MSI Radeon HD 7790 TurboDuo OC review
Metro Last Light VGA Graphics Benchmark performance test
Noctua NH-U12S and NH-U14S review
ASUS GeForce GTX 670 DirectCU Mini review
OCZ Vertex 3.20 SSD review
Cooler Master Eisberg 240L Prestige review
Guru3D and OCZ Contest - PC Power 1200W PSU Giveaway
MSI GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST OC review
ASUS ROG ORION PRO Gaming Headset Review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - April 2013
GeForce 314.21 BETA Driver Download
Posted by: Hilbert Hagedoorn on: 03/16/2013 09:17 AM [ 152 comment(s) ]
Advertisement
Download the GeForce 314.21 BETA Driver as released by NVIDIA mostly to help out with performance and stability improvements in Tomb Raider. It also adds new SLI and 3D Vision profiles.
Release Summary
- Improves performance and stability in Tomb Raider
- Adds new SLI and 3D Vision profiles.
Additional Details
- Installs PhysX System Software 9.12.1031.
- Installs HD Audio v1.3.23.1
- Includes support for applications built using CUDA 5 or earlier version of the CUDA Toolkit.
- Supports OpenGL 4.3 for GeForce 400-series and later GPUs.
- Supports DisplayPort 1.2 for GeForce GTX 600 series GPUs.
- Supports multiple languages and APIs for GPU computing: CUDA C, CUDA C++, CUDA Fortran, OpenCL, DirectCompute, and Microsoft C++ AMP.
- Supports single GPU and NVIDIA SLI technology on DirectX 9, DirectX 10, DirectX 11, and OpenGL, including 3-way SLI, Quad SLI, and SLI support on SLI-certified Intel and AMD motherboards.
Supported Products
ION (Desktops)
ION
ION LE (Desktops)
ION LE
GeForce 600 Series
GeForce GTX 690, GeForce GTX 680, GeForce GTX 670, GeForce GTX 660 Ti, GeForce GTX 660, GeForce GTX 650 Ti, GeForce GTX 650, GeForce GT 645, GeForce GT 640, GeForce GT 630, GeForce GT 620, GeForce GT 610, GeForce 605
GeForce 500 Series
GeForce GTX 590, GeForce GTX 580, GeForce GTX 570, GeForce GTX 560 Ti, GeForce GTX 560 SE, GeForce GTX 560, GeForce GTX 555, GeForce GTX 550 Ti, GeForce GT 545, GeForce GT 530, GeForce GT 520, GeForce 510
GeForce 400 Series
GeForce GTX 480, GeForce GTX 470, GeForce GTX 465, GeForce GTX 460 SE v2, GeForce GTX 460 SE, GeForce GTX 460, GeForce GTS 450, GeForce GT 440, GeForce GT 430, GeForce GT 420, GeForce 405
GeForce 300 Series
GeForce GT 340, GeForce GT 330, GeForce GT 320, GeForce 315, GeForce 310
GeForce 200 Series
GeForce GTX 295, GeForce GTX 285, GeForce GTX 280, GeForce GTX 275, GeForce GTX 260, GeForce GTS 250, GeForce GTS 240, GeForce GT 230, GeForce GT 240, GeForce GT 220, GeForce G210, GeForce 210, GeForce 205
GeForce 100 Series
GeForce GT 140, GeForce GT 130, GeForce GT 120, GeForce G100
GeForce 9 Series
GeForce 9800 GX2, GeForce 9800 GTX/GTX+, GeForce 9800 GT, GeForce 9600 GT, GeForce 9600 GSO, GeForce 9600 GSO 512, GeForce 9600 GS, GeForce 9500 GT, GeForce 9500 GS, GeForce 9400 GT, GeForce 9400, GeForce 9300 GS, GeForce 9300 GE, GeForce 9300 SE, GeForce 9300, GeForce 9200, GeForce 9100
GeForce 8 Series
GeForce 8800 Ultra, GeForce 8800 GTX, GeForce 8800 GTS 512, GeForce 8800 GTS, GeForce 8800 GT, GeForce 8800 GS, GeForce 8600 GTS, GeForce 8600 GT, GeForce 8600 GS, GeForce 8500 GT, GeForce 8400 GS, GeForce 8400 SE, GeForce 8400, GeForce 8300 GS, GeForce 8300, GeForce 8200, GeForce 8200 /nForce 730a, GeForce 8100 /nForce 720a
7 pages « < 4 5 6 7
applejack
Master Guru
Posts: 324
Joined: 2004-08-21
Master Guru
Posts: 324
Joined: 2004-08-21
#4556884 Posted on: 03/18/2013 08:02 PM
Try Running without exclusive fullscreen enabled. It cures the issue for Nvidia and AMD users alike.
You can use tessellation.
tried exclusive fullscreen both enabled and disabled. no dice
actually crashed faster with it disabled.
guess I'll play without tessellation for the time being...
Try Running without exclusive fullscreen enabled. It cures the issue for Nvidia and AMD users alike.
You can use tessellation.
tried exclusive fullscreen both enabled and disabled. no dice
actually crashed faster with it disabled.
guess I'll play without tessellation for the time being...
GhostXL
Ancient Guru
Posts: 4906
Joined: 2004-10-30
Ancient Guru
Posts: 4906
Joined: 2004-10-30
#4556944 Posted on: 03/18/2013 09:19 PM
tried exclusive fullscreen both enabled and disabled. no dice
actually crashed faster with it disabled.
guess I'll play without tessellation for the time being...
Hmm, sorry to hear, it solves most peoples issues with crashing.
tried exclusive fullscreen both enabled and disabled. no dice
actually crashed faster with it disabled.
guess I'll play without tessellation for the time being...
Hmm, sorry to hear, it solves most peoples issues with crashing.
Wokis
Member Guru
Posts: 68
Joined: 2010-08-03
Member Guru
Posts: 68
Joined: 2010-08-03
#4556958 Posted on: 03/18/2013 09:25 PM
It's 4xSSAA. 4xSSAA (OGSSAA) at 2560x1600p is essentially rendering at 5120x3200p and scale it down to 2560x1600p.
10240x6400p would be 8xSSAA.
But what would 2x SSAA then be?
It's 4xSSAA. 4xSSAA (OGSSAA) at 2560x1600p is essentially rendering at 5120x3200p and scale it down to 2560x1600p.
10240x6400p would be 8xSSAA.
But what would 2x SSAA then be?
Bradders684
Master Guru
Posts: 204
Joined: 2010-01-13
Master Guru
Posts: 204
Joined: 2010-01-13
#4557016 Posted on: 03/18/2013 10:16 PM
It's 4xSSAA. 4xSSAA (OGSSAA) at 2560x1600p is essentially rendering at 5120x3200p and scale it down to 2560x1600p.
10240x6400p would be 8xSSAA.
As for the FXAA in Tomb Raider, nah.. it's horrible, IMO.
Good thing is, with wireless XBOX360 controller, 3rd person games like Tomb Raider is perfectly playable at locked 30 fps (frame limit to 30 fps with everything maxed including 4xSSAA).
Constant/locked 30 fps is better than frame rates jumping all over all the place. Frame rate limiter is very handy.
I don't think it is displayed at 2 or 4 times your resolution like it is supposed to.
I get better fps using 4xSSAA than I do when I downsample from 3840x2160 to 1920x1080.
It's 4xSSAA. 4xSSAA (OGSSAA) at 2560x1600p is essentially rendering at 5120x3200p and scale it down to 2560x1600p.
10240x6400p would be 8xSSAA.
As for the FXAA in Tomb Raider, nah.. it's horrible, IMO.
Good thing is, with wireless XBOX360 controller, 3rd person games like Tomb Raider is perfectly playable at locked 30 fps (frame limit to 30 fps with everything maxed including 4xSSAA).
Constant/locked 30 fps is better than frame rates jumping all over all the place. Frame rate limiter is very handy.
I don't think it is displayed at 2 or 4 times your resolution like it is supposed to.
I get better fps using 4xSSAA than I do when I downsample from 3840x2160 to 1920x1080.
CSF90
Member Guru
Posts: 113
Joined: 2013-03-04
Member Guru
Posts: 113
Joined: 2013-03-04
#4557093 Posted on: 03/18/2013 11:28 PM
Same here - Tested on my GTX680 and works great with tesselation & TressFX ON etc.
Here is a ~7 min video showing how well the performance is with OSD fps, core clock etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuJpaKuEs2M
Nice OC on that 680. Are you using a modded BIOS or did you remove the hardware voltage control?
Got a 670 myself at 1215MHz and am struggling to maintain 50 fps with everything maxed and TressFX OFF. Did you turn shadows up to Ultra, out of interest? I know a 680, especially at that speed, is a faster card, but just curious.
I completed the campaign with Adaptive V-Sync (Half Refresh Rate) - so locked to 30 fps - and everything maxed (2x SSAA), was pretty.
Same here - Tested on my GTX680 and works great with tesselation & TressFX ON etc.
Here is a ~7 min video showing how well the performance is with OSD fps, core clock etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuJpaKuEs2M
Nice OC on that 680. Are you using a modded BIOS or did you remove the hardware voltage control?
Got a 670 myself at 1215MHz and am struggling to maintain 50 fps with everything maxed and TressFX OFF. Did you turn shadows up to Ultra, out of interest? I know a 680, especially at that speed, is a faster card, but just curious.
I completed the campaign with Adaptive V-Sync (Half Refresh Rate) - so locked to 30 fps - and everything maxed (2x SSAA), was pretty.
PowerK
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
#4557161 Posted on: 03/19/2013 12:49 AM
@ PowerK - Capping a game to 30 fps with £1,720 worth of graphics card hardware?!?!?
I can play Tomb Raider fine at 50-60 fps with 1920x1200, Ultimate, 2xSSAA settings with only dips to 25-30 fps during some cutscenes, likely due to TressFX hair. I would think Titan SLI should be able to manage 2xSSAA on maxed out settings at 2560x1600 seeing as each card is 50% faster than a single GTX 680.
Not sure what your point is. But this game doesn't require high frame rate or fast movements like some of the competitive FPS do. (Counter-Strike, BF3 etc). Constant/locked 30 fps is better than frame rates jumping all over all the place.
I prefer 4xSSAA at 30 fps to 2xSSAA at 60 fps for games like Tomb Raider. (Though, I admit that difference between 2xSSAA and 4xSSAA at 2560x1600p resolution is very subtle at best.)
As I said earlier, with wireless XBOX360 controller, 3rd person games like Tomb Raider is perfectly playable at locked 30 fps.
That being said, I understand that 4xSSAA (OGSSAA) is quite crazy (and some might call it an overkill) at 2560x1600p because it's essentially rendering at 5120x3200p and scale it down to 2560x1600p. However, it's still an improvement in term of image quality.
And I see Tomb Raider uses about 2.6~2.8GB of VRAM. Hehe.. graphic cards with 3GB VRAM is becoming the norm these days.
I don't think it is displayed at 2 or 4 times your resolution like it is supposed to.
I get better fps using 4xSSAA than I do when I downsample from 3840x2160 to 1920x1080.
I'm not surprised. Driver forced downsampling involves another brute force scaling stage with zero optimization from software(game). 4xSSAA supported by software/game should perform better. And it's doing what it's supposed to do in more "optimized" way.
The latest build of Project CARS is another good example. It has in-game downsampling (OGSSAA) option which performs considerably better than manual downsampling through NV driver.
After all, driver forced downsampling is the last (emergency) resort when no other AA options are feasible.
But what would 2x SSAA then be?
It depends on the implementation. Some applies in horizontal pixels while some others apply in vertical pixel. (Basically, it's either 1x2SSAA or 2x1SSAA).
@ PowerK - Capping a game to 30 fps with £1,720 worth of graphics card hardware?!?!?
I can play Tomb Raider fine at 50-60 fps with 1920x1200, Ultimate, 2xSSAA settings with only dips to 25-30 fps during some cutscenes, likely due to TressFX hair. I would think Titan SLI should be able to manage 2xSSAA on maxed out settings at 2560x1600 seeing as each card is 50% faster than a single GTX 680.
Not sure what your point is. But this game doesn't require high frame rate or fast movements like some of the competitive FPS do. (Counter-Strike, BF3 etc). Constant/locked 30 fps is better than frame rates jumping all over all the place.
I prefer 4xSSAA at 30 fps to 2xSSAA at 60 fps for games like Tomb Raider. (Though, I admit that difference between 2xSSAA and 4xSSAA at 2560x1600p resolution is very subtle at best.)
As I said earlier, with wireless XBOX360 controller, 3rd person games like Tomb Raider is perfectly playable at locked 30 fps.
That being said, I understand that 4xSSAA (OGSSAA) is quite crazy (and some might call it an overkill) at 2560x1600p because it's essentially rendering at 5120x3200p and scale it down to 2560x1600p. However, it's still an improvement in term of image quality.
And I see Tomb Raider uses about 2.6~2.8GB of VRAM. Hehe.. graphic cards with 3GB VRAM is becoming the norm these days.
I don't think it is displayed at 2 or 4 times your resolution like it is supposed to.
I get better fps using 4xSSAA than I do when I downsample from 3840x2160 to 1920x1080.
I'm not surprised. Driver forced downsampling involves another brute force scaling stage with zero optimization from software(game). 4xSSAA supported by software/game should perform better. And it's doing what it's supposed to do in more "optimized" way.
The latest build of Project CARS is another good example. It has in-game downsampling (OGSSAA) option which performs considerably better than manual downsampling through NV driver.
After all, driver forced downsampling is the last (emergency) resort when no other AA options are feasible.
But what would 2x SSAA then be?
It depends on the implementation. Some applies in horizontal pixels while some others apply in vertical pixel. (Basically, it's either 1x2SSAA or 2x1SSAA).
Darren Hodgson
Ancient Guru
Posts: 9654
Joined: 2004-08-18
Ancient Guru
Posts: 9654
Joined: 2004-08-18
#4557352 Posted on: 03/19/2013 09:47 AM
@ PowerK - My point was that Tomb Raider might not need a 60 fps due it's slower pacing but I personally can feel the difference between 60 and 30 fps. 30 fps feels laggy/sluggish to me and because the screen is updating only once per two refreshes movement also looks less smooth. I prefer my PC games to run at least 45 fps and anything below that starts to hinder both controller (Xbox 360) response and look decidely less smooth when moving. Obviously you don't mind that but I still find it surprising that you've bought almost two grand worth of graphics hardware to play a game at a console framerate! Of course, it's your choice but I just find that surprising.
@ PowerK - My point was that Tomb Raider might not need a 60 fps due it's slower pacing but I personally can feel the difference between 60 and 30 fps. 30 fps feels laggy/sluggish to me and because the screen is updating only once per two refreshes movement also looks less smooth. I prefer my PC games to run at least 45 fps and anything below that starts to hinder both controller (Xbox 360) response and look decidely less smooth when moving. Obviously you don't mind that but I still find it surprising that you've bought almost two grand worth of graphics hardware to play a game at a console framerate! Of course, it's your choice but I just find that surprising.
yosef019
Maha Guru
Posts: 1283
Joined: 2010-03-24
Maha Guru
Posts: 1283
Joined: 2010-03-24
#4557367 Posted on: 03/19/2013 10:43 AM
why they cant made proper aa like msaa
@ PowerK - My point was that Tomb Raider might not need a 60 fps due it's slower pacing but I personally can feel the difference between 60 and 30 fps. 30 fps feels laggy/sluggish to me and because the screen is updating only once per two refreshes movement also looks less smooth. I prefer my PC games to run at least 45 fps and anything below that starts to hinder both controller (Xbox 360) response and look decidely less smooth when moving. Obviously you don't mind that but I still find it surprising that you've bought almost two grand worth of graphics hardware to play a game at a console framerate! Of course, it's your choice but I just find that surprising.
why they cant made proper aa like msaa
PowerK
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
#4557381 Posted on: 03/19/2013 11:04 AM
I still fail to see your point.
I'm all for the eye-candy and frame rate. I almost never settle for anything less than 60 fps with first person shooters. But 3rd person games like Tom Raider is fine at constant 30 fps. For me, constant 30 fps with maximum eye-candy > 60 fps with less eye-candy for game like Tomb Raider when played with XBOX360 controller.
You also have to remember that my base resolution is 2560x1600p. In terms of fillrate hit, your 1920x1080p with 2xSSAA is about same as me playing 2560x1600p *without* any AA.
And you think you're playing with "PC framerate" at 60 fps ? PC framerate is at 120/144Hz(fps), my friend.
EDIT : That being said, this game looks like a pre-rendered CG movie at 2560x1600p with 4xSSAA. I love it. Few screenshots I took while playing.
@ PowerK - My point was that Tomb Raider might not need a 60 fps due it's slower pacing but I personally can feel the difference between 60 and 30 fps. 30 fps feels laggy/sluggish to me and because the screen is updating only once per two refreshes movement also looks less smooth. I prefer my PC games to run at least 45 fps and anything below that starts to hinder both controller (Xbox 360) response and look decidely less smooth when moving. Obviously you don't mind that but I still find it surprising that you've bought almost two grand worth of graphics hardware to play a game at a console framerate! Of course, it's your choice but I just find that surprising.
I still fail to see your point.
I'm all for the eye-candy and frame rate. I almost never settle for anything less than 60 fps with first person shooters. But 3rd person games like Tom Raider is fine at constant 30 fps. For me, constant 30 fps with maximum eye-candy > 60 fps with less eye-candy for game like Tomb Raider when played with XBOX360 controller.
You also have to remember that my base resolution is 2560x1600p. In terms of fillrate hit, your 1920x1080p with 2xSSAA is about same as me playing 2560x1600p *without* any AA.
And you think you're playing with "PC framerate" at 60 fps ? PC framerate is at 120/144Hz(fps), my friend.
EDIT : That being said, this game looks like a pre-rendered CG movie at 2560x1600p with 4xSSAA. I love it. Few screenshots I took while playing.
PowerK
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
#4557408 Posted on: 03/19/2013 11:40 AM
IMO, It's great to see another AAA title with out of the box OGSSAA support.
Witcher 2 with ulbersampling (SSAA) option, Project CARS with (downsampling = SSAA) option, SleepingDogs with ExtremeAA (SSAA) option were all great.
However, it could've been better if Crystal Dynamics implemented traditional MSAA *with* alpha to coverage (transparency MSAA) like Ubisoft did with their Far Cry 3.
Far Cry 3 is another great looking title at 2560x1600p with 4xMSAA + Enahnced Alpha to Coverage (TrMSAA).
why they cant made proper aa like msaa
IMO, It's great to see another AAA title with out of the box OGSSAA support.
Witcher 2 with ulbersampling (SSAA) option, Project CARS with (downsampling = SSAA) option, SleepingDogs with ExtremeAA (SSAA) option were all great.
However, it could've been better if Crystal Dynamics implemented traditional MSAA *with* alpha to coverage (transparency MSAA) like Ubisoft did with their Far Cry 3.
Far Cry 3 is another great looking title at 2560x1600p with 4xMSAA + Enahnced Alpha to Coverage (TrMSAA).
CSF90
Member Guru
Posts: 113
Joined: 2013-03-04
Member Guru
Posts: 113
Joined: 2013-03-04
#4557569 Posted on: 03/19/2013 03:54 PM
I still fail to see your point.
I'm all for the eye-candy and frame rate. I almost never settle for anything less than 60 fps with first person shooters. But 3rd person games like Tom Raider is fine at constant 30 fps. For me, constant 30 fps with maximum eye-candy > 60 fps with less eye-candy for game like Tomb Raider when played with XBOX360 controller.
You also have to remember that my base resolution is 2560x1600p. In terms of fillrate hit, your 1920x1080p with 2xSSAA is about same as me playing 2560x1600p *without* any AA.
And you think you're playing with "PC framerate" at 60 fps ? PC framerate is at 120/144Hz(fps), my friend.
EDIT : That being said, this game looks like a pre-rendered CG movie at 2560x1600p with 4xSSAA. I love it. Few screenshots I took while playing.
Your screenshots look incredible. You could take press release ones with your setup!
I agree with what you said - I played TR at 30fps because I couldn't get a constant 60 with below maximum settings. So I turned it all up (2x SSAA) and played at 30 fps with no hiccups - game played fine and looked great too.
I still fail to see your point.
I'm all for the eye-candy and frame rate. I almost never settle for anything less than 60 fps with first person shooters. But 3rd person games like Tom Raider is fine at constant 30 fps. For me, constant 30 fps with maximum eye-candy > 60 fps with less eye-candy for game like Tomb Raider when played with XBOX360 controller.
You also have to remember that my base resolution is 2560x1600p. In terms of fillrate hit, your 1920x1080p with 2xSSAA is about same as me playing 2560x1600p *without* any AA.
And you think you're playing with "PC framerate" at 60 fps ? PC framerate is at 120/144Hz(fps), my friend.
EDIT : That being said, this game looks like a pre-rendered CG movie at 2560x1600p with 4xSSAA. I love it. Few screenshots I took while playing.
Your screenshots look incredible. You could take press release ones with your setup!
I agree with what you said - I played TR at 30fps because I couldn't get a constant 60 with below maximum settings. So I turned it all up (2x SSAA) and played at 30 fps with no hiccups - game played fine and looked great too.
PowerK
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
#4557942 Posted on: 03/20/2013 12:28 AM
Your screenshots look incredible. You could take press release ones with your setup!
I agree with what you said - I played TR at 30fps because I couldn't get a constant 60 with below maximum settings. So I turned it all up (2x SSAA) and played at 30 fps with no hiccups - game played fine and looked great too.
Yup. *Consistent* 30 fps is perfectly fine with games like Tomb Raider (thanks to frame rate limiter). Surprisingly, a lot of people still don't understand consistent frame rate is better than frame rates jumping all over all the place.
There are games which require minimum 60 fps (and higher). These are usually racing games and first person shooters which require precise control and fast pace. Tomb Raider is far from any of those. And for games like Tomb Raider, maximum eye-candy at consistent 30 fps is better than frame rate jumping all over the place or reduced eye-candy with 60 fps.
Your screenshots look incredible. You could take press release ones with your setup!
I agree with what you said - I played TR at 30fps because I couldn't get a constant 60 with below maximum settings. So I turned it all up (2x SSAA) and played at 30 fps with no hiccups - game played fine and looked great too.
Yup. *Consistent* 30 fps is perfectly fine with games like Tomb Raider (thanks to frame rate limiter). Surprisingly, a lot of people still don't understand consistent frame rate is better than frame rates jumping all over all the place.
There are games which require minimum 60 fps (and higher). These are usually racing games and first person shooters which require precise control and fast pace. Tomb Raider is far from any of those. And for games like Tomb Raider, maximum eye-candy at consistent 30 fps is better than frame rate jumping all over the place or reduced eye-candy with 60 fps.
PowerK
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
#4558343 Posted on: 03/20/2013 02:28 PM
Just an update for the record, I found a sweetspot. Frame rate cap at 45 fps.
This game looks and plays stunning.
Just an update for the record, I found a sweetspot. Frame rate cap at 45 fps.
This game looks and plays stunning.
Skinner
Member Guru
Posts: 67
Joined: 2003-03-22
Member Guru
Posts: 67
Joined: 2003-03-22
#4558607 Posted on: 03/20/2013 08:43 PM
IMO, It's great to see another AAA title with out of the box OGSSAA support.
Witcher 2 with ulbersampling (SSAA) option, Project CARS with (downsampling = SSAA) option, SleepingDogs with ExtremeAA (SSAA) option were all great.
However, it could've been better if Crystal Dynamics implemented traditional MSAA *with* alpha to coverage (transparency MSAA) like Ubisoft did with their Far Cry 3.
Far Cry 3 is another great looking title at 2560x1600p with 4xMSAA + Enahnced Alpha to Coverage (TrMSAA).
Next Metro (last light) is coming with ingame SSAA
I also run 2800x1800 downsampled to 1920x1200 in Tombraider along with
2xSSAA. I do believe in some games, even they support ingame AA wich can enhanced to (SG)SSAA, still fail to cover everything, so the brute force attack comes in handy (when you got the power), to treat everything(uncovered alpha's and textures!)
I also alway's use the frameratlimiter (mostly at 59 it's important to eliminate lag to set it just below your refreshrate, or lower when you don't archive enough fps to get till 59)
IMO, It's great to see another AAA title with out of the box OGSSAA support.
Witcher 2 with ulbersampling (SSAA) option, Project CARS with (downsampling = SSAA) option, SleepingDogs with ExtremeAA (SSAA) option were all great.
However, it could've been better if Crystal Dynamics implemented traditional MSAA *with* alpha to coverage (transparency MSAA) like Ubisoft did with their Far Cry 3.
Far Cry 3 is another great looking title at 2560x1600p with 4xMSAA + Enahnced Alpha to Coverage (TrMSAA).
Next Metro (last light) is coming with ingame SSAA
I also run 2800x1800 downsampled to 1920x1200 in Tombraider along with
2xSSAA. I do believe in some games, even they support ingame AA wich can enhanced to (SG)SSAA, still fail to cover everything, so the brute force attack comes in handy (when you got the power), to treat everything(uncovered alpha's and textures!)
I also alway's use the frameratlimiter (mostly at 59 it's important to eliminate lag to set it just below your refreshrate, or lower when you don't archive enough fps to get till 59)
PowerK
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
#4558847 Posted on: 03/21/2013 03:15 AM
Next Metro (last light) is coming with ingame SSAA
I also run 2800x1800 downsampled to 1920x1200 in Tombraider along with
2xSSAA. I do believe in some games, even they support ingame AA wich can enhanced to (SG)SSAA, still fail to cover everything, so the brute force attack comes in handy (when you got the power), to treat everything(uncovered alpha's and textures!)
I also alway's use the frameratlimiter (mostly at 59 it's important to eliminate lag to set it just below your refreshrate, or lower when you don't archive enough fps to get till 59)
Although, it's great to see another AAA title with out of the box OGSSAA support. I'm not really a fan of OGSSAA. (But it's indeed better than nothing).
Why? Because the SSAA AMD seems to be using with their Gaming Evolved titles such as Sleeping Dogs and now Tomb Raider is OGSSAA - the most inefficient SSAA there is. SGSSAA looks better at higher or the same performance. With in-game SSAA for example in Sniper Elite V2, Sleeping Dogs and Tomb Raider, I can still see quite a bit of shimmering. SGSSAA would be a much better solution.
That being said, I don't see a reason to use 2880x1800p downsampling with in-game 2xOGSSAA on your 1920x1200p monitor. Just use in-game 4xOGSSAA at 1920x1200p without downsampling. You actually get better image quality this way. Because 2880x1800p downsampling involves 1.5x1.5 driver OGSSAA and extra interpolation which results in "softer" (read blurred) image compared to straight up in-game 4xOGSSAA without extra interpolation. You're probably thinking this interpolation artifacts (softer image) being better. But it's not, IMO.
Next Metro (last light) is coming with ingame SSAA
I also run 2800x1800 downsampled to 1920x1200 in Tombraider along with
2xSSAA. I do believe in some games, even they support ingame AA wich can enhanced to (SG)SSAA, still fail to cover everything, so the brute force attack comes in handy (when you got the power), to treat everything(uncovered alpha's and textures!)
I also alway's use the frameratlimiter (mostly at 59 it's important to eliminate lag to set it just below your refreshrate, or lower when you don't archive enough fps to get till 59)
Although, it's great to see another AAA title with out of the box OGSSAA support. I'm not really a fan of OGSSAA. (But it's indeed better than nothing).
Why? Because the SSAA AMD seems to be using with their Gaming Evolved titles such as Sleeping Dogs and now Tomb Raider is OGSSAA - the most inefficient SSAA there is. SGSSAA looks better at higher or the same performance. With in-game SSAA for example in Sniper Elite V2, Sleeping Dogs and Tomb Raider, I can still see quite a bit of shimmering. SGSSAA would be a much better solution.
That being said, I don't see a reason to use 2880x1800p downsampling with in-game 2xOGSSAA on your 1920x1200p monitor. Just use in-game 4xOGSSAA at 1920x1200p without downsampling. You actually get better image quality this way. Because 2880x1800p downsampling involves 1.5x1.5 driver OGSSAA and extra interpolation which results in "softer" (read blurred) image compared to straight up in-game 4xOGSSAA without extra interpolation. You're probably thinking this interpolation artifacts (softer image) being better. But it's not, IMO.
Skinner
Member Guru
Posts: 67
Joined: 2003-03-22
Member Guru
Posts: 67
Joined: 2003-03-22
#4559054 Posted on: 03/21/2013 01:22 PM
I didn't know (missed it) the ingame SSAA use OGSSAA
I'll check the covering and quality this weekend between the two modes (ingame OGSSAA and driver-, sometimes they optimize at the cost of covering on certain objects to increase perf.
That being said, I don't see a reason to use 2880x1800p downsampling with in-game 2xOGSSAA on your 1920x1200p monitor. Just use in-game 4xOGSSAA at 1920x1200p without downsampling. You actually get better image quality this way. Because 2880x1800p downsampling involves 1.5x1.5 driver OGSSAA and extra interpolation which results in "softer" (read blurred) image compared to straight up in-game 4xOGSSAA without extra interpolation. You're probably thinking this interpolation artifacts (softer image) being better. But it's not, IMO.
I didn't know (missed it) the ingame SSAA use OGSSAA
I'll check the covering and quality this weekend between the two modes (ingame OGSSAA and driver-, sometimes they optimize at the cost of covering on certain objects to increase perf.
Shayne
Member Guru
Posts: 124
Joined: 2010-03-21
Member Guru
Posts: 124
Joined: 2010-03-21
#4560312 Posted on: 03/23/2013 04:00 AM
Who else cant run little lara OC'd? Don't get me wrong I run ultra played 2x's in standard and its ok but soon as I set my stable oc to get a bit more jiggle the game pooches. This oc is stable for the last 2 years many games, heaven yad yad yad. With this game NVidia just don't work?
Suggestion plz
Who else cant run little lara OC'd? Don't get me wrong I run ultra played 2x's in standard and its ok but soon as I set my stable oc to get a bit more jiggle the game pooches. This oc is stable for the last 2 years many games, heaven yad yad yad. With this game NVidia just don't work?
Suggestion plz
-Tj-
Maha Guru
Posts: 2391
Joined: 2012-05-18
Maha Guru
Posts: 2391
Joined: 2012-05-18
#4560353 Posted on: 03/23/2013 07:25 AM
It runs fine when I OC my GF110 Fermi, even at 950mhz.
Guess its GK104 that's kinda crappy, I've seen few posts at nvidia forums mentioning this too
It runs fine when I OC my GF110 Fermi, even at 950mhz.
Guess its GK104 that's kinda crappy, I've seen few posts at nvidia forums mentioning this too
kens30
Master Guru
Posts: 598
Joined: 2008-10-08
Master Guru
Posts: 598
Joined: 2008-10-08
#4560363 Posted on: 03/23/2013 08:38 AM
It runs fine when I OC my GF110 Fermi, even at 950mhz.
Guess its GK104 that's kinda crappy, I've seen few posts at nvidia forums mentioning this too
Game runs fine here too GTX480 oc to 830mhz with 314.21 drivers,and as for PowerK if i had 2 titans in sli i wouldn't settle with anything less than 60 fps if i had invested $2,000 in 2 Titans, i love full eye candy too but i am forced to cap my frame rate to at least at 45fps or drop a little eye candy to maintain a playable frame rate with my outdated GPU.
It runs fine when I OC my GF110 Fermi, even at 950mhz.
Guess its GK104 that's kinda crappy, I've seen few posts at nvidia forums mentioning this too
Game runs fine here too GTX480 oc to 830mhz with 314.21 drivers,and as for PowerK if i had 2 titans in sli i wouldn't settle with anything less than 60 fps if i had invested $2,000 in 2 Titans, i love full eye candy too but i am forced to cap my frame rate to at least at 45fps or drop a little eye candy to maintain a playable frame rate with my outdated GPU.
SLI-756
Ancient Guru
Posts: 3094
Joined: 2012-07-10
Ancient Guru
Posts: 3094
Joined: 2012-07-10
#4560364 Posted on: 03/23/2013 08:41 AM
It runs fine when I OC my GF110 Fermi, even at 950mhz.
Guess its GK104 that's kinda crappy, I've seen few posts at nvidia forums mentioning this too
The hell?
all you do is bad mouth the 600 series in every single one of your posts.
you're a TROLL.
It runs fine when I OC my GF110 Fermi, even at 950mhz.
Guess its GK104 that's kinda crappy, I've seen few posts at nvidia forums mentioning this too
The hell?
all you do is bad mouth the 600 series in every single one of your posts.
you're a TROLL.
-Tj-
Maha Guru
Posts: 2391
Joined: 2012-05-18
Maha Guru
Posts: 2391
Joined: 2012-05-18
#4560367 Posted on: 03/23/2013 08:57 AM
The hell?
all you do is bad mouth the 600 series in every single one of your posts.
you're a TROLL.
Excuse me? Im just stating the obvious, NV has some issues with Kepler and new tess approach, that dynamic clock is also questionable.
Troll you say, lol whatever
The hell?
all you do is bad mouth the 600 series in every single one of your posts.
you're a TROLL.
Excuse me? Im just stating the obvious, NV has some issues with Kepler and new tess approach, that dynamic clock is also questionable.
Troll you say, lol whatever
PowerK
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
Master Guru
Posts: 280
Joined: 2004-06-12
#4560382 Posted on: 03/23/2013 10:04 AM
This game's visual quality is damn impressive.
Several more screenshots at 2560x1600p maxed. http://min.us/mlG5zKXFzgUZc
Although OGSSAA is nice, I really wish they opted for SGSSAA.
This game's visual quality is damn impressive.
Several more screenshots at 2560x1600p maxed. http://min.us/mlG5zKXFzgUZc
Although OGSSAA is nice, I really wish they opted for SGSSAA.
Iruwen
Master Guru
Posts: 261
Joined: 2012-08-28
Master Guru
Posts: 261
Joined: 2012-08-28
#4560479 Posted on: 03/23/2013 02:10 PM
I don't have any problems with my 670 fixed at 1280MHz. When will people learn that just because OC was stable in the past that doesn't have to be true forever? TR uses DirectCompute in conjunction with tesselation, that's heavy load. Not saying there might not be a driver problem though, I also didn't have any BF3 crashes but obviously there was a bug in the driver.
Excuse me? Im just stating the obvious, NV has some issues with Kepler and new tess approach, that dynamic clock is also questionable.
I don't have any problems with my 670 fixed at 1280MHz. When will people learn that just because OC was stable in the past that doesn't have to be true forever? TR uses DirectCompute in conjunction with tesselation, that's heavy load. Not saying there might not be a driver problem though, I also didn't have any BF3 crashes but obviously there was a bug in the driver.
Frankster
Newbie
Posts: 13
Joined: 2008-08-02
Newbie
Posts: 13
Joined: 2008-08-02
#4560744 Posted on: 03/23/2013 10:57 PM
Hm, I don't like that driver because I do like BF3. The 314.21 is good for TR, but I get horrible texture flickering in BF3. Not always, but often; but if the game starts ok that does not mean that its ok all the time - flickering every now and then when using dirtbikes and such... I hope it's because of the game, not the driver. I'm so fed up with drivers hardwired to games...
Edit: Oh, despite the links says MOH, its all about BF3: http://battlelog.medalofhonor.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654490210255683/
Needless to say that disabling AA does NOT help...
Hm, I don't like that driver because I do like BF3. The 314.21 is good for TR, but I get horrible texture flickering in BF3. Not always, but often; but if the game starts ok that does not mean that its ok all the time - flickering every now and then when using dirtbikes and such... I hope it's because of the game, not the driver. I'm so fed up with drivers hardwired to games...
Edit: Oh, despite the links says MOH, its all about BF3: http://battlelog.medalofhonor.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654490210255683/
Needless to say that disabling AA does NOT help...
7 pages « < 4 5 6 7
Post New Comment
Click here to post a comment for this file on the message forum.
Guru3D.com © 2013
Member Guru
Posts: 55
Joined: 2004-04-12
Good Lord! These drivers plus whatever new patch was applied not only fixed all the graphic glitches, they DOUBLED my frame rates on the benchmark!
I don't use the TressFX because I think it is silly. Who cares about her hair? Besides, if you think about it, she is filthy and covered with blood and slime. How could her hair possibly be clean? It looks more natural without the flowing, princess like tresses. Girls aren't magic (well, sometimes maybe