Tuesday, June 27th 2017

More Ryzen Gaming Performance Patches: ~28% Gain in ROTR on Medium/High Presets

AMD's Ryzen has been generally well received as a gaming processor, but it has always had a small Achilles Heel in one area; gaming performance. While some may argue the obviously correct statement that it is "good enough" for many situations, it was obviously not up the level of awesome the rest of the architecture seemed to be at.

It would now appear it may simply be a lack of optimization to blame more than an inherent architectural issue. AMD has seen a major performance patch in one game, Rise of the Tomb Raider, that has netted it around 28% higher average FPS in the medium and high presets, which just so happen to be more CPU bound than higher settings. When asked how these performance improvements were attained, developer Crystal Dynamics had the following to say on the matter:

"Rise of the Tomb Raider splits rendering tasks to run on different threads... By tuning the size of those tasks - breaking some up, allowing multi-core CPUs to contribute in more cases, and combining some others, to reduce overheads in the scheduler - the game can more efficiently exploit extra threads on the host CPU."
Very nice. The patch should already be auto applied via Steam. If you want to test against the old build, you can always opt in to an older steam beta (such as v767.2 or earlier) to see the old performance vs the new. This can be done easily from the game properties menu, and a nice "how-to" is shown in the source article.

There were also some major performance improvement patches to certain aspects of other applications such as ZBrush, which are obviously less relevant to gamers but very relevant to content creators. More on that is available in the source article from AMD, below.Source: AMD
Add your own comment

37 Comments on More Ryzen Gaming Performance Patches: ~28% Gain in ROTR on Medium/High Presets

#1
EntropyZ
One small step... It's proof that software has to play catch-up with the hardware. Future triple-A games (especially those with huge open play areas) have to be cared for to use extra threads effectively, I just wish there was some magic generic code that could scale well with any extra amount of cores/threads, regardless how many. Exploiting architecture performance though is another thing entirely.
Posted on Reply
#2
Basard
Yeah, but what improvement does it give Intel then? Or is it only helpful with more than 8 threads?
Posted on Reply
#3
R-T-B
Basard said:
Yeah, but what improvement does it give Intel then? Or is it only helpful with more than 8 threads?
Excellent question. Given the source is an AMD blog they obviously did not talk about that. ;)

Anyone want to test for us?
Posted on Reply
#4
dwade
Basard said:
Yeah, but what improvement does it give Intel then? Or is it only helpful with more than 8 threads?
They're still slower than Intel's.
Posted on Reply
#6
EntropyZ
Folterknecht said:
http://www.gamestar.de/artikel/ryzen-patch-fuer-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-teils-ueber-30-prozent-mehr-leistung-unter-directx-12,3314847.html
So these patches are most likely based around the the architecture and may scale with the cores/threads that use it. The Intel Core architecture gains nothing from the patch it seems. Oh well.

Now if only more game developer companies would release patches such as these, way-long after release date. (I'm looking at you Bethesda Game Studios, stop ignoring me, k?)
Posted on Reply
#7
AsRock
TPU addict
EntropyZ said:
So these patches are most likely based around the the architecture and may scale with the cores/threads that use it. The Intel Core architecture gains nothing from the patch it seems. Oh well.

Now if only more game developer companies would release patches such as these, way-long after release date. (I'm looking at you Bethesda Game Studios, stop ignoring me, k?)
Well if they fixed there shit in the first place, they cannot even make the keys in there games fully programmable never mind any thing else.
Posted on Reply
#8
NdMk2o1o
Basard said:
Yeah, but what improvement does it give Intel then? Or is it only helpful with more than 8 threads?
given how most AAA games have been geared and coded around Intel, there is little to be done to improve performance on Intel, now AMD has a competitive architecture and comparable IPC if devs care to spend the time they are seeing that Ryzen is just as good as and better than comparable processors from Intel and have a lot of performance to give, that's if they care.... I could of got a 4c/4t i5 for the same cash I spent on a 6c/12t Ryzen, guess who's laughing?
Posted on Reply
#9
FR@NK
AMD is still a couple car lengths behind:

Posted on Reply
#10
LogitechFan
NdMk2o1o said:
I spent on a 6c/12t Ryzen, guess who's laughing?
Anyone who is waiting for 6c/12t 8700K... :)
Posted on Reply
#11
r9
Basard said:
Yeah, but what improvement does it give Intel then? Or is it only helpful with more than 8 threads?
Because its architecture thing.
Posted on Reply
#12
Dave65
dwade said:
They're still slower than Intel's.
At what price?
Posted on Reply
#13
NdMk2o1o
LogitechFan said:
Anyone who is waiting for 6c/12t 8700K... :)
and spending 2x..... of course
Posted on Reply
#14
Rehmanpa
This is great. Not only does it show that Ryzen has real potential for improvement, but it shows that ryzen is even more effectively able to compete with Intel. Hopefully we'll be seeing more reports of this kind of improvement. Only people pissed now are the intel fanboys.
Posted on Reply
#15
mrthanhnguyen
Dave65 said:
At what price?
1800x $429.99 and 95fps
7700k $299.99 and 112 fps.
Posted on Reply
#16
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
dwade said:
They're still slower than Intel's.
Proof of that?
Posted on Reply
#17
Totally
LogitechFan said:
Anyone who is waiting for 6c/12t 8700K... :)
That's a long time to for them to keep laughing since that chip realistically won't be in anyone's hands until the end of the year/early next. They'll probably have to skip those too since the next round of Ryzen chips will probably launch around that time.
Posted on Reply
#18
RejZoR
dwade said:
They're still slower than Intel's.
At 150+ fps, who really gives a damn?
Posted on Reply
#19
ratirt
RejZoR said:
At 150+ fps, who really gives a damn?
There's probably few people who will skin you alive for saying that "who really gives a damn" my goal is 4k 60hz not 1080p 200hz so I don't give a damn :)
Besides Ryzen is slower noticeably in few titles and ROTTR is one of the worst for AMD. Anyway the fps count for AMD grows so I think at the end of the year it may look different with developers showing their willingness to use the resources and new patches showing up. :)
Posted on Reply
#20
sutyi
The patch came out a month ago, how come it only made it to the front page now?

I did do a bench run on June 1st.

Ryzen 5 1600 @ 3.6GHz, 16GB DDR4-2933, GTX 1060 6GB @ 720p High settings, so it is not too GPU bound.

About +32% average fps.

build 767_2:


build 770_1:
Posted on Reply
#21
Manu_PT
Totally said:
That's a long time to for them to keep laughing since that chip realistically won't be in anyone's hands until the end of the year/early next. They'll probably have to skip those too since the next round of Ryzen chips will probably launch around that time.
August my friend, z370. 6 core 4,5ghz turbo boost + 4000mhz 100% suppported DDR4 beauty. You´re welcome.
Posted on Reply
#23
Dragonsmonk
The one thing I am confused about is the heavy discrepancy in numbers between this article and the Gamestar article...
Posted on Reply
#24
R-T-B
sutyi said:
The patch came out a month ago, how come it only made it to the front page now?
I have a small confession on that part.

I don't play this game. I hardly play any games anymore, actually. I do however, monitor the AMD blog and was first notified of this particular set of claims via a post they made last Friday (the source to this article, one may note). I posted it today because on Monday W1zzard was testing some site stuff and asked us not to post during my shift, and on Friday I was too tired to keep posting.

So, there's your explanation I suppose. I guess the better question is why the AMD blog is getting around to it so late.
Posted on Reply
#25
Readlight
8 fps on rx460 4gb Not worth to buy game!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment