GCN performance

[PontiacGTX]

I have checked the Ghost recon wildlands Benchmarks and I noticed something when they used Ultra Quality (UQ) the 470 is even ahead the R9 290X by a big margin when it was on very high Quality(VHQ) the 290x was faster than 480, what could have caused that a 470 that currently is slower than a 290 by a bit, outperform a 290x? and even the R9 Nano is slower here than RX 480 when the R9 nano is always as fast as 1060/Fury OR Faster

 

[lolfail9001]

I have checked the Ghost recon wildlands Benchmarks and I noticed something when they used Ultra Quality (UQ) the 470 is even ahead the R9 290X by a big margin when it was on very high Quality(VHQ) the 290x was faster than 480, what could have caused that a 470 that currently is slower than a 290 by a bit, outperform a 290x? and even the R9 Nano is slower here than RX 480 when the R9 nano is always as fast as 1060/Fury OR Faster

Tesselation/geometry game in general? Sounds kind of obvious, you know.

 

[PontiacGTX]

it can be vram because the 780 has better tessellation than the 290x, and it is as fast or slower

 

[CSI_PC]

I would need to look into the detail settings, but it does use Volumetric Lighting based upon Nvidia and also Nvidia Turf effects, and also HBAO+ (although that usually hits all equally).
So maybe the Ultra settings is those two kicking in heavily and with their tessellation as mentioned that impacts the older AMD GPUs more.

Cheers

 

[razor1]

it can be vram because the 780 has better tessellation than the 290x, and it is as fast or slower

if it was vram the 970 will get hurt too, maybe a combination of both.

 

[crazycrave]

Depends on which 290x was tested as later cards had better PCB/Power /cooling designs that was the test bed for the 390x with 1020/1350 clocks which was a step up in performance from ref design cards.

Also the 290x was built for Eyefinity with that 512mb memory bus but ,if you really want to test one then try 5760 x 1080 in iRacing Sims.