A win for GTX295 over 5970 in Modern Warfare 2?

P

PS3

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
1,386
Thought this was interesting if you look at the minimum FPS in MW2, the 295 is beating the 5970. Minimum FPS = smoothness, so I would say I would give mw2 to the 295 still. :D - obviously this victory will be extremely short lived once ati irons out the drivers I assume, but interesting nonetheless.

http://driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=885&pageid=7

mw2w.jpg
 
Umm, min fps doesn't always = smoothness, for example , if for only 1 second, for whatever reason the fps drops to 14, and the rest of the time its 40, it will record 14, you need to see the actual graph of frames per second / time to see where the dip to 14 occurred, how many times and for how long
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
Umm, min fps doesn't always = smoothness, for example , if for only 1 second, for whatever reason the fps drops to 14, and the rest of the time its 40, it will record 14, you need to see the actual graph of frames per second / time to see where the dip to 14 occurred, how many times and for how long
Click to expand...

+1 framerate graphs.

dropping to 20-25 fps 15 times per minute consistenly -or-

dropping to 35-40 fps 15 times per minute and dropping to 15 fps once in a 10 minute span.
 
Something is off in their testing.. my min FPS does not hit that low with a 5870. Of course, I don't know which level they tested.
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
Umm, min fps doesn't always = smoothness, for example , if for only 1 second, for whatever reason the fps drops to 14, and the rest of the time its 40, it will record 14, you need to see the actual graph of frames per second / time to see where the dip to 14 occurred, how many times and for how long
Click to expand...

Precisely, bar graphs only show limited information. A line graph of framerates over time is much more useful IMO.
 
I'm surprised how close the cards are in performance. I honestly expected to see the 5970 blow away the 295. With the exception of stalker, they're pretty much neck and neck (with the 295 and 4870x2 beating it in some cases).

The drivers probably still need some work
 
x3sphere said:
Something is off in their testing.. my min FPS does not hit that low with a 5870. Of course, I don't know which level they tested.
Click to expand...

It's possible I think. A level with a lot of explosions and particle effects/special effects(or whatever you want to call them) what not will make these cards suffer.
 
there is min fps problem with radeon not that its victory or something lol god ppl are raelly desperate when it comes to defend there beloved card
 
dr.stevil said:
I'm surprised how close the cards are in performance. I honestly expected to see the 5970 blow away the 295. With the exception of stalker, they're pretty much neck and neck (with the 295 and 4870x2 beating it in some cases).

The drivers probably still need some work
Click to expand...
neck and neck lol 30 50 fps difference is neck and neck what are you smoking ?
 
PS3 said:
Wha? :D
Click to expand...
both dual gpu radeons have min fps problem but on avg 5970 is still better. of course you can celebrate that victory if u want by pulling out your gtx 295 and hugging it but must say it won't last long :D
 
Last edited:
eric66 said:
both dual gpu radeons have min fps problem but on avg they are still better. of course you can celebrate that victory if u want by pulling out your gtx 295 and hugging it but must say it won't last long :D
Click to expand...

complete hogwash
 
Wait isn't the same people claiming min fps means nothing the ones using that same argument against the 295 when the 5870 came out?
Jesus, you have short memories and lack of consistency,,, ;)
 
I guessed that this would either be an Atech thread or a PS3 thread, and I guess I was half-right. What a shocker.

The average frame rate of the 5970 is significantly higher. Given that, I'd say it's fair to assume that the 5970 is the better card for MW2. The minimum measured frame rate is often an unreproducible anomaly.
 
phide said:
I guessed that this would either be an Atech thread or a PS3 thread, and I guess I was half-right. What a shocker.

The average frame rate of the 5970 is significantly higher. Given that, I'd say it's fair to assume that the 5970 is the better card for MW2. The minimum measured frame rate is often an unreproducible anomaly.
Click to expand...

I think it's obvious that mw2 can still stress a video card when there are a lot of explosions, smoke, and other effects. And Nvidia cards seem to always shine in cod titles any way. Look at cod5 benchmarks below. Certainly an overclocked gtx295 will probably match 5850CF in this game, and really close the gap on the 5970(at stock speeds). This is just one game however obviously, and obviously the 5970 is the best card.

SAPPH-HD5970-25.jpg
 
Looks like they are hitting a CPU limit.

How about some eyefinity resolution tests?

That would really show what's up with the cards, and have fewer wierd CPU limitations.

25xx/16xx is no longer the 'top dawg' resolution for a single card.
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
Umm, min fps doesn't always = smoothness, for example , if for only 1 second, for whatever reason the fps drops to 14, and the rest of the time its 40, it will record 14, you need to see the actual graph of frames per second / time to see where the dip to 14 occurred, how many times and for how long
Click to expand...

+1.

It is impossible to draw the conclusion which one is smoother without looking at the line charts. Some nv fanboys are just too easily excited. :D
 
There's something wrong with the game if it's averaging over 80fps and the minimum doesn't go past 25.
 
its driver problem and looks like only cf setups have it cause single gpu radeon has much better min fps
 
dr.stevil said:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/11/18/amd-ati-radeon-hd-5970-review/6

look here :) in most of the games tested, the 5970 doesn't have THAT large of a lead (if any in some cases) with the exception of stalker
Click to expand...

Well I think we can conclude that this is reproducible and really only confirms a driver problem with modern warfare 2 with the graph below. That's two reviews where minimum fps is suffering with the 5970. Definitely a scaling issue with CF set ups, that's all it is, and it only appears to be in mw2.

Also you fail to realize that the 5970 can easily be overclocked to 5870 CF speeds and up right? So that lead does get large, and there are even larger gaps with the 5970 leading at stock speeds in games like nfs shift.

codmw2s.gif
 
dr.stevil said:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/11/18/amd-ati-radeon-hd-5970-review/6

look here :) in most of the games tested, the 5970 doesn't have THAT large of a lead (if any in some cases) with the exception of stalker
Click to expand...
if you check that review you ll see that they tested with catalyst 9.10 instead of hemlock driver which is i believe 9.12 beta and that fallout thing is cpu limitation you can see that nearly every card has same fps until 2560 res where radeon makes a little difference but still hits same limit which were in lower res
 
Oh whatever but hey wait i think the purpose of this thread is because OP owns a GTX 295 and that somehow justfies his purchase.
 
Fafeifa said:
Oh whatever but hey wait i think the purpose of this thread is because OP owns a GTX 295 and that somehow justfies his purchase.
Click to expand...

you should of seen the stream of threads, mostly to post images of his mATX case.:D

I got the same case:D:D
 
to tell the truth actually if those benchs are true its still win for gtx 295 most important for nvidia driver team. even without min fps thing gtx 295 is doing great job against 5970 in this game
 
eric66 said:
to tell the truth actually if those benchs are true its still win for gtx 295 most important for nvidia driver team. even without min fps thing gtx 295 is doing great job against 5970 in this game
Click to expand...

Modern Warfare 2 is the only game with that problem though. The GTX295 has had a year to mature! I'd give the ati driver team some slack, because the 5970 just barely launched. Well then again, modern warfare 2 was just released too, so patches etc. might fix any performance issues were seeing as well...
 
5970 beats the GTX 295 by 20 FPS on average on both those charts... I'd say it's faster.
A single min frame drop doesn't mean anything compared to a graph to show performance over the testing period.
There are going to be a few TWIWMTBP games that simply run faster on Nvidia hardware because it's coded that way as well.
We'll just have to see how the 5970 drivers evolve. They are running on betas basically and I'm not sure if the Crossfire profiles are optimized for that game yet either.
 
vjcsmoke said:
5970 beats the GTX 295 by 20 FPS on average on both those charts... I'd say it's faster.
A single min frame drop doesn't mean anything compared to a graph to show performance over the testing period.
Click to expand...

the first linked review has a line graph for the 5970 only, but not the gtx295.
 
vjcsmoke said:
5970 beats the GTX 295 by 20 FPS on average on both those charts... I'd say it's faster.
A single min frame drop doesn't mean anything compared to a graph to show performance over the testing period.
There are going to be a few TWIWMTBP games that simply run faster on Nvidia hardware because it's coded that way as well.
We'll just have to see how the 5970 drivers evolve. They are running on betas basically and I'm not sure if the Crossfire profiles are optimized for that game yet either.
Click to expand...

mw2line.jpg


http://driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=885&pageid=7

That's the line graph. Drivers will evolve...this is just one little hiccup obviously. Look how NFS shift patch increased performance dramatically in ati's lineup.
 
PS3 said:
Glad you upgraded your case:cool:.
Click to expand...

nuclear jump over a completely bare system.


Of course, I stupidly went and bought another motherboard, that happens to ATX, so it doesn't fit:mad:

So now I have another naked system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top