Originally posted by chithanh
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
AMD APU vs. Radeon GPU Open-Source Comparison
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Michael View PostThe testing isn't about letting you know if a game is playable or not per se but using it as a means of measuring/comparing performance improvements and differences, etc. I don't even play video games myself nor do a majority of the companies using PTS care about the game performance from that metric.
If cards start pushing past 100FPS in a game at max detail settings at 2560x1600 they retire the game from the list as at that point you have to go to 5670x1080 or higher which is uncommon for anyone not using a top of the line GPU. Why? Because at over 100FPS you are doing a CPU bound benchmark, not a GPU bound benchmark.
Comment
-
Originally posted by curaga View PostOuch. Why are they pretending to do a fair compare, if each playthrough is manual? Their numbers are meaningless.
On the presentation, like others said, it's the exact same info, just presented differently. I really don't care if the min/max numbers were also in table form, because they alone are not that useful: what if it was a single anomalous spike? In the graph you can see how often the spikes appear.
Those spikes are present in real demos and real gameplay because the GPU load in no game is a constant. As the number of things going on on screen increases and falls so to does the load on the GPU and thus the framerate also rises and falls with it. Theres a world of difference between the GPU load of sitting in a building with no firefight happening and going outside of it and having a war zone raging on.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kivada View PostIf cards start pushing past 100FPS in a game at max detail settings at 2560x1600 they retire the game from the list as at that point you have to go to 5670x1080 or higher which is uncommon for anyone not using a top of the line GPU. Why? Because at over 100FPS you are doing a CPU bound benchmark, not a GPU bound benchmark.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JS987 View PostIt is important to know if CPU or GPU is bottleneck.
In 5 years when you can pick up a 3840x2160 for $150 then the goalpost will be moved. Just as it was when the average high res screen was only 1024x760 but most people ran 640x4080 or 800x800 to get acceptable framerates, this was upped to 1280x1024 then 1600x1200 then 1920x1200 then to 2560x1600. Such is technological progress.
Comment
-
Originally posted by liam View PostDoes he?
According to the site creator/maintainer he doesn't.
IMHO, he doesn't as well: he runs a benchmarking site which focuses on linux/bsd.
Comment
-
Originally posted by liam View PostDoes he?
According to the site creator/maintainer he doesn't.
IMHO, he doesn't as well: he runs a benchmarking site which focuses on linux/bsd.
From http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...836#post375836
So either he is confused as to what his stated job is or he is trying to weasel out of doing what is expected of him by keeping up with his peers doing the same job on other sites.
Comment
Comment