• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Really Confused

Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
19
I am not sure if I am missing something here can you guys explain this to me:

Look at this review:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-radeon-hd-5970-2gb-oc-edition-review-11.html

And this one

http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=855&page=13

Both sites are using an I7 920

Now look at this review:

http://www.hitechlegion.com/reviews...-dual-graphics-directx-11-video-card?start=11

91 frames?

The reviewer goes on to say this:

I would like to talk a little about the benchmarks in Call of Duty (World at War). Some people are speculating that due to CPU limitations (not getting the info to the card fast enough), there is a bottleneck. I see and understand the point, but I would like to possibly add something to those remarks. Could it be that the drivers aren’t mature enough yet? While benchmarking the game, I noticed the frame rates would not go over 91 FPS no matter what settings I tried (No AA, No AF,etc.), which may lead to another argument about resolution. I can understand the CPU being the bottleneck at lower resolutions but does it really play that much of a part at 1920 x 1200? If it did, why did frame rates drop as the resolutions went higher? (ATI and NVIDIA) So let’s rethink this. Windows 7 is new, both ATI and NVIDIA’s drivers are new, so could it be lack of maturity or even lack of support by the games developers? I think we will start seeing some differences as drivers mature and Activision comes out with their next patch.

http://www.hitechlegion.com/reviews...-dual-graphics-directx-11-video-card?start=14

He is using a I7 870 so is there a CPU bottleneck or am I missing something? I looked on Hard but they did not use COD in testing that I could find. I just don't get it this is the second review of their's that doesn't make sense. So I come to you guys for help I am thinking about a whole new rig here and I was thinking the 870 but damn if a CPU does that much I think I will get a 920.

Thanks for the help guys

dee dee
 
I think its a driver issue. The "hemlock" driver had several editions. Here you can see an early review from PC games hardware where they used even older drivers. The results in COD WAW was even lower (on 5870) then on High tech legion and they used a 920:
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...irst-DirectX-11-graphics-card/Reviews/?page=8

I think we can expect more from the 5000 series to come. Look at the [H] review with NFS (new patch and drivers):

It went from this:
1253589355YCmpekvJfn_10_4.gif

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/09/22/amds_ati_radeon_hd_5870_video_card_review/10

To this:
12577103617dNc2NW5SO_7_1.gif

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/11/10/need_for_speed_shift_gameplay_performance_iq/7
 
What I don't get is he can't get over 91 frames on two resolutions where as other people are well over 150+ frames. It doesn't make sense. Could it be a framerate cap?

What you linked to was from Sept these are all recent surely this can't be the same drivers could they?
 
Its an older driver and its the 5870. If you look at PC games hardware, they got 55.7fps in average on 5870 in september (4x AA 1680x1050) with an earlier driver, while Hardwarecanucs got 92.78fps in average in November same setting.

[H] experienced also a major performance increase with newer driver (and patch) for NFS as seen from the two reviews they had with NFS.

The Hemlock driver also shows difference in NFS, some used beta 4 and others beta 5 (which gave better results).

However, you might be right about the framerate cap. I did some research and it turns out that COD WAW have a framerate cap at 91:

World at War includes an artificial frame rate cap of 91fps. While this can be removed, 91fps is far above what we'd describe as a playable frame rate, so we've chosen to leave it enabled and focus more on the minimum frame rate where playability is more important.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/11/24/multi-gpu-round-up/7
 
ahhhh ok that means sense now.

That gives some ideas as to what he was talking about. In a sense I guess he doesn't know what he is doing but at the sametime shows drivers could be an issue. Thanks for taking the time to help me make sense of this.
 
Back
Top