Burty117
Posts: 5,116 +3,701
I say my 200th reply should close this out .
Well if that's the case I guess we should keep going!
Soo.. Nvidia is better than AMD/ATI??
Edit: I soo didn't read that properly...
I say my 200th reply should close this out .
I say my 200th reply should close this out .
Well if that's the case I guess we should keep going!
Soo.. Nvidia is better than AMD/ATI??
Edit: I soo didn't read that properly...
Go back and read my quote that give it some time after release and some of the issues will be resolved with that. I think I have proven my point.
Please. No.What was your point? And please start from the beginning
I must be reading the charts wrong then. Isn't the GTX 690 the HD 7990's principle competitor ? From my understanding the 690 is ahead in 10 of the 12 benches concerning frame latencyWanted to add to this, as seen in the GTX 780 review, the frame latency issue seems to already have made huge progress in being resolved and moved the 7990 to the top of the charts in almost every test.
Please. No.
I must be reading the charts wrong then. Isn't the GTX 690 the HD 7990's principle competitor ? From my understanding the 690 is ahead in 10 of the 12 benches concerning frame latency
Well that is patently false as far as my comments are concerned. What I actually said was:Divide and a few others argument was that the card was bad because on its pre-release beta drivers when it was not available to the public yet that the card was a failure because the only test that it was losing in was frame time latency.
15% ? Which reviews were these. Please link, I'd be keen to read a HD 7990 review I haven't already seen.the reviewers have seen in a range of 5-15% depending on the game for the 7990 which is around the 1100 on the core overclock
I see. So the HD 7990 being behind by 5% in frame latency tests is no biggie. You do realize that the average frame rate difference between the 7990 and GTX 690 where the 7990 "wins" is less than 5% in half the benchmarks and the margin between the two cards is 5.6% (at 1920) and 9% (at 2560) - or 1% and 3.3% without the GCN optimized Sleeping Dogs ? Even the worst case scenario of 9% is less than the 10% difference in price...or does performance-per-$ not count in this instance ? or maybe non-gaming features do count in this instance ?Now with the recent updates, its beats most cards including the 690 in those tests excluding a few and if nothing else it is only like a difference of 5% on some of the frame latency
Or is lower by 6.5 and 10.2% in Crysis 3, less than 5% in six further benchmarks, and exceeds 10 in a further three.So lets recap, the 7990 now has more FPS sometimes by as much as 10 or more
While costing 10% more. Yes, that's about it.and its frame time latency is better in many cases or withing 5% of the 690 which is its primary competitor.
You mean using Assassins Creed 3 as an example of less than stellar Crossfire support in games? Yes, I suppose I was rather remiss since it is an isolated case....well, isolated except for F1 2012, Star Craft 2, Planetside 2, Project Cars, WoW, not to mention odd quirks at different resolutions and image quality settings for other games...Oh look you picked one of the few "Nvidia Biased" games to base this of shock and awe.
Seems to be exactly what I was talking about. So, shall we "try them for size"Your trying to provide the few over many, since you like to post games showing the fps ill return the favor
[snip]
Try those of for size.
Lol, maybe it's a 'game optimising division' and not a 'driver division'.It seems like AMD takes a game and optimizes the heck out of it.