Did some driver testing to confirm whether or not Nvidia has been deliberately gimping Kepler cards in recent drivers, here's the results.
Tested in Arma 3 since the game is known to not be optimized and not favour either of the brands as it's hard to find a game nowadays that isn't Nvidia or AMD afiliated.
All tests were performed by loading the game at the exact same spot and looking at the horizon for roughly a minute to stabilize the framerate so it would be a constant.
The only thing that changed between each test was the driver revision, all on default settings with clean install option so no tweaking of any sort being applied to drivers, just clean drivers exactly the way they come.
There was also the Witcher 3 performance fiasco shortly before 353 driver launched but Arma 3 performance doesn't seem to have been affected, the "Kepler Fix" Nvidia claimed to do was in driver 353 which bumped performance up in Witcher 3 but none of that seems to have had any effect on Arma 3 and it's safe to assume it was Witcher 3 exclusive fixes.
Anyhow.
The first entry are the first major driver release since 780 Ti came out, basically the "entry" drivers for the card with which it more or less launched with.
Then it showed gradual improvement all the way up to 353 series.
Starting with 355 there's an observable subtle downward slope in performance that seems to be going down roughly 1 frame with each new major driver. Over the course of less than a year since 353 drivers, Arma 3 exhibits a performance worse of 5 frames.
Note that all this was tested on the exact same version of Arma 3 which is the latest build with new improved renderer.
In last thread I've been called AMD shill somehow even though I'm a fucking Nvidia user and never had AMD/ATI cards just because I didn't include videos so here you go this time around faggots.
Arma 3 running 353.62 driver:
https://u.pomf.is/ryjwly.webm
Arma 3 running latest 364.96 driver:
https://u.pomf.is/vbtivp.webm
>>335863975
It's also worth noting that drivers were cleanly removed entirely with DDU before doing a clean install of the new ones.
Also did a Dark Souls 3 test.
DS3 running 353.62 driver:
https://u.pomf.is/tblqmk.webm
DS3 running 364.94 driver:
https://u.pomf.is/frcsyb.webm
Is 4fps that big of a difference though? I'm not excusing Nvidia is they are deliberately doing this but if they were trying to gimp older cards wouldn't they try and take away more than just 4 to 5 frames?
>>335864530
>Is 4fps that big of a difference though?
how about 10% difference?
>>335864530
5 actually, and it's a gradual downward slope.
It may be "only" 5 FPS now but in half a year it may be 10.
>>335864530
It's the morals behind it. And five frames can matter if you are only getting 28-30 consistently. The difference between 60 fps and 55 fps would be more insidious and harder to detect.
>>335864613
What I'm trying to say is I would assume if this was deliberate JewVidia would gimp more than just 10% maybe 20% or 30%
>>335864715
the difference between 60 and 55 fps is excessive stutter, as the latter constantly misses the refresh rate of the display
>>335863975
2-5 frames is not enough to prove planed obsolescence. stop your retarded crying.
>>335864823
what OP's saying is they're boiling the frog. Gradual slow decreases, so nobody notices between each driver version, but it compounds and in a few months or years, these cards will run like shit
>>335864823
If they gimped more it would be immediately noticeable and there would be grounds to sue them, also antitrust would kick in.
A gradual stealth downgrade of 1 frame with each major update however will go unnoticed.
>m-muh 3 fps difference
>ACHTUALLEE
amd vs nvidia threads are fucking hilarious, people literally spend hours making shit up for "muh preferred graphics card company"
>>335865159
Thanks for your ad hominem shitpost and proving inability to read.
>>335865220
Thanks for making another hilarious thread op, really brings out the console war feel.
>>335865306
If you think 10% performance difference is neglibile then you're fucking retarded and a literall corporate shill.
>>335865363
Keep on wearing that tinfoil hat, friend.
Sometimes I wonder when these kinds of people are playing games, and the frames drop, they freak out and post an angry steam review.
am I stupid or does it make complete sense that newer drivers dont work as well for older cards since they would be built with newer cards in mind?
why would you think nvidia would actively gimp older hardware when its more likely they just arent focusing on it as much?
>>335865619
You could hardly do anything more to prove that you're a shill if you're complaining about negative steam reviews.
And please do resort to more ad hominem and completely ignore all the fucking evidence posted.
>>335864925
>2-5 frames is not enough to prove planed obsolescence. stop your retarded crying.
Explain the reduction in performance then.
>>335865810
new drivers are designed with newer hardware in mind and as a result older hardware might suffer
>>335865732
Who exactly am I a shill for? Steam? Arma? You are pathetic anon.
Keep making these threads though, Im sure you'll make a difference and teach those evil corporate meanies a lesson!
>>335865713
>am I stupid or does it make complete sense that newer drivers dont work as well for older cards since they would be built with newer cards in mind?
the worst that should happen is that the code for older cards is not updated any longer, and doesn't see any performance gains. Speed loss should be rare. These drivers are not monolithic one-size-fits-all. They have a shitload of mini drivers underneath and just pick the right one for the card found. So the old mini drivers aren't even aware of new modern cards, and don't support them.
>>335865713
Then the new drivers shouldn't be listed as compatible for older cards.
They should simply say "we're no longer updating the codebase for X cards and Y driver is the last one for this generation of cards".
>>335866095
then people would complain about lack of support.
I would be pissed if a company told me my hardware would not be supported after less than 2 years.
and that would also be lying, these drivers do support older cards, they arent guaranteed to perform better but they do work.
>>335865991
these kinds of drivers are one-size-fits-all, otherwise 3 generations of cards wouldnt have the same driver to download
>>335866258
>then people would complain about lack of support.
how is decreasing performance not lack of support? What do you understand it to mean when you say "support"?
>>335865975
That wouldnt be happening if they were just focusing on newer hardware performance would stay the same, not decrease
>>335866258
But how the fuck is it supported if even the "game ready" Dark Souls 3 drivers perform WORSE than an older driver?
Do you even realize the contradictions within your logic?
>>335865975
>new drivers are designed with newer hardware in mind and as a result older hardware might suffer
That's not the way drivers work.
>>335866330
Why do you think they're so big? Only reason nvidia is doing one download is so people don't have to select based on their hardware, because nvidia don't trust people to make the right selection. Underneath it's all the old individual tiny drivers and one frontend to rule them all
>>335866330
>these kinds of drivers are one-size-fits-all
That's just the way they're packaged, the reality is they're not.
You can download specific drivers for your exact card, they might happen to be included in "one-size-fits-all" package, but they are most certainly seperate.
>>335865984
>Actually believing companies don't sabotage their own product/make it out of cheap stuff so it breaks
>tin foil hat meme
I bet you also believe bush wanted to protect his country from terrorism and the Vietnam war was justified
>>335863975
What's interesting to me is that they're not running at the same clock speeds or using the same amount of VRAM until you zoom in, then they start performing practically the same with roughly the same clocks and VRAM usage.
Your evidence doesn't suggest planned obsolescence.
>>335867427
That's Nvidia's "amazing" feature they introduced in Kepler series called Boost and it's fully automated by hardware and you have 0 control over it.
>>335867427
>Your evidence doesn't suggest planned obsolescence.
All it suggests is the drivers have been altered resulting in a reduction in performance.
Oh wait.
>>335863975
I'd rather take driver downgrades than housefires, sky high electricity bills and a complete lack of drivers, performance and dev support. Graphics cards age, that's kind of why you upgrade them. No one games on a 3dfx Voodoo these days, nor bitches about not being able to. At least with Nvidia you know you're getting a good two years of high performance. With AMD, well, their brand says it all. Even if they did put out something that wasn't just a ticking timebomb, I wouldn't be caught dead buying it.
>>335868074
shill.jpg
>>335868183
>smart.jpg
Fixed it for (You).
>>335867765
It doesn't.
Good job hiding the CPU usage, OP. You made sure no one noticed you intentionally modifying the Rivatuner FPS limiter, which artificially loads the CPU to keep frametimes even.
Nice try AMD shill.
>>335868074
Are you even going to try?
>>335868553
I have no idea what the fuck did you even just write anon but please do keep that ad hominem coming
>all these shills trying to derail the thread
SHUT IT DOWN
>>335868691
Not sure if I should be upset or just sad but at least I hope this will reach some anons
>>335863975
OP would it be viable for me to roll back to 353 drivers and just stay there?
>>335863975
>Planned obsolescence
>FPS went up for about 10 driver updates
kek. You also realize that ARMA 3 recently had some sort of graphical overhaul patch, right? I hate it when Nvidia pulls their bullshit too, but you're really grasping for straws right now.
>>335868074
>Graphics cards age, that's kind of why you upgrade them.
You upgrade graphics cards so you can play games at higher settings with higher FPS not because your old games suddenly run like shit. I'm not saying I believe OP but your argument is seriously flawed.
>>335868847
Yeah, that's the entire point of my thread, to let people know so they can rollback
http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/87783/en-us
>>335867352
It was justified in that we really wanted that fucking tin mining.
>>335863975
Thank you based OP
I am also running a 780Ti and was wondering this as well, since everyone was reporting 750/780 with lower FPS, wasn't sure about the Ti.
>>335868873
Did you even pay attention? All tests were performed on the SAME version of Arma 3, post visual patch.
But of course you didn't, reading is too hard for you, I know you illiterate amerifats can't read so OP info is too hard for you.
>>335864178
I updated to a newer driver for Dark Souls 3 and my FPS went down like the Hindenburg, had to rollback to make it work again. I wouldn't use DS3 for tests of any kind desu, it's has some realy performance issues for some people on new cards (don't know if they fixed the crashes yet even)
>>335868928
Thanks for the heads up. I kind of got this feeling a while back.
>780 sli
>mod skyrim like fuck every now and then
>on the latest run through same texture packs and enbs perform worse than they used to
I don't understand why everyone is saying amd shill. I will probably never switch to an amd card. But I do like knowing which drivers maybe optimal for my nvidia card.
Good work OP
>>335869073
You're thinking of the 364.72 driver, I used the Hotfix 364.96 driver which "supposedly" has no stability issues.
>>335869172
Ah so it's fixed, ok. Yes that was the exact driver
>>335869030
>Did you pay attention
No, I didn't read half your post because you scream tinfoil hat.
>Nvidia constantly releases driver updates and many end up being shitty
>Guys it's a conspiracy, they're purposely gimping our games and our hardware!
Fuck off retard.
>>335869149
I never even used an AMD card not ever plan to since they lack the convenience features that Nvidia has but that doesn't change the fact that it pisses me off with what Nvidia is pulling. I sure as fucking hell won't be buying 1070 on release, I'll wait for people to disect the hardware completely to ensure it has no 3.5-tier bullshit.
>>335869272
I'm not OP, but I still have the right to call you a moron.
>SHILL
>SHILL
>TINFOIL
>INSERT BUZZWORD HERE
lmao
>>335868928
Not that I particularly care...because honestly, anyone who thinks planned obsolescence isn't a thing in this age of mass consumerism is a fucking retard, be it kettles, cars or that beat up smart phone of yours that gets slower with each new firmware update, not to mention the whole name of the PC Hardware game is having the latest and greatest...and has been since the day I was rocking a pair of Voodoo 2's, but the thread caught my eye as i've just got back into Arma 3, just rolled back to 353.62 on my old 780GTX, definite improvement in performance so fucking awesome.
>>335868680
Sure you don't, OP. You have no idea how to limit the frame-rate in Rivatuner. You have no idea how to hide the CPU usage from the OSD. Not a damn clue.
You only know what you need to know to push an agenda; shill AMD and defame Nvidia.
>>335869272
Kill yourself retarded cuck you didn't even read half of it
>>335866395
maybe decreased performance means increased stability, or some areas may perform worse while others perform better.
lack of support would mean nothing.
>>335869574
I have a fucking 780 Ti
My previous cards were all Riva TnT2, GeForce 2 Ti, GeForce 4 Ti 4400, GeForce FX 5800 Ultra, GeForce 7800 GTX, GeForce 8800GT, GeForce 570 GTX and now this 780 Ti
But please do tell me what a fucking AMD shill I am even though not once did I recommend AMD in this very thread. Please stop with the fucking ad hominem and projecting because it makes you look retarded.
>>335866436
>hey if we use these new pixel pipelines to computer the shaders used for hair in the new dark souls game the 900 series cards get a 3 frame increase
>but older cards dont have those pipelines, will it still work
>I have a work-around for that, and it shouldnt affect performance
>ok do it
>>335870094
Dark Souls 3 doesn't use Goyworks anon
>>335870012
>M64 Riva TNT2
Fuck that was such an awesome value for money card back in the day.
>>335866436
if they spend more time making sure the new drivers work great on new cards, that means they spend less time making sure they work great on older cards meaning if performance decreases they might not notice
its not as if they are purposefully crippling the cards, they probably just arent paying as much attention to them, so any performance decreases arent noticed
>>335870012
>not once did I recommend AMD
>implying you have to recommend a product to be a shill for it, when the entire basis of the thread is to badmouth the competition
Top kek.
>>335870161
what is goyworks?
dark souls did have a driver released for it
>>335870371
Goyworks aka Nvidia Gameworks which is Nvidia exclusive pipeline bullshit that cripples games.
>>335864823
If Nvidia deliberately gimped everyone's old videocards by HALVING their framerates, I'm pretty sure their headquarters would see a riot and maybe a fire or two. Karma for Fermi.
>Literally can't discuss Nvidia badly without somebody sperging about "MUH AMD"
you're fucking kidding
>>335870443
I dont think anyone is talking about that
but while you bring it up, gameworks are luxury and experimental graphics options. They will cripple your game because its not designed to run well, its designed to do something unique
>>335870497
>cant badmouth a company based on anecdotal evidence without people thinking you are a shill for their only other competitor
what did you expect
You give Nvidia a lot of credit. This is most likely the result of their incompetence more so than malice.
>>335870591
>its designed to do something unique
I'll let you have a moment to google "architecture".
Also, I am not in this post chain. This is my second post in this thread.
My first: >>335869003
>>335870839
Yeah anon and 3.5GB is also clearly incompetence and not calculated malice.
>>335870909
who said anything about architecture?
and how is your other post related?
>>335870937
Well if you weren't a moron, you'd know that the 3.5GB thing was indeed incompetence and laziness on the engineer's part, but malice on the marketing department's part.
>>335871451
Time to stop posting mr nvidia marketer
>>335871451
was it really malice? maybe they didnt know
if I was the guy behind 3.5 I certainly would have hidden it
>>335871147
It isn't.
Do you know that I quoted something in my post?
>unique
>architecture
PLEASE, GO FUCKING LOOK AT A DICTIONARY. ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO COMPUTER LOGIC "ARCHITECTURE".
>brrrrrrrrrrrm, here comes the plane anon! open wide!
Spoonfeeding.
So what driver should I use if I have the 750Ti meme card? On 359.00 currently
>>335873619
353.62
No alternative, so nothing to be done
I wish there was a way to change drivers without reinstalling. So I could play new games with new drivers if they work better or have fixes.
AMD and Nvidia both suck.
>>335875763
>So I could play new games with new drivers if they work better or have fixes
There is no such thing though, even the "Gameready" DS3 drivers perform flat out worse than old driver
>>335875782
No shit
>>335863975
How do I get the old drivers for my GTX 960?
I'm tired of Nvidia fucking me in the ass with these fucking drivers.
Windows 10 is fucking bad enough.
I too have noticed driver upgrades keep assfucking my frame rate.
>>335876118
Read the thread anon there's a link posted
As expected OP is full of shit. Just ran 2 scenarios with NO AI UNITS ON THE MAP (important) and in each scenario under both drivers, performance was exactly the same.
OP clearly isn't fully loading his GPU, this is evident in the GPU never reaching 99% usage in either scenario. Combined with the fact that there are visible AI units in view, this means a CPU bottleneck was reached in all tests.
TLDR: OP is full of shit and shilling for AMD. I'm okay with this because there needs to be some chumps buying that shit so Nvidia doesn't become a monopoly. Thanks OP.
>>335876174
Arma 3 will always max CPU you dumb retard, that's why there's a Dark Souls 3 comparison posted, get cancer and die.
>>335876174
>Just ran 2 scenarios with NO AI UNITS ON THE MAP (important) and in each scenario under both drivers, performance was exactly the same.
Where's your video proof Mr. Nvidia Shill?
>>335876174
even if his test is bullshit installing the latest nvidia drivers has been fucking my frame rate up
csgo of all things didn't fucking work
>>335876118
>GTX 960
Don't. Maxwell cards improve with driver updates.
>>335876441
He hasn't provided a single fucking shred of proof and you believe him? Really? Are you retarded?
>>335876118
They started gimping only Kepler cards for now.
>>335876490
Except old games like CSGO.
I was getting drops down to 10 frames per fuckign second every time a weapon was fired, the muzzle flash just grinded down a fucking GTX 960.
It wasn't the game installation either.
That was about the time I started noticing the driver updates don't help at all.
been using a prebuilt from 2011 and it still works fine for new games, but who should i go with if i do decide to get a new pc?
i haven't really payed attention to the graphics card companies
>>335876578
It's from my personal shitty experience with driver updates.
The one exception might have possibly been Fallout 4. The loading screen stopped playing at 10FPS not too long ago, I am unsure if it was a driver update or a game update that fixed it.
>>335876763
Wait for both companies new cards to come out later this year, wait for benchmark and then buy whichever is cheaper while offering same/better performance as the competition
>>335876817
I meant the faggot claiming OP test isn't legit, fucking marketers trying to derail the thread with disinfo.
>>335876763
Nvidia are cunts, but AMD is incompetent most of the time. Choice is yours.
>>335863975
Thanks for doing this. It's genuinely refreshing to know that somebody is cataloging things like this
>>335876850
Until you realize even games like Witcher 3 uses fucking Nvidia GameWorks and will gimp the fuck out of your AMD card because Nvidia is evil and hates you.
>>335869721
On /v/ it's best you don't even read a tenth of the retarded shit here.
>>335877037
AMD actually has workaround for Nvidia's tessellation bullshit.
Nvidia forces insane tessellation rates with Gameworks (64-256x), AMD drivers let you override it and get it down to a sane level like 8x which has no perceiveable visual difference from 64x but has substantially better performance.
>>335877037
AMD needs no help gimping themselves.
Besides, even were that the case that would just be Nvidia's way of showing you the light. You know, away from shitty drivers, 110 C cards, and huge ass power draw.
>>335876259
>>335876412
>>335876441
You're getting trolled by OP. He's intentionally leaving out specific information to mask the truth. But he couldn't avoid the telltale sign of a CPU bottleneck: GPU usage.
Take a look at the before and after in both Arma 3 and Dark Souls 3. In both clips from each game, you'll notice a performance "drop" accompanied with an equally lowered GPU utilization. This indicates a CPU bottleneck in the supposedly newer GPU driver benchmarks.
The guy is full of shit and people are falling for it. I literally just ran two sets of tests and there was absolutely no difference in performance in either scenario.
Why didn't I take screenshots as proof? Because I know this fuckboi would cry that they're both using the same driver (which is probably what he did in his tests anyway) and there's no proof to back that claim up at all. There is literally no way to prove a screenshot of a game with Rivatuner running is using a specific driver version. The only way we could possibly prove that is if we performed the tests live on stream. And I'm not about to go through that trouble right now.
Once again, OP is full of shit.
>>335877287
>AMD cucks can't see the difference
It's like console fags saying you can't see above 30 FPS.
>>335863975
I have a 750 GTX , What driver should i get. shit´s been working like shit after last update.
I could run most games just fine , now stutters appeared.
>>335877356
>The only way we could possibly prove that is if we performed the tests live on stream.
>I'm not about to go through that trouble right now.
Because you are full of shit?
>>335877356
OP provided actual proof
All you provide is conjecture and projections with 0 evidence
The only one here full of shit is you
>>335865975
>New drivers make the same hardware perform worse over time
>It's not planned obsolescence
Lol
>>335877505
353.62
>>335869850
Games run on older drivers, all this "support" is doing is making your hardware worse.
>>335877397
I don't think you realize what diminishing returns are.
Witcher 3 models are like 12.000 polygons each.
At 8x that makes them 96.000 polygons.
At 64x that's 768.000 polygons.
There's barely visible difference between 12k and 96k, let alone visible difference between 96k and 768k
>>335877397
Sub dividing a cube 256 times isn't going to make it look better.
>>335877727
They don't even have it.
>>335877882
>>335877948
>Y-y-you can't see more than 8x tessellation!
Look at these pathetic AMDcucks trying to justify their purchase.
>>335878354
Still trying to derail and shitpost the thread up I see Mr Nvidia Shill.
>>335878332
http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/87783/en-us
http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/87789/en-us
>>335867650
You should see what AMD is working on (though i'd be surprised if it makesi t into polaris). Essentially it is how Nvidia's boost works but on a per shader (and other component) level.
This would effectively render base clocks a non factor - the card could run the parts that are under high load (like say, the shaders) at really high frequencies while parts that are not seeing much use (such as a compute unit) would downclock to free up thermal and power draw headroom.
That sort of thing is a serious game changer for a graphics card given the generally high TDP's they have versus cpus. Especially when you look at some of the ultra dense chips AMD have made (fiji is extremely dense compared to most Nvidia chips for example).
No doubt Nvidia will eventually implement a similar technology.
>tfw gtx 770
>tfw brother bought 280x
>tfw he gets more fps than me now
I don't know if Kelper has been gimped, but one thing for sure is that the 280X has aged better and now beats the 770 in every modern game, even gameworks shit.
Anyone getting screen tearing with the newest update? Was browsing the steam store and holy shit it was driving me crazy
>>335879556
Turn on Aero, No Aero = no Windows/Desktop V-Sync
>>335864823
>what is subtlety
>>335879778
Thanks anon, I'll try it out when I get home
>>335864953
So what's the hard-point?
Is there at least some autist somewhere keeping track of "good" updates with minimal gimping for nvidia cards?
>>335881058
353.62 is all you need anon
>nvidia optimizes drivers only looking at the last two series of cards
Gee its like you're meant to upgrade every 3 years or something.inb4 faggot with an 8800 on xp trying to claim he isn't the one holding back the industry and it is in fact consoles holding it back
too many variables that could be throwing your measurements off.
>>335881095
Fuck. Currently on 361.91 with my 770, but I'll have to try it, thanks anon.
FPS always fluctuates, is this thread as stupid as I think or am I missing something?
>>335881584
The fluctuations always stay within a certain range anon
Those ranges are clearly different for those drivers.
Alright as you all know, 314.22 was THE driver for 560 Ti. But Shader Cache, a supposedly big performance optimization feature, debuted with 337.88. Which one is better for 560 Ti?
>buy game in 2016
>It looks the same from game in 2006
>requires a 980 for 60 fps
That's the greater jewing. How the fuck does that make sense? Honestly I'm glad that consoles exist. Atleast they set a barrier of optimization. Without consoles, I'd promise you these incompetent devs would optimize for high-end GPUs and then blame it all on us when we get shitty frames.
>>335881205
My 8800gt runs Crysis which looks better than current gen games. Consoles literally hold back the industry.
>>335881692
yeah silky smooth 22fps at 1440*900 :^)
>>335881692
Consoles got shit to do with it you fuck. It's more like devs who only test their games on latest high-end GPUs. If anything, consoles force devs to optimize for lower-end hardware.
>>335881783
>consoles force devs to optimize for lower-end hardware
Totally
>>335882031
Do you want me to post the XCOM and Rome 2 benchmarks? Quantum Break wouldn't have happened without Xbone anyways.
>>335878956
I would literally impregnate every single one of those delicious brown girls.
>>335881674
>How the fuck does that make sense?
The reason is
>It looks the same from game in 2006
is just not true. However, and that's the problem, the differences are in shaders, and kind of hard to see, if you don't know what you're looking for. It may, however, also have to do with raised expectations. In 2006 you may have run games at 1080p with multisampling or so, while it's expected nowadays to run in 4k with supersampling. That does have an impact on the performance
>these incompetent devs would optimize for high-end GPUs
You always write your shaders for the high-end, and then just strip some procedures for the weaker cards, or decrease resolutions. There are several reasons for this: Game development takes time. By the time the game is done, you still want to be able to saturate high end cards so enthusiasts think they got their money's worth. In a couple months the high end cards will be mid range common stuff anyway, so it works out. For sane people it means max settings in a game will NOT be the right option. These settings push shaders hard, and evaporate framerate like it's nobody's business. So the older your card gets, the more you'll have to get used to medium or low settings. That's all fine though, as these lower settings use the same models, often the same textures, and just throw away some shaders you don't need anyway.
>and then blame it all on us when we get shitty frames
That blame is justified. All the options in the games are there for a reason. You won't be able to max them unless you got maxed hardware, by design. Got to learn to keep your expectations in check. If your card's from 2006, you got to make your game look like 2006, even if that may mean lower or lowest settings, especially in terms of shader, antialiasing and resolution
>>335863975
Arma 3 is probably the worst game you could had used for a test like this.
>DS3 gets its framerate divided by a factor of 10 with the newest drivers compared to 2013 drivers on certain cards
NO GIMPING
DELETE THIS
>>335873656
so what driver should i use if i have a 970 meme card?
>>335884520
Latest
>>335884520
Oldest
I'm still rocking 347.88 apparently
I max my BF4 on 120fps with mostly all medium settings at 1080p.
Can't really comment on any new games since there haven't been any worth of value imo in the last year or so.
>>335863975
>new AMD drivers keep improving my R9 290
Feelsgood
