1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Catalyst Hotfix 71310 Restores Visual Elements at Expense of Performance

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Oct 30, 2008.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,869 (11.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    AMD had released an updated hotfix to its ATI Catalyst 8.10 drivers the other day, with hotfix 71310. It succeeded hotfix 70517 for the said version of Catalyst. Hotfixes specific to certain games, are intended to selectively improve hardware performance and/or visual quality. When AMD released the older hotfix for version 8.10 of Catalyst, it aimed to improve performance in general. It was later found by keen observers, that the hotfix manipulated with visual elements of the game in an attempt to gain performance. A popular example of this, was noted in the "lost rocks" issue in Far Cry 2, where the hotfix 70517 caused the texture and/or geometric loss of certain rocks along a track from a scene, presumably reducing load on the graphics processor(s).

    With hotfix 71310 issued yesterday, AMD seems to have fixed the issue. Expreview put the hotfix to test, where it was found that the "lost rocks" issue was fixed. The larger issue was of the driver interfering with visual elements the game has to offer. The fix however, came at the expense of performance. Expreview used a test-bed consisting of Core 2 Extreme QX9650 CPU, ATI Radeon HD 4870 graphics, 2x 1 GB of DDR3 1066 MHz memory, all seated on an ASUS Striker II Extreme motherboard, running Windows Vista 32-bit operating system. The testers used Driver Sweeper to make sure a new variant of the driver installed on a purged environment. Testing Far Cry 2 revealed that the issue was addressed, but at a performance loss. The frame-rate dropped from 48.12 fps to 43.20, which is roughly a 10% loss in frame-rate.

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Source: Expreview
     
    1c3d0g and phanbuey say thanks.
  2. VIPER

    VIPER

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    190 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Yes, same for me... Better graphics, worse framerate... I will get back to DX9 and the "normal" driver...
     
  3. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,897 (13.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,306
    Too busy blowing stuff up to notice any decrease in framerate. At least the rocks are there (I guess) that I never bothered to pay attention to with the earlier driver.
     
  4. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,921 (6.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
    The rocks are bigger. Whoopdy doo. Why would that lower fps?
     
  5. InnocentCriminal

    InnocentCriminal Resident Grammar Amender

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,484 (1.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    847
    Those screens aren't the same. Stupid Expreview.
     
    VuurVOS and AsRock say thanks.
  6. VIPER

    VIPER

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    190 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    But it is the same (approx) position on the road. And look at the missing stones... Needless to say that they used max settings so the view distance is not near. Ain't it?
     
  7. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,921 (6.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
    Why are some missing rocks lowering the fps and why not just keep them removed?
     
  8. VIPER

    VIPER

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    190 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    I am not sure if the missing rocks lower the fps... But I installed this latest hotfix and it works like s**t...
     
  9. J-Man

    J-Man New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,248 (0.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    81
    Location:
    Oakham, UK
    I don't bother with these hotfix files... I'm happy as my game is without installing crap.
     
  10. Duffman

    Duffman New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,011 (0.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    Location:
    Mt. Pocono, PA
    damn, i was wondering where those rocks went
     
  11. AsRock

    AsRock TPU addict

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    11,132 (4.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,766
    Location:
    US
    Yeah and not just by a little bit either DUMB asses. Those screens are BS and no one should compare unless the same options and the pic is the same.

    Like how hard is it to make a save game these days lol.
     
  12. phanbuey

    phanbuey

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,207 (2.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    975
    Location:
    Miami
    :roll::roll::roll::roll::roll:
    i dont see a difference at all... am i blind?

    EDIT: ok i see it... that is not worth FPS... some dirt over some rocks. Maybe if ubisoft spent more time on gameplay and not miniscule details of rocks and trees, then no one would even notice haha.
     
  13. VIPER

    VIPER

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    190 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    The problem is that I had problems :twitch: After 1hour of playing, the framerate is dropping and the game stutters (I hope this is the right word). I need to save, exit to the menu and enter again...
     
  14. Duffman

    Duffman New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,011 (0.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    Location:
    Mt. Pocono, PA
    the rocks farther back, the little ones. There are more of them in the new hotfix screenshot
     
    1c3d0g and phanbuey say thanks.
  15. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,869 (11.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    It's not just about those rocks, it's about the driver manipulating with the game, which it shouldn't. The rocks might not be the only anomalies, sneak around to discover more. And it doesn't matter if the two screenshots show the scene from slightly different angles/camera positions/distance from objects; the density of rocks (read: visual elements) must be the same. It's not even like the draw-distance is too much that the engine eats up rocks.
     
    1c3d0g says thanks.
  16. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (1.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,506
    There you have it folks, it was intentionally done that way to skew results. Anyone who's played this game knows that the fps counter can fluctuate. :rolleyes:
     
  17. Voyager

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Messages:
    23 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    The new savana shooter :laugh: do not deserve it, the game has no good story at all.
    We don't look at the graphics only :shadedshu
     
  18. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,869 (11.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    1c3d0g says thanks.
  19. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (1.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,506


    True, we cannot look at just graphics. However, the frame rates in FC2 in those type of environments can change from one location to another. Besides, because they reduced the size of the pic themselves makes it clear that their tests are flawed ;)
     
  20. phanbuey

    phanbuey

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,207 (2.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    975
    Location:
    Miami
    They did this back in the day with missing mipmap textures in Quake 3. I agree that they shouldnt manipulate the game engine to boost performance without the user knowing. Its like when drug companies didnt tell you about sideffects of their drugs.

    "Lose weight fast!... (but you pee blood!)"
     
  21. VIPER

    VIPER

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    190 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    The funny thing is that FC2 is the only new game that is not working well on my actual machine... I cannot play it in full-resolution (1680x1050)... Bad optimization? Bad engine? I don't know...
     
  22. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (1.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,506
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    It's easy to mimic those results.

    You don't know what resolution I am using.
    You don't know what DX version I am using.
    you don't know what settings I am using.
    And I can assume that most of you don't know where I am on the map.
    ETC, Etc...
    This is how I can get you to concentrate on the numbers only. By eliminating all other variables that are crucial to the result. ;)
     
  23. wolf2009 Guest

    ^^ The numbers have changed due to less things being rendered in 2nd image

    The images are not the same
     
  24. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (1.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,506
    All I did was back up :).


    Correct, the images are not in the same spot.
     
  25. wolf2009 Guest

    What do you have to say about first image rendering more shadows ?
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page