AMD Frame Pacing Explored: Catalyst 13.8 Brings Consistency to Crossfire
by Ryan Smith on August 1, 2013 2:00 PM ESTSleeping Dogs
Another Square Enix game, Sleeping Dogs is one of the few open world games to be released with any kind of benchmark, giving us a unique opportunity to benchmark an open world game. Like most console ports, Sleeping Dogs’ base assets are not extremely demanding, but it makes up for it with its interesting anti-aliasing implementation, a mix of FXAA and SSAA that at its highest settings does an impeccable job of removing jaggies. However by effectively rendering the game world multiple times over, it can also require a very powerful video card to drive these high AA modes.
Once more the tables turn with frame rates, and we see the 7990 hold on to a very small lead over the GTX 690.
Sleeping Dogs is another title where AMD has greatly improved on their frame consistency. With Catalyst 13.6 the 7990 had deltas over 100% (the variability was larger than the average frame time) which has since been heavily reduced with frame pacing. The end result eliminated AMD’s runt frames in this benchmark, and pushing them down to the 20% range. Still, this pales in comparison to the GTX 690. Though we do see the 6990 doing rather well for itself due to its lower frame rate, even with this metric compensating for that factor. It’s clearly a lot easier to schedule frames when you have more time to do it.
This is another case of where AMD’s massive improvements on frame pacing have led to an improvement in frame times at the 95th percentile. Here they shave off 7ms, and not unlike their frame rate are slightly ahead of the GTX 690.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
102 Comments
View All Comments
boot318 - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
I've read a couple people got "black screened" when they did this update on one GPU. I'm not saying that will happen, but you better prepare for it if you do.Bob Todd - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
I may have missed this when I skimmed through the results, but have you heard anything about rough estimates from AMD about a frame pacing release supporting Eyefinity (e.g. Q4, H1 2014, etc.)? I know it's still a tiny percentage of users, but there are relatively cheap 1080p IPS panels now so building a nice looking 5760x1080 setup is pretty affordable these days. After playing games this way, it's something I wish I had done earlier, and I'm eager to see a frame pacing driver supporting this setup.Ryan Smith - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
Sorry, AMD didn't give us an ETA on that one. Let me see if I can still get one out of them.DanNeely - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
HardOCP says DX9 and Eyefinity support should be available in a driver update later this month.http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/08/01/amd_cata...
DeviousOrange - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
I am hoping this will also improve Dual Graphics, will give it a test over the weekend.Homeles - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
Well I'll be damned. They did it. Not quite as good as Nvidia, but at this point, the difference isn't really one worth mentioning.xdrol - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
The link is bad for the driver, please remove "-auth" from the URL.chizow - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
Like watching a baby crawl. Good first step for AMD, but still a long way to go.AMD and their fans can thank the press (mainly TechReport and HardOCP, sorry Derek, you guys were way late to the party and still not fully onboard with FCAT measurements) and Nvidia fans for making such a big stink of this. Lord knows AMD and their fans were too busy looking the other way to address it, anyways.
Hopefully AMD and their fans take something away from this: if you want to improve your product, don't try to sweep it under the rug, address it, own it, and demand a fix for it.
chizow - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
Sorry my above post should reference the author Ryan, not Derek (was thinking of your predecessor), when referring to AT not being at the forefront of this runtframe/microstutter issue.Also, I feel the accolades given to TechReport, while not completely undeserving, should also be given to PCPer's Ryan Shrout and some of the German publications like PCGamesHardware. While TechReport did start the ball rolling with some new ways to measure frame latency/microstutter, Ryan Shrout really harped on the runtframe issue until Nvidia worked with him in unveiling FCAT. Also, the German sites have been hammering AMD for years about their much worst microstuttering in CF, largely ignored by the NA press/blogs. And finally Kyle at HardOCP has said for years SLI felt smoother than CF with some Pepsi challenge type user testing, but not so much hard evidence as presented here as well as other sites.
Finally Ryan, are these new metrics you've done an excellent job of formulating going to make it into future benchmarks? Or are you going to just assume the issue has been fixed going forward? I would love to take AMD's word on it but as we've seen from both vendors in the past, driver regression is commonplace unless constantly revisited by users, reviewers, and the vendors alike.
Ryan Smith - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
"Finally Ryan, are these new metrics you've done an excellent job of formulating going to make it into future benchmarks?"They'll be in future articles in a limited form, similar to how we handled the GTX 780 launch. It takes a lot of additional work to put this data together, which isn't always time we have available. Especially if it becomes doing hours of extra work to collect data just to say "yep, still no stuttering."