ATI 4890 + 1.31 = crap

[blato639]

Still Jaeger, an E6600 is a decent performer and should not be producing CPU limiting to this extent. There is something else afoot here.

Have you tried resetting your Vid Card Driver settings to default or best performance? It could be a anti-aliasing issue.

I overclocked my E6600 to 3.0 ghz and saw a preformance increase in 1.30, going to test 1.31.

I have messed with eveyr single graphic setting in the CCC and the game, tested it probably over 50 times with different things. I completely deleted all of my graphic drivers, did a drivers sweep, registery clean, defrag, reinstall of drivers and it didn't do anything.

I've come to the conclusion that not only is my E6600 a bit underpowered for my 4890 (it really isn't as powerful as you think), the 4890 was just a half-assed attempt by ATI to outperform the GTX 275.

I'm going to buy the Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 at 2.8ghz, OC to 3.0, and hopefully that will increase my FPS a bit. Maybe you Rats will do some optimizations before launch that will increase FPS. If not I guess I will live.

In other new after overclocking my CPU my ArmA 2 framerate jumped to from 20 to 30 and stayed around 30 the whole night (5 hours mission), this leads me to believe that a lot of modern games are actually more CPU intensive than I originally. Crysis is very GPU heavy, I get like 40fps on that with some custom config files. Shattered Horizion, the game by Futurmark really saw a 5-10 fps increase with the overclock.

[soloje]

I just test again with my new computer

I5 750 + ATI 5770+ 4Go+ Win7 64

my old computer is

E6600 +GF7950Gt+ 2Go +XP

strange result to confirm there is an issue with ATI card (or drivers ?) or win 7 perhaps.

--------------New comp------------old--

antwerp:--------18 ----------------- 26

remagen:---- 26 ------------------- 32

vehicles:----- 16 ------------------ 19

stangely for the other test I' m now at the double FPS than with my old computer

Edited January 6, 2010 by SOLOJE

[blato639]

I just test again with my new computer

I5 750 + ATI 5770+ 4Go+ Win7 64

my old computer is

E6600 +GF7950Gt+ 2Go +XP

strange result to confirm there is an issue with ATI card (or drivers ?) or win 7 perhaps.

--------------New comp------------old--

antwerp:--------18 ----------------- 26

remagen:---- 26 ------------------- 32

vehicles:----- 16 ------------------ 19

stangely for the other test I' m now at the double FPS than with my old computer

I'm noticing that people with Windows 7 64bit are the ones having more performance issues.

Mine, with my 4890 has been a problem even back in Windows Vista 32bit.

[chimaera]

My rig...

Windows7 Enterprise(64bit)

i7-920 (stock, no O/C)

ATI 4870 X2

6 GB DDR3 RAM

1680x1050x32

Benchantwerp~22fps

ATI drivers 10.2(cleaned out older drivers before installing)

My CPU runs at 2.66GHz(2.93GHz with turbo boost).

I've set my GFX card to Application controlled, I dont 'force' any settings in the GFX software...

Edited February 26, 2010 by chimaera

[kalegek]

This game uses a lot of CPU power. My 4890 gets a hard life in this game with all settings high 1920x1200 2xAA 16x AF. I noticed sometimes huge framedrops out of nowhere .. From 60 to 28.

I got a 8400 @ 4,04 ghz

[munchkin]

One problem here is that the 4890 is a dual card. I had similar experience with my 3870x2.

A test I made compared a single 3870 to my own 3870x2 and the single card showed better performance. Since this game doesn't support crossfire I concluded that the problem lay there.

If you can try to disable one GPU, and you have to do that in the hardware manager since there is no such option in CCC for dual cards, and see if that helps. I never did myself because it wasn't that bad back then.

[zaltor]

I just test again with my new computer

I5 750 + ATI 5770+ 4Go+ Win7 64

my old computer is

E6600 +GF7950Gt+ 2Go +XP

strange result to confirm there is an issue with ATI card (or drivers ?) or win 7 perhaps.

--------------New comp------------old--

antwerp:--------18 ----------------- 26

remagen:---- 26 ------------------- 32

vehicles:----- 16 ------------------ 19

stangely for the other test I' m now at the double FPS than with my old computer

those results are exactley same as mine from old build to new build, however my pc hasnt changed, lost those fps since first offline beta to now

Edited February 26, 2010 by zaltor

[chimaera]

One problem here is that the 4890 is a dual card. I had similar experience with my 3870x2.

A test I made compared a single 3870 to my own 3870x2 and the single card showed better performance. Since this game doesn't support crossfire I concluded that the problem lay there.

If you can try to disable one GPU, and you have to do that in the hardware manager since there is no such option in CCC for dual cards, and see if that helps. I never did myself because it wasn't that bad back then.

ATI 4870 X2 which is 'SLI'(CrossFireX) on a single card/slot you disable the the CrossFireX/SLI by disabling 'Catalyst A.I.' so it easily done...

[madrebel]

for dual card setups try messing around with the pre-rendered frames option and see if you can improve performance. start at 0 and work your way up.

[person]

Is that for Nvidia cards, cause I dont see a pre render options on my catalyst control manager.

[badger77]

Just as a point of reference an I7 920 2.66ghz CPU will give about 44 fps on antwerp.

[madrebel]

Is that for Nvidia cards' date=' cause I dont see a pre render options on my catalyst control manager.[/quote']

right sorry, ati calls it flip queue size.

*edit* something to understand in regards to pre-rendered frames/flip queue size is it increases latency the higher you set it. also, it works in addition to the frame buffer.

so, if you use triple buffering and 8 pre-render/flip queue you introducing a little bit of latency (mouse/keyboard input) with the goal of an over all smoother and or increased fps. this setting for some game engines can improve performance for multi gpu setups.

I would start with triple buffering set to off and pre-render/flip queue set to 0 and then increase from there.

Edited February 26, 2010 by madrebel

[person]

Here are my specs:

Core I7 @ 3.8Ghz

6 Gigs DDR3 Triple Channel Ram @ 1600

2 x 5770 in Xfire

Intel X25 SSD 80Gig drive (Game Installed)

2 Seagate Drives in Raid 0 for 250Gigs total

I run the Offline test as per the forum post. My .benchantwerp gives me 40 FPS. Doesnt seem right. Not sure if there is a bottleneck in my computer not allowing the Graphics cards to perform. When i run GPU-Z and monitor them it seems like both cards never go past 30-40% each.

Edit, also I cannot find anything about Flip Queue or Frame Render in the Catalyst Control center. There is a Triple Buffering option, which I have disabled.

Edited February 26, 2010 by person

[madrebel]

i dont have an ati but flip queue should be in there somewhere in the CCP. google search it.

[chimaera]

Just as a point of reference an I7 920 2.66ghz CPU will give about 44 fps on antwerp.

Well it certainly does not on my rig :-)... average of about ~22fps

[badger77]

Here are my specs:

Core I7 @ 3.8Ghz

6 Gigs DDR3 Triple Channel Ram @ 1600

2 x 5770 in Xfire

Intel X25 SSD 80Gig drive (Game Installed)

2 Seagate Drives in Raid 0 for 250Gigs total

I run the Offline test as per the forum post. My .benchantwerp gives me 40 FPS. Doesnt seem right. Not sure if there is a bottleneck in my computer not allowing the Graphics cards to perform. When i run GPU-Z and monitor them it seems like both cards never go past 30-40% each.

Edit, also I cannot find anything about Flip Queue or Frame Render in the Catalyst Control center. There is a Triple Buffering option, which I have disabled.

Well it's your ati cards then

I'm getting 46 fps on Antwerp bench on an old gtx 260

like others are saying try disabling one card in your ati settings see how much that improves

I'm running my i7 on 2.66ghz btw

Nice setup you got there BTW

Edited February 28, 2010 by badger77

[chimaera]

Well it's your ati cards then

I'm getting 46 fps on Antwerp bench on an old gtx 260

like others are saying try disabling one card in your ati settings see how much that improves

I'm running my i7 on 2.66ghz btw

Nice setup you got there BTW

Disabling one of the cards doesn't do anything to the performance(neither negative or positive effect).

[badger77]

Disabling one of the cards doesn't do anything to the performance(neither negative or positive effect).

Ahh fiar enough. Thought I saw a post saying that helped.

Guess it's just a wait for the rats to find the issues with all the ATI cards.

[chimaera]

Benchmarking comparisons between a Nvidia Geforce GTX 260(896 MB) and ATI Radeon HD 4870(1024 MB) shows they are very similar in performance.

Thats why I bought my 4870x2 card, it was at the time a less expensive card than the GTX260 while still outperforming it.

Tom's Hardware - Benchmark The Last Remnant

Why do I link to a benchmark between ATI 4870(1024 MB) vs GTX 260(896 MB)?

Well I figured as BGE doesnt utilize both GPU's on my x2 card it should be equal to a ATI 4870(1024 MB).

The benchmark shows that in 'mainstream' applications/games the cards are very similar in performance, some are 'won' by ATI and some are 'won' by nVidia.

When it comes to testing in BGE we get a picture that shows that nVidia has some kind of advantage, what it is I dont know.

If I would be buying a computer today I would not go for a ATI card which is sad as my latest 3 computer builds has been with ATI cards.

Edited March 2, 2010 by chimaera

[badger77]

Well as per Lutes test in the other post it seems it's not so cut and dry.

Yes the ATI's are getting horrid performance on CPU intensive items such as the Antwerp benchmark, but they are wiping the floor with some Nvidia on the graphics stuff as per the bino test. The 4870 had 50% on my 260 GTX in that one little test and the 5000 series guys are actually getting a FPS INCREASE looking through binos in that one test.

Seems there is quite a bit to this.

The rats have stats from probably hundreds of machines now they can go through and see differences, hence the different types of tests.

[chimaera]

Yes I saw those recent 'binos' tests, interesting...

It could very well be that there actually is no problem, maybe ATI and nVidia is using VERY different ways to handle graphics.

But I hope that with the recent input from us and the test results that has been posted during Beta that the Rats might actually be able to find some unknown bug that hasnt been squashed yet. For example, why is the ATI cards idling at 0% load during some tests? As if the CPU is doing all the work...

Edited March 2, 2010 by chimaera

[ratware]

I got pretty much the same system,

Getting 40fps at lowest high 60+.

E6600 2,4ghz not OCed

8800GTS 640mb

6GB ram

also W7

[lutorm]

I have a ATI 4890 from XFX with 1 gig of DDR5 video memory, an Intel E6600 CPU, and 4 gigs of DDR 800 ram with Windows 7 64bit and I get a total of 15 FPS with any settings on the Antwerp Benchmark for 1.31.

Hey blato, can you look at the CPU/GPU benchmark thread in the windows support forum and do my "bino test" on p.3? This is a good system to try it on because you have a pretty powerful video card and slow processor.

Also, if anyone with a newish Nvidia card is reading this, I need data on Nvidia cards too. Please try that test and report your results.

[Jizzyjaz]

Now that you guys bring it up, it oddly feels like my FPS are capped at 60, no higher, much lower. No matter where i go its always 60 even, when i get into a bigger area, the fps drop.

I happen to have an ATI 5770.

5gb ram

Dual core 3.0ghz AMD

[lutorm]

Now that you guys bring it up, it oddly feels like my FPS are capped at 60, no higher, much lower. No matter where i go its always 60 even, when i get into a bigger area, the fps drop.

I happen to have an ATI 5770.

5gb ram

Dual core 3.0ghz AMD

Capped at 60 is a strong indication you have vsync on.