Catalyst Hotfix 71310 Restores Visual Elements at Expense of Performance

[El Fiendo]

Darkmatter, don't worry yourself too much. He did the same thing over 'Mojave' a little bit back.

Look East, benchmarks are set up like a movie. They are made to make a standard that should apply across all cards and runthroughs. Screenshots taken in the same place should have the same FPS within 1 or 2 frames because the same elements are being rendered every time. It's set to be exact same camera movements. With yours you proved that at different locations, FPS varies. They are showing FPS varied at the same location. This shows that there is a difference in the way that location was rendered. They have provided screenshots that attempt to explain the variances, specifically in this case these rocks. In doing so they show missing textures of said rocks. Your screenshots don't refute the evidence because its a completely different location in your examples.

Whether or not it was a mistake or underhanded tactics, I don't know. However I do know your arguement is slightly flawed.

[newconroer]

Aye,

I was going to say the other day, that one could easily say this is the same as Nvidia degrading image quality to achieve greater performance.

Fortunatley for me, these drivers actually helped my performance, but either way, I don't think we should be complaining about ATi here. We should be complaining to Ubisoft for releasing a game with such a weak LOD scaling system, and a program that has far too few sprites and objects altogether.

[EastCoasthandle]

Originally Posted by El Fiendo

Darkmatter, don't worry yourself too much. He did the same thing over 'Mojave' a little bit back.

Look East, benchmarks are set up like a movie. They are made to make a standard that should apply across all cards and runthroughs. Screenshots taken in the same place should have the same FPS within 1 or 2 frames because the same elements are being rendered every time. It's set to be exact same camera movements. With yours you proved that at different locations, FPS varies. They are showing FPS varied at the same location. This shows that there is a difference in the way that location was rendered. They have provided screenshots that attempt to explain the variances, specifically in this case these rocks. In doing so they show missing textures of said rocks. Your screenshots don't refute the evidence because its a completely different location in your examples.

Whether or not it was a mistake or underhanded tactics, I don't know. However I do know your arguement is slightly flawed.

Nah there is nothing wrong with my opinion on the situation "new poster" . It's obvious you didn't read my explanation as to why I posted those pics. Read a few posts back and it becomes clear to you that your assumption and my reason don't match. But thanks for the feedback none the less

[DarkMatter]

Originally Posted by El Fiendo

Darkmatter, don't worry yourself too much. He did the same thing over 'Mojave' a little bit back.

Look East, benchmarks are set up like a movie. They are made to make a standard that should apply across all cards and runthroughs. Screenshots taken in the same place should have the same FPS within 1 or 2 frames because the same elements are being rendered every time. It's set to be exact same camera movements. With yours you proved that at different locations, FPS varies. They are showing FPS varied at the same location. This shows that there is a difference in the way that location was rendered. They have provided screenshots that attempt to explain the variances, specifically in this case these rocks. In doing so they show missing textures of said rocks. Your screenshots don't refute the evidence because its a completely different location in your examples.

Whether or not it was a mistake or underhanded tactics, I don't know. However I do know your arguement is slightly flawed.

Yeah, I know I have to care less about him. Indeed with this thread and some others in the past I have enough evidence he doesn't read what it is said in the links. I even have my doubts he even follows the links or that he even reads other's post for the matter.

He just lives in that little place inside his mind, where he is happy, unconnected from the harmful reality that is the outside. Sad...

[El Fiendo]

Originally Posted by EastCoasthandle

Nah there is nothing wrong with my opinion on the situation "new poster" . It's obvious you didn't read my explanation as to why I posted those pics. Read a few posts back and it becomes clear to you that your assumption and my reason don't match. But thanks for the feedback none the less

Didn't realize it was a crime to be new. Also, it has 0 effect on my reading comprehension. I've read the thread thoroughly and have come to realize you aren't. Here's the kicker, all you proved in your screenshots is that you mimiced the problem with the drivers. In your screenshots, you changed what was being rendered by moving the camera thus changing the rendered data. In the review's screenshots, the driver changed what was rendered at the same location, thereby doing the same thing. In effect you've been arguing this point against yourself.

If you can change the fps in a give screen rendered it will change the outcome of frame rates obtained

In your case you were the change, in the reviews case, it was the drivers. The fact that people see this as underhanded is their opinion. The fact you see it as a mistake is your opinion. I've made no assumptions, I'm providing exactly whats been pointed out already to this point.

[EastCoasthandle]

Originally Posted by DarkMatter

Yeah, I know I have to care less about him. Indeed with this thread and some others in the past I have enough evidence he doesn't read what it is said in the links. I even have my doubts he even follows the links or that he even reads other's post for the matter.

He just lives in that little place inside his mind, where he is happy, unconnected from the harmful reality that is the outside. Sad...

And I see that when we disagree you can only result to throwing insults as a base for your claims. Furthermore, it's you who (out of the blue) responses to my posts in such fashion. In the end, that's what's sad . Odd how with some people can agree to disagree with a subject while you on the other hand make these odd posts that are off topic to the thread. I guess it's your way of feeling good about issue at hand.

[EastCoasthandle]

Originally Posted by El Fiendo

Didn't realize it was a crime to be new. Also, it has 0 effect on my reading comprehension. I've read the thread thoroughly and have come to realize you aren't. Here's the kicker, all you proved in your screenshots is that you mimiced the problem with the drivers. In your screenshots, you changed what was being rendered by moving the camera thus changing the rendered data. In the review's screenshots, the driver changed what was rendered at the same location, thereby doing the same thing. In effect you've been arguing this point against yourself.

In your case you were the change, in the reviews case, it was the drivers. The fact that people see this as underhanded is their opinion. The fact you see it as a mistake is your opinion. I've made no assumptions, I'm providing exactly whats been pointed out already to this point.

Actually you do have a problem with comprehending my posts. I've already explained the reason for the pics. All you have to do is read it not make up your own explanation. But thanks anyway

[El Fiendo]

Originally Posted by EastCoasthandle

Actually you do have a problem with comprehending my posts. I've already explained the reason for the pics. All you have to do is read it not make up your own explanation. But thanks anyway

I understand your reasoning behind your posts. You're trying to point out that we don't know anything about the screenshots other than what they say. You tried showing everyone this using your screenshots.

We know the reviews screenshots are from the benchmark. We can clearly see the missing textures. And judging how the match up when you overlay them, aside from missing textures, its safe to assume they are in the same spot. Your screenshots however are clearly none of the above. Yours has too many variables tossed in which isn't the point the review was making. Of course frames fluctuate in game. They shouldn't in benchmarks at the same point along the way. If you can't trust Expreview, thats your issue. However, I can't imagine why they'd specifcally try to mudsling ATI, they're showing what they've found.

I've been saying this all along, however you've been refusing to realize it.

[EastCoasthandle]

Originally Posted by El Fiendo

I understand your reasoning behind your posts. You're trying to point out that we don't know anything about the screenshots other than what they say. You tried showing everyone this using your screenshots.

We know the reviews screenshots are from the benchmark. We can clearly see the missing textures. And judging how the match up when you overlay them, aside from missing textures, its safe to assume they are in the same spot. Your screenshots however are clearly none of the above. Yours has too many variables tossed in which isn't the point the review was making. Of course frames fluctuate in game. They shouldn't in benchmarks at the same point along the way. If you can't trust Expreview, thats your issue. However, I can't imagine why they'd specifcally try to mudsling ATI, they're showing what they've found.

I've been saying this all along, however you've been refusing to realize it.

There is a contradiction found within your own post. It's become obvious at this point that your posts are more geared toward arguing more so then stating an opinion. You insist on adding way more then what I said or implied to say.

[DarkMatter]

Originally Posted by EastCoasthandle

And I see that when we disagree you can only result to throwing insults as a base for your claims. Furthermore, it's you who (out of the blue) responses to my posts in such fashion. In the end, that's what's sad . Odd how with some people can agree to disagree with a subject while you on the other hand make these odd posts that are off topic to the thread. I guess it's your way of feeling good about issue at hand.

Buffff!

It's not a matter of agreeing or not. The drivers change the performance obtained out of the benchmark. Not screenshots. They state it very clearly in the links provided by Btrunr.

We used the same PC as we used in our first test - nothing has changed except for the new hotfix driver replacing the old one. We continue to test using FarCry2’s built-in short Ranch demo run at overall ultra settings, varying the AA settings in-game and forcing 16xAF in the control panel. We can see the performance of the new hotfix drivers sits slightly ahead of the regular Cat 8-10 but behind the first hotfix drivers. Here are our results:

To refute those, you took 2 screenshots at different angles and said you reproduced what they did. And no, you didn't. Period.

[newconroer]

Fu** me this is more exciting than the game.

[EastCoasthandle]

Originally Posted by DarkMatter

Buffff!

It's not a matter of agreeing or not. The drivers change the performance obtained out of the benchmark. Not screenshots. They state it very clearly in the links provided by Btrunr.



To refute those, you took 2 screenshots at different angles and said you reproduced what they did. And no, you didn't. Period.

And what I've already told you in previous posts still stands. Even with the second review posted the averages are no were as high as found in the OP. You can get mad, upset or whatever. I have no reason to agree with you. That's something you have to deal with. And as for the screenshot I've already explained that to you numerous times. LOL

[DarkMatter]

Originally Posted by EastCoasthandle

And what I've already told you in previous posts still stands. Even with the second review posted the averages are no were as high as found in the OP. You can get mad, upset or whatever. I have no reason to agree with you. That's something you have to deal with.

Different testbeds, different results. That's what any normal person knows. What you think is that contrary to what they say, the fps figures they offer are on those punctual frames instead of average of the benchmark and want to make a point out of that. That's lame.

[EastCoasthandle]

Originally Posted by DarkMatter

Different testbeds, different results. That's what any normal person knows. What you think is that contrary to what they say, the fps figures they offer are on those punctual frames instead of average of the benchmark and want to make a point out of that. That's lame.

And your the one arguing about it. Irony...

[ShogoXT]

Anyone have any windows crossfire BSOD troubles?

[El Fiendo]

Originally Posted by EastCoasthandle

There is a contradiction found within your own post. It's become obvious at this point that your posts are more geared toward arguing more so then stating an opinion. You insist on adding way more then what I said or implied to say.

I'm sorry East, but there isn't a contradiction there nor am I adding.

"You're trying to point out that we don't know anything about the screenshots other than what they say. You tried showing everyone this using your screenshots." is taken directly from post #22.

"Your screenshots however are clearly none of the above." Now this one hinges on the fact you've been arguing we don't know what they're settings for each screenshot is. Its why I mentioned the trust issue with Expreview which is my opinion whether its right or wrong. But you show an obviously different location and attempt to use that as your basis for the arguement. The screenshots in the first post are of the same spot. Its comparing Apples to Jupiter. I personally trust Expreview to be at least professional and consistent if they're going to start a story like this.

In the end I regret posting attempting to clear this up as it was obviously bothering some of the other members. In the end it would only seem, judging by your short and unhelpful posts, I've only gone so far as to feed the troll.

[Wile E]

Originally Posted by EastCoasthandle

And what I've already told you in previous posts still stands. Even with the second review posted the averages are no were as high as found in the OP. You can get mad, upset or whatever. I have no reason to agree with you. That's something you have to deal with. And as for the screenshot I've already explained that to you numerous times. LOL

You are missing the point East. I'm sorry man, your opinion of this is slightly off. The important thing is not the screen shots. They do not matter at all. They are just there as an example of what was reported as missing in the game. They are not used as fps evidence at all. The FPS they quoted are what the in-game benchmark gave to them. The in-game benchmark dropped by 5fps avg with the new hotfix. They cannot manipulate the in-game benchmark, unless they purposely use different graphical settings for each bench. They cannot alter the in-game benchmark to change the camera angles.

[DarkMatter]

Originally Posted by EastCoasthandle

And your the one arguing about it. Irony...

Explain that. I want to have a good laugh.

Honestly, I am arguing about what? What's your point? YOU are stating 2 respectable review sites are lying, based on something you fabricated. And of course I argue with that.

Here I finally found it:

http://en.expreview.com/2008/10/29/c...far-cry-2.html

This is the article to which the other one is the follow up. In the other one in chinese things are not clear. But in this...

- They clearly state it's average frames.

- The screenshot is at the same angle, just in case you want to follow the same route once again.

Sorry kid, but you are just wrong, you have been since you started this mess. Period.

Originally Posted by newconroer

Fu** me this is more exciting than the game.

thats true !!

:..sits back with popcorn and pop and conitnously refreshes browser..:


Btw what are we arguing over ?

[DarkMatter]

Originally Posted by Wile E

You are missing the point East. I'm sorry man, your opinion of this is slightly off. The important thing is not the screen shots. They do not matter at all. They are just there as an example of what was reported as missing in the game. They are not used as fps evidence at all. The FPS they quoted are what the in-game benchmark gave to them. The in-game benchmark dropped by 5fps avg with the new hotfix. They cannot manipulate the in-game benchmark, unless they purposely use different graphical settings for each bench. They cannot alter the in-game benchmark to change the camera angles.

If you convince him (actually is not a matter of convincing, it's understanding facts) with that after all the posts we made saying the exact same thing, I will not know what to think. Seriously.

[El Fiendo]

Originally Posted by DarkMatter

If you convince him (actually is not a matter of convincing, it's understanding facts) with that after all the posts we made saying the exact same thing, I will not know what to think. Seriously.

If he convinces him, I'll herald him as a god. And also be very clingy towards him.

[newconroer]

Originally Posted by El Fiendo

If he convinces him, I'll herald him as a god. And also be very clingy towards him.

There'd be only one thing left to do then...

Dim the lights, put some "Take My Breath Away" by Berlin on in the background, and make sweet love like Osama and Leeroy Brown.

[EastCoasthandle]

Originally Posted by DarkMatter

Explain that. I want to have a good laugh.

Honestly, I am arguing about what? What's your point? YOU are stating 2 respectable review sites are lying, based on something you fabricated. And of course I argue with that.

Here I finally found it:

http://en.expreview.com/2008/10/29/c...far-cry-2.html

This is the article to which the other one is the follow up. In the other one in chinese things are not clear. But in this...

- They clearly state it's average frames.

- The screenshot is at the same angle, just in case you want to follow the same route once again.

Sorry kid, but you are just wrong, you have been since you started this mess. Period.

I see now, we are reinventing what I said in those screen shots I provided. Is that your argument? It's obvious not going to work here.

[DarkMatter]

Originally Posted by El Fiendo

If he convinces him, I'll herald him as a god. And also be very clingy towards him.

Yeah he would deserve something great. A cookie. Want a cookie?

Honestly. I'm curious about what he is going say to refute my last post, because he NEVER will admit he was simply wrong, not being me the one he is arguing with.

I'm excited. It's going to be a really good literature, I'm sure. Some fantastic or sci-fi literature to be precise. Worth of one Hugo, probably.

EDIT: Oh he was faster than this post. Ooooooh... What a dissapointment. Negation of evidence. That's all he got.

[EastCoasthandle]

Originally Posted by Wile E

You are missing the point East. I'm sorry man, your opinion of this is slightly off. The important thing is not the screen shots. They do not matter at all. They are just there as an example of what was reported as missing in the game. They are not used as fps evidence at all. The FPS they quoted are what the in-game benchmark gave to them. The in-game benchmark dropped by 5fps avg with the new hotfix. They cannot manipulate the in-game benchmark, unless they purposely use different graphical settings for each bench. They cannot alter the in-game benchmark to change the camera angles.

No, I am not missing the point but stated an opinion. You can agree or disagree but the point does stand on it's on merit within the content that I explained it. The post in which I left regarding the pic were directed more so towards the amount of information presented not about actual frame rates specifically. You can agree or disagree but lets not reinvent what was stated.