View Post
    I see alot of words and no facts & proof. Love it how these guys keep defending a brand/company that has no interest in fixing their drivers or keeping their customers happy.
    What in the world are you on about? All I see are words from a fanboy posting in an nvidia "totally unpaid I swear" astroturfing thread complaining that somebody who owns the GPU's of their hated "rival" isn't unhappy with them. Heaven forbid they're not trying to jump off for nVidia!


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  6. #6
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    21

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    I've been seeing this in afterburner as well with the second GPU usage (13.10 beta), but its either at 99% or 0% depending on whether the GPU has any load on at all. I'm confident this is a glitch of some kind in the reporting of the load rather than the actual GPU usage, especially because it this doesn't occur regularly on my system.

    True. We knew CFX had problems and the fact that the released a fix for single display but not eyefinity shows there are issues other than frame pacing at work. Ryan's work definitely does a good job at quantifying the result rather than using ambiguous words like "microstutter" or "artifacts", but actually displays them and can analyze the root cause.




    What in the world are you on about? All I see are words from a fanboy posting in an nvidia "totally unpaid I swear" astroturfing thread complaining that somebody who owns the GPU's of their hated "rival" isn't unhappy with them. Heaven forbid they're not trying to jump off for nVidia!
    With a handle like yours "Activate: AMD" and your posts throughout this forum it's pretty clear you're the fanboy. I'm just stating the obvious - No proof (screenshots, video, graphs etc.)just words like always from the likes of you poor fanboys lol

    At least there are a handful of sites out there that do proper testing and benchmarking to weed out the crap that is being sold to customers. For this I thank this site in particular Ryan Schrout.
    Intel Core i5 2500K @5.3Ghz - 1.485v - Water cooled
    GTX680 SLI @1.306Mhz Core/7150Mhz Mem
    G.SKILL Ripjaws X 2x4GB @2133Mhz 9-9-9-24
    Asus p8z68-v pro
    Samsung SSD 840 Pro 250GB, 2x 1TB Western Digital Caviar Black
    OCZ Z Series 850W GOLD

  7. #7
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    11,090

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Quote Originally Posted by klapcos View Post
    With a handle like yours "Activate: AMD" and your posts throughout this forum it's pretty clear you're the fanboy. I'm just stating the obvious - No proof (screenshots, video, graphs etc.)just words like always from the likes of you poor fanboys lol

    At least there are a handful of sites out there that do proper testing and benchmarking to weed out the crap that is being sold to customers. For this I thank this site in particular Ryan Schrout.
    First off, my handle is from over 10 years ago, back when this was an AMD CPU forum and pre-dates AMD's ATI acquisition by at least 3 years. I have owned numerous GPU's by ATI, nVidia and AMD over the years and have had both complaints and good experiences from all manufacturers. Why does somebody need proof to say that they're not having any problems with their GPU? How does a screenshot/graph/video prove that I am happy with my gaming experience? How is somebody even supposed to provide the equivalent of Ryan's work when they don't have the specialized equipment required? The point is, you attacked a poster who was simply saying "meh, i'm using the latest drivers and I'm happy with them" for not having proof. Where is your proof that you're satisfied with your GTX 680?


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  8. #8
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    What in the world are you on about? All I see are words from a fanboy posting in an nvidia "totally unpaid I swear" astroturfing thread complaining that somebody who owns the GPU's of their hated "rival" isn't unhappy with them. Heaven forbid they're not trying to jump off for nVidia!
    The owners of this site know I have no connection to NVIDIA and have not for a long time. Nice allegation you can't prove, and I'm sure the site would be happy to shoot down if you were to express concern I was some sort of marketing agent.

    I did suggest to Ryan that he expand on his great FCAT series with an investigation into mixed card CFx because I don't think a 7870 and 7970 mix can output smooth AFR. (and people have been posting on the forums for years what a "great" feature this is)

  9. #9
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    11,090

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Quote Originally Posted by jethro View Post
    The owners of this site know I have no connection to NVIDIA and have not for a long time. Nice allegation you can't prove, and I'm sure the site would be happy to shoot down if you were to express concern I was some sort of marketing agent.
    Thats nice to say, but your obvious nV fanboyism only serves to highlight the fact that you did work for nVidia as a "focus group" member. I would probably have very nice things to say about companies that provided me lots of free high-end hardware and let me go to their fancy press conferences too. Its just too much to ignore when you post such consistently scathing things about AMD while nV does no wrong.


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  10. #10
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    21

    Resolved Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    First off, my handle is from over 10 years ago, back when this was an AMD CPU forum and pre-dates AMD's ATI acquisition by at least 3 years. I have owned numerous GPU's by ATI, nVidia and AMD over the years and have had both complaints and good experiences from all manufacturers. Why does somebody need proof to say that they're not having any problems with their GPU? How does a screenshot/graph/video prove that I am happy with my gaming experience? How is somebody even supposed to provide the equivalent of Ryan's work when they don't have the specialized equipment required? The point is, you attacked a poster who was simply saying "meh, i'm using the latest drivers and I'm happy with them" for not having proof. Where is your proof that you're satisfied with your GTX 680?
    Apologies if I put you in that spot, didn't mean to. I was ATI only back in the day when the owned it up in the PC gaming scene with 9700 pro, 9800 pro, x800 pro, x1900 and even the flop HD2900 XT, 4870 & 4890 CF. I hated that AMD bought over ATI and all good things went to shit. Remember when AMD was laying off huge masses of employees and shrugging it off because they were going to have this big name and that big name show up to lead the remnants of teams they had? I remember one in particular Anand plastered a huge photo of in announcing the big move. Then there was that nVidia guy who was hired by AMD, announced, who went to AMD for less than a day, and then went screaming back to nVidia the next day.

    AMD's money problems--the most likely source of all its delays (8xxx series, Kaveri)--are affecting its entire business line at this point and the problems AMD has had in fixing even the most basic Crossfire issues (from early last year!) would make anyone less confident about the long term future of both AMD and driver support for any product they make. Which in itself hurts AMD's ability to sell its products.

    Here is my proof of my GTX680's in some games & benchmarks I made with the Avermedia Live GamerHD and happy with my choice since last year.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CniI899s_qo
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgXbUMbjL50
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWFIAqFJtr4
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrLbj7yf5tA
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OL1v0ySu3uI
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jRDRfvk5Fs
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gv5g3iUVzt4

    How to flash GTX770 bios to GTX680:
    http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=379680
    Last edited by klapcos; 09-23-2013 at 03:52 PM.
    Intel Core i5 2500K @5.3Ghz - 1.485v - Water cooled
    GTX680 SLI @1.306Mhz Core/7150Mhz Mem
    G.SKILL Ripjaws X 2x4GB @2133Mhz 9-9-9-24
    Asus p8z68-v pro
    Samsung SSD 840 Pro 250GB, 2x 1TB Western Digital Caviar Black
    OCZ Z Series 850W GOLD

  11. #11
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    Thats nice to say, but your obvious nV fanboyism only serves to highlight the fact that you did work for nVidia as a "focus group" member. I would probably have very nice things to say about companies that provided me lots of free high-end hardware and let me go to their fancy press conferences too. Its just too much to ignore when you post such consistently scathing things about AMD while nV does no wrong.
    I'm not saying anything about NVIDIA here?

  12. #12
    Joined
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vvardenfell
    Age
    58
    Posts
    10,924

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    We are all going to behave now, aren't we? Please make all posts about the topic, and not other posters.

    Meridian

  13. #13
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    According to Tom's Hardware, the next phase of frame pacing drivers that support high resolution are coming around year end:



    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...g,3620-10.html

  14. #14
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    21

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    Can't wait for tomorrow to watch the live feed from AMD. I really hope they won't disappoint especially in the driver area for their new and older gpu's.
    Intel Core i5 2500K @5.3Ghz - 1.485v - Water cooled
    GTX680 SLI @1.306Mhz Core/7150Mhz Mem
    G.SKILL Ripjaws X 2x4GB @2133Mhz 9-9-9-24
    Asus p8z68-v pro
    Samsung SSD 840 Pro 250GB, 2x 1TB Western Digital Caviar Black
    OCZ Z Series 850W GOLD

  15. #15
    Joined
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    507

    Re: AMD fails at Eyefinity and Surround in CFx

    There is one game that saw absolutely no improvement or fixes with the new drivers and it is known to be a bear on any videocard or cards and that is Skyrim. Load that sucker up with virtually any amount of mods, and after awhile it will use so much ram and videoram AMD or NVIDIA will be brought to a crawl, and frankly SKYRIM could have used a few more patches than what it got. So no amount of fixes in drivers from AMD or NVIDIA will ever fix SKYRIM's performance, it's up to Bethesda which stopped after patch 1.9 or up to third party's and Bethesda doesn't care if third party's continue to patch and fix the game as Bethesda is done with the game.

    I've had to start trimming mod's from Skyrim as it is slowing down overall system and videocard performance on my system, and will probably have to drop back the graphic options a notch or two. I can only hope AMD has ace up their sleeve for the next set of drivers, as I do like personally like the Radeon 7850's in for gaming, as I don't really play first person shooters.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •