How are AMD drivers these days?

[Denver]

I've had zero problems in the last few years.

Tip: Use only WHQL drivers (not updating every beta driver as if your life depended on it), update using the option built into Adrenalin, block windows junk from replacing your drivers.

 

[B_Bang]

Bloody excellent! Have been for a couplr of years now. Just make sure you are using WHQL and not beta drivers.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I agree nvidia is a bit more feature diverse, but it doesn't terribly bother me either as I don't use those features. It's a "to each their own" type thing.

The NVidia way of forcefully applying settings on a per-game basis in the control panel can not be understated. AMD's drivers are stable, sure, but so are NVidia's. Personal preference. I do like that the AMD control panel is not a damned "App" and is actually installed WITH the drivers instead of on top of them.

 

[3x0]

The NVidia way of forcefully applying settings on a per-game basis in the control panel can not be understated.

What's different compared to the AMD way?

 

[lexluthermiester]

What's different compared to the AMD way?

To explain properly, I would need to take screen shots for both systems and I simply don't have time for that right now. Put simply, in the NVidia control panel, you can select custom, fine-grained settings on a per-game(per-EXE) basis. AFAIK, AMD doesn't have that feature.

 

[3x0]

To explain properly, I would need to take screen shots for both systems and I simply don't have time for that right now. Put simply, in the NVidia control panel, you can select custom, fine-grained settings on a per-game(per-EXE) basis. AFAIK, AMD doesn't have that feature.

It does

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

AFAIK, AMD doesn't have that feature.

Spoiler: This is old news.

 

[lexluthermiester]

It does
View attachment 333033View attachment 333032

No, those are not as fine grained as NVidia's. For example, AMD does not give users the option to forcefully shut off AntiAliasing. NVidia does. AMD will let us shut off AF but not AA? I mean really, WTF is that crap? It's been that way for years and is a complete deal breaker for me. I don't use AA, at all, ever. I think it's an antiquated and un-needed feature that takes up compute in a way that is completely superfluous. There are many other examples like this.

Spoiler: This is old news.

View attachment 333034

See above.

 

[3x0]

No, those are not as fine grained as NVidia's. For example, AMD does not give users the option to forcefully shut off AntiAliasing. NVidia does. They'll let us shut off AF but not AA? I mean really, WTF is that crap? It's been that way for years and is a complete deal breaker for me. I don't use AA, at all. I think it's an antiquated and un-needed feature. There are other examples like this.

That use case is very very niche I'd say. Not a lot of games force AA without having an in game option to disable it.

 

[lexluthermiester]

That use case is very very niche I'd say.

Maybe, but that isn't the only one.

Not a lot of games force AA without having an in game option to disable it.

You'd be surprised how often games try to force certain settings. The ability to control them from outside the game itself is important.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

No, those are not as fine grained as NVidia's. For example, AMD does not give users the option to forcefully shut off AntiAliasing. NVidia does. AMD will let us shut off AF but not AA? I mean really, WTF is that crap? It's been that way for years and is a complete deal breaker for me. I don't use AA, at all, ever. I think it's an antiquated and un-needed feature that takes up compute in a way that is completely superfluous. There are many other examples like this.


See above.

I'd also love to have more control over that and I contacted AMD... I guess if they haven't implemented anything in two years they don't give a crap.

 

[Princess Garnet]

I mean really, WTF is that crap? It's been that way for years and is a complete deal breaker for me. I don't use AA, at all, ever. I think it's an antiquated and un-needed feature that takes up compute in a way that is completely superfluous. There are many other examples like this.

I'm the other way around. I can't stand not having anti-aliasing at times, and it's far from antiquated. Maybe if you're using 4K on small displays it would seem that way, or maybe if you're using stuff like frame scaling (DLSS/FSR/DLAA/etc.) it might seem that way, but in many cases, "native rendering" can look awful without it.

I absolutely agree that it should be an option to be with or without. But the times you are forced to have it, but not want it are probably far less than the times you can't have it, but want it.

MSAA and the like more and more hasn't worked over the years as games have moved to deferred rendering (or just whatever else they're doing that makes it not work). FXAA is a vaseline filter, not anti-aliasing. TAA is tolerable to me personally and I use it over nothing but I absolutely get why some don't like it (shimmering at times [though this can be present without anti-aliasing, just in other ways], and the strange "ghosting" with slow moving things). Supersampling is very computationally demanding and has other drawbacks.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

Maybe if you're using 4K on small displays it would seem that way

Precisely. My 27" 4K display allows me to disable AA and have image quality boost. Very subtle and hard to notice but it's here. AA is only a necessity if you're stuck at 1440p and below. I think by the time 5K (5120x2880) becomes a thing, we'll see AA going total necro.

I'm talking from my extensive experience with both 1080p and 4K displays. At 1080p, AA feels like it's meant to be played this way. Nothing is rough, nothing is unnecessarily pixelated and these artifacts like said shimmering and ghosting are here but they're not as bad as no AA.
Tables turn at 4K. You don't need to soften sharp edges, they're soft already. You invest your calculating power into curing the disease that doesn't exist and get side effects because eating prescription drugs is an eating disorder without real need doesn't cure anything and just worsens your QoL.

 

[Princess Garnet]

Yeah, it's probably unnecessary on 4K PC displays, but those existing doesn't mean all those 1440p or 1080 displays are going away, so there's going to be a desire for anti-aliasing going forward. About two thirds of the PC market (according to Steam, anyway) seems to be on 1080p. Even 1440p has less users than many people probably imagine it does. And 4K seems to have less users than sub-1080p does, but many people seem to have the impression that 1080p is out of fashion and 1440p is the commonality. Not even close. And even 1440p at 27" (a common PPI factor for that resolution) isn't anywhere close to enough PPI to be fine without anti-aliasing (well, not to me anyway). 4K at ~32", let alone 27", might be though.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

I don't say it's obsolete now. Of course the vast majority is still using lower resolution panels. When 4K and 5K displays become what 1080p is now, then we will see AA fading away rapidly.

 

[P4-630]

Some of the nvidia settings I use for GTA V

MFAA AA mode which gives the same quality as 4x MSAA but has only the performance costs of 2x MSAA.

 

[Kodehawa]

I haven't had any issues really.

 

[evernessince]

No, those are not as fine grained as NVidia's. For example, AMD does not give users the option to forcefully shut off AntiAliasing. NVidia does. AMD will let us shut off AF but not AA? I mean really, WTF is that crap? It's been that way for years and is a complete deal breaker for me. I don't use AA, at all, ever. I think it's an antiquated and un-needed feature that takes up compute in a way that is completely superfluous. There are many other examples like this.


See above.

Many of those per game settings do not work anymore on both the AMD and Nvidia ever since Deferred Rendering became mainstream. This is why many people recommend using Nvidia inspector if you want to force per game settings and you can find very long threads dating back all the way to 2011 that include compatibility flags for specific games for Nvidia inspector.

Both AMD and Nvidia could do with a massive update regarding those.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Many of those per game settings do not work anymore on both the AMD and Nvidia ever since Deferred Rendering became mainstream. This is why many people recommend using Nvidia inspector if you want to force per game settings and you can find very long threads dating back all the way to 2011 that include compatibility flags for specific games for Nvidia inspector.

Both AMD and Nvidia could do with a massive update regarding those.

I can't speak as to AMD side of things, but with the NVidia side, forcing things in the control panel still actually works with the modern games I play. So who knows?

 

[evernessince]

I can't speak as to AMD side of things, but with the NVidia side, forcing things in the control panel still actually works with the modern games I play. So who knows?

It depends on the setting and the game. If you google "Nvidia can't force AA" or "Nvidia can't force AO" you'll get a metric ton of forum posts broaching the topic. Deferred rendering isn't compatible with a quite a few of them. In addition games can set hidden flags to ignore settings forced in the driver. This is down to the fact that often gamers will set and forget things in their drivers which can cause problems with a game (forcing AA can cause artifacts on an Nvidia card for example assuming the setting is able to apply to that specific game at all). From a developer's perspective it makes sense to ignore forced driver settings that can cause issues which will ultimately be blammed on them. I believe the situation in general needs attention but I'm not sure it'll get it given the extremely small fraction of people to whom it matters. Value wise AMD and Nvidia are getting more dedicating manpower elsewhere.

 

[lexluthermiester]

From a developer's perspective it makes sense to ignore forced driver settings

No it doesn't. Devs need ALWAYS respect the settings the user sets. Going behind the back of a users wishes is always unacceptable regardless of the reason. Devs need to live with the problems because they will exist in one form or another til the end of time. Respecting the user is always the better move.

I'm not sure it'll get it given the extremely small fraction of people to whom it matters.

You might be underestimating how important this is.

 

[evernessince]

No it doesn't. Dev need ALWAYS respect the setting the user sets. Going behind the back of a users wishes is always unacceptable regardless of the reason. Devs need to live with the problems because they will exist in one form or another til the end of time. Respecting the user is always the better move.

Always is too strong a word. If a setting were to make a game unplayable (in a literal sense) / crash prone and the game changes behavior to fix that, that's a win for both the user and the dev. More and more modern games already do this, particularly in regards to ensuring VRAM usage fits within a card's budget regardless of user set texture settings. The user can set ultra but texture swapping and tweaking streaming parameters ensures most game will run fine on cards with under-provisioned VRAM allowances.

Of course you want to give the user as much control as possible but there needs to be measures in place to ensure the less skilled among us are able to have a good experience. As with anything else, balance is key.

I'd also say that settings in the game and settings in the driver are really two different things. It much easier for devs to control settings in their own games, they cannot control driver settings.

You might be underestimating how important this is.

As far as I'm aware, software like ReShade is much more popular than using in driver settings. Far more powerful and flexible.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Always is too strong a word.

Not strong enough.

Of course you want to give the user as much control as possible but there needs to be measures in place to ensure the less skilled among us are able to have a good experience.

Their needs to be basic modes and advanced modes. In one, users select basic settings and the rest is automatic, in advanced, the user is given COMPLETE control, fully enforced system-wide.

As far as I'm aware, software like ReShade is much more popular than using in driver settings.

I doubt that. Heard of it, never used it. And I'm likely far from alone.

 

[evernessince]

I doubt that. Heard of it, never used it. And I'm likely far from alone.

With ReShade you can get advanced effects like Ray Tracing and RT GI in any game where you can access the depth buffer. I've gotten it working in quite a few games. It's not as good as if the game had implemented it natively but for non-recent games it's a huge improvement.

You have to sub to patreons to get the better shaders though. The one's out of the box are the normal expected ones.

 

[Princess Garnet]

I don't say it's obsolete now. Of course the vast majority is still using lower resolution panels. When 4K and 5K displays become what 1080p is now, then we will see AA fading away rapidly.

Yeah, I know you weren't. I was just making the statement in addition to what I said.

I think it's going to be a long time before 4K is anywhere near where 1080p is now. Not only do panel costs have to come down, and they sort of have, but the GPU market is slowing down and people, at least gamers, aren't going to be keen on higher resolution displays when GPUs are being cut down and priced up simultaneously. 1080p seems here to stay for a while yet. And the desire for anti-aliasing, too.