Anno 2205 crippled on all AMD & Kepler GPUs

TaintedSquirrel

TaintedSquirrel

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
12,691
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-11/anno-2205-benchmarks/2/#diagramm-anno-2205-1920-1080

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Anno-2205-Spiel-55714/Specials/Technik-Test-Benchmarks-1175781/

hp11oVE.png


L5lvfGY.png
 
Last edited:
Can you elaborate what the claim is here? How do these benchmarks show that the game is "crippled" on Maxwell / AMD?
 
I don't see Maxwell anywhere, I only see Kepler.

Well, the most obvious thing amongst the benchmark pictures is the fact that 970 is currently running toe to toe with Fury X, and 960 beating a 290.

though I'd take it with a dead sea's worth of salt.
 
"Crippled" might be a bit sensationalist, but I do frown every time I see a 960 coming close to or even surpassing a 780.
 
The numbers look fine to me? The 780ti and 290x are right in line with each other, same with the 780 and 960.
 
This comes close to badly programmed or just badly implemented graphics.
throw this through the translator : http://www.computerbase.de/2015-11/...schnitt_viel_shader_qualitaet_frisst_leistung

It says that only current graphics with optimized paths will perform very good and the rest is just not worth doing for them it seems. Shader on ultra will not have to much visual impact from really high but the setting requires stupid amount of graphics power ..

German is not my 1st language ;) .
 
Last edited:
cageymaru said:
Another game to skip until the $5 bargain bin.
Click to expand...

That's what is told myself on the last Anno game and all the following DLC.

Never ended up getting it, way better choices out there to spend on.
 
cocdod said:
The numbers look fine to me? The 780ti and 290x are right in line with each other, same with the 780 and 960.
Click to expand...

You know a company's marketing is doing it perfectly when their customers think it's normal that a current mid-range card (~$200) is beating a flagship (~$650, before the 290/290X-induced price cuts, ~$499 after) from their last generation of products. :(

Edit: Nm, the GTX 960 is priced even lower than I thought...
 
Last edited:
Revdarian said:
Neither that nor Tessellation would explain the similarity with the Kepler line also performing terrible.
Click to expand...

I'm primarily going off of the CPU scaling graph in

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-11/anno-2205-benchmarks/2/#diagramm-anno-2205-1920-1080

980Ti CPU scales

Fury X does not

if they did the same CPU scale test with a Kepler card and showed no scaling, then I'd guess the issue is CPU scaling caused by drivers

Nvidia had to release Kepler focus drivers to improve W3 performance, so the performance issues are probably driver related at least
 
960 hot on the heels of a 780Ti and beating a 780, heh.
 
Cool Vibrations said:
You know a company's marketing is doing it perfectly when their customers think it's normal that a current mid-range card (~$200) is beating a flagship (~$650, before the 290/290X-induced price cuts, ~$499 after) from their last generation of products. :(

Edit: Nm, the GTX 960 is priced even lower than I thought...
Click to expand...

xorbe said:
960 hot on the heels of a 780Ti and beating a 780, heh.
Click to expand...


Must be an amazing card this 960!




Oh wait... :rolleyes:

LOL...
 
I guess everyone with regular Titans will have to upgrade to a GTX 950.
 
Is that new? People wanted a 580. Then by 2012 the 660 was close and ran cooler. $230 price range?
 
singe_101 said:
Is that new? People wanted a 580. Then by 2012 the 660 was close and ran cooler. $230 price range?
Click to expand...

Sure but Kepler had the advantage of a process shrink, Maxwell doesn't.

This is besides the fact that apart from a few games, the 780 is usually a good 30%+ faster than 960.

perfrel_1920.gif
 
Curious if/how the tessellation selector for AMD would affect performance then if the game is over tesselated (again).
 
Can't be tessellation since 780 beats 960, and 960 seems to be on par with Fury X.
 
Yakk said:
Curious if/how the tessellation selector for AMD would affect performance then if the game is over tesselated (again).
Click to expand...

Overtessellated?
Let me guess, you have never coded and think wireframes show something (most likely from a source that know nothing either) while infact it show nothing to support the claim.

Care to link to any proof of "overtessellation"?

HINT: If you post anything wireframerelated...I will link to my post debunking the claim about crysis2 and tessellation.

I bet most people talking "too much tessellation"(looking at you AMD) choose to ignore the only visible in wireframe mode ocean i crysis3...but then again...ignorance is the new black on forums...
 
The OP titme is false btw...better suited for a click-bait site.

Try looking at what Maxwell is and what it does better than Kepler.

Insert: WOW...never architechture does better in future games...oh really?
 
Why are you girls calling this clickbait, the website is in German how good is that for clickbait ? Unless you are thinking that the Germans want to take over the world by releasing in depth article about a new game is just a part of the master plan ?
 
Yakk said:
That's what is told myself on the last Anno game and all the following DLC.

Never ended up getting it, way better choices out there to spend on.
Click to expand...

it's a fun game. but i uninstalled it after the eco-fascist faction declared war on me for building a nuclear power plant. fuck that shit.
 
Revdarian said:
You do realize that Kepler is crippled here too, and in the past year Kepler's performance has gone slightly down since the focus went to maxwell, haven't you?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Not relevant to me. Went from 980 on day 1, to a 980 Ti on day one. Life is good.

Sounds like you're grasping at straws. Kepler performance hasn't "gone down" nor is there any Nvidia conspiracy to "cripple Kepler" in drivers like AMD tinfoil hatters want to believe.

My point wasn't only about this benchmark, but the overall pattern it corroborates: AMD always comes up short, even at the same pricepoints.
 
Older nVidia architecture weren't as good with tesselation. There's no conspiracy here for nVidia to cripple their own hardware, that's just a dumb and irrational idea. No company will intentionally cripple their own hardware.

Tesselation is a valid feature in DX 11. You can't blame the dev for using it. If you're unhappy with your GPU performance in tesselation, you should take it up with the GPU maker.
 
Hornet said:
Older nVidia architecture weren't as good with tesselation. There's no conspiracy here for nVidia to cripple their own hardware, that's just a dumb and irrational idea. No company will intentionally cripple their own hardware.

Tesselation is a valid feature in DX 11. You can't blame the dev for using it. If you're unhappy with your GPU performance in tesselation, you should take it up with the GPU maker.
Click to expand...

No you should take it up with the devs. The hardware is out there and you insist the solution is for the hardware to be updated to meet the standards of one game. Tessellation isn't the only tech for better 3D visuals. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

From the looks of those performance graphs I would have to say it is horribly un-optimized. This is looking a lot like TW3 where tess had only one setting: 64X. Of course now the game added ability for lower settings but at launch it was quite the marketing tool for Maxwell. Of course this situation looks far worse so either terrible devs or some back alley dealings.
 
odditory said:
Not relevant to me. Went from 980 on day 1, to a 980 Ti on day one. Life is good.

Sounds like you're grasping at straws. Kepler performance hasn't "gone down" nor is there any Nvidia conspiracy to "cripple Kepler" in drivers like AMD tinfoil hatters want to believe.

My point wasn't only about this benchmark, but the overall pattern it corroborates: AMD always comes up short, even at the same pricepoints.
Click to expand...

What I got out of it is that Nvidia doesn't support last year's cards at all. The chart clearly shows that a 960 is faster than a GTX 780 / 780ti. Those cards last year were the equivalent of the 980 / 980ti. So when Pascal launches expect your 980 / 980ti to be as fast as the slowest sub $200 Pascal card.

AMD's driver team will just analyze the game and work around whatever issues are there. Nvidia? You're fucked if you aren't on the newest hardware.

That's what I get out of the current state of video cards.
 
cageymaru said:
What I got out of it is that Nvidia doesn't support last year's cards at all. The chart clearly shows that a 960 is faster than a GTX 780 / 780ti. Those cards last year were the equivalent of the 980 / 980ti. So when Pascal launches expect your 980 / 980ti to be as fast as the slowest sub $200 Pascal card.

AMD's driver team will just analyze the game and work around whatever issues are there. Nvidia? You're fucked if you aren't on the newest hardware.

That's what I get out of the current state of video cards.
Click to expand...

IIRC the 970 was equivalent to the 780/780ti. Regardless your point still stands since the 970 is ~20% faster than the 780ti and they should be neck and neck...

I don't know if it's "crippled" which means malicious to me or just "not optimized" yet. Only time will tell.
 
AllBlackFan said:
Still it's not an explanation for the 960 beating a 780 as it has less Tess. performance.
Click to expand...

Could be a combination of tessellation + other optimizations that better utilize Maxwell vs Kepler and GCN. Either way, AMD is getting pounded here. I wish reviewers would use a lot more games that aren't mainstream for benchmark tests because at this point, both NVIDIA and AMD probably optimized their drivers for the usual culprit of games that are tested by reviewers. Throwing a curve ball by using games not typically tested would be a nice change and give an idea of just how efficient the drivers are for each company.
 
Dayaks said:
IIRC the 970 was equivalent to the 780/780ti. Regardless your point still stands since the 970 is ~20% faster than the 780ti and they should be neck and neck...

I don't know if it's "crippled" which means malicious to me or just "not optimized" yet. Only time will tell.
Click to expand...

The last Anno game was never really "optimized". I remember them patching in lots of functions to allow for new ways to add in DLC. If you asked questions on the boards, you would get responses like "The dev team is German and speak limited English." Then AMD came out with some drivers and it worked fine. Nothing groundbreaking like the smoothness of Civilization Beyond Earth under Mantle, but it did run much better. Been awhile, but I don't remember the driver even being specific for the game.

Also the DLC pack never really went on sale if you had the UPLAY version of the game. So I would recommend getting the Steam version next Summer Sale. The Steam version and DLC went on sale all of the time.

The last Anno game was really enjoyable. I hear that they consolized this game to appeal to more people. Of course this alienates the core audience of the last game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top