Radeon Software Crimson Driver (15.11) WHQL Driver Performance Analysis
Click here to post a comment for Radeon Software Crimson Driver (15.11) WHQL Driver Performance Analysis on our message forum
Ryu5uzaku
Good stuff. I checked some other benchies too it seems all around perf increases. Of course it seems experience varies. DX9 got improved frame pacing. And FLC seems to be good when fps drops under freesync limit with or w/o v-sync smoother then before.
Great review as always.
Ven0m
Thanks for the review, Hilbert!
They claimed better frame pacing. Is there any difference in animation smoothness? Will you add FCAT benchmarks?
NAZ2222
Why do you call this driver Beta 7? Did you not use the WQL version from the AMD site?
pokyeah88
somehow borderlands 2 and presequel felt smoother, but didnt know it's because of the placebo effect or not, but i love the new ui.
Blackfyre
vbetts
Moderator
Horray! 2 more fps! 😀
vbetts
Moderator
Undying
vbetts
Moderator
Seketh
Why isn't Fiji on the benchmarks?
Not that I'm expecting a significant difference, but it makes absolutely no sense to exclude Fiji from this analysis...
Pretty much this. The only thing I got from the last Nvidia release were more TDR crashes.
Denial
JonasBeckman
MBTP
This review feels kind of incomplete and rather strange not having the fury X...
LM2014
TDR is a classic for the nvidia drivers.
Hence the reason for me to never buy any graphics card that company.
In the era of fermi I felt the constant Tdrs BSODs twice.
I had to sell my graphics card and never had a problem, since I amd, incidentally always had cards from ATI/AMD.
For me the drivers AMD are by far much better and more stable.
I think a grace people who continue to say that the nvidia drivers are better.
This is just my opinion.. 🙂
vbetts
Moderator
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Administrator
schmidtbag
I'm not sure how much this relates to Windows, but framerate can be a pretty gray topic. The frames rendered isn't the same thing as frames displayed (for example, if your monitor is 60Hz, you can get a framerate beyond 61FPS but you're not going to see it). Catalyst on Linux has been notoriously bad because you might measure 100FPS but looking at your display it seems to be more like 40FPS.
The claims AMD made about framerate improvements might have more to do with the frames displayed. From what I heard, there was almost no measured performance difference in Linux at all but there was a significant visual improvement. Maybe Windows is the same way?
PieEyedPiper
Thanks for the review, would have liked to see some frametime testing though considering it's the new flashy 3.0 upgrade. 😉
waltc3
Rich_Guy