amd AMD cards and fallout 4

[ulti2x]

I have a couple of questions for all you guys..

 

Is the AMD issue with fallout 4 running like crap completely fixed? Like if I turned God Rays and tessellation all the way up will my frames be hindered, and will the performance be nearly up to par with the 970 in fallout 4? Its the only thing holding me back from getting an r9 390 over the 970. By the way, which 390 brand should I get, Sapphire or MSI?

 

Thanks all for your replies
 

[Morgan MLGman]

Sapphire for cooling, MSI for overclocking, both cards are excellent

AFAIK performance on Nvidia cards actually tanked quite a bit with the latest Fallout 4 patch, so a 390 should outperform a 970 atm.

[Nicko_barbeque]

I think MSI is better at Nvidia cards and sapphire is better AMD... All up to personal choice tho...

[App4that]

Fixed is not the word I would use, better is the word I would use. 

 

That said your CPU is just as important as your GPU. If you have a i7 you're golden. If you don't just turn the Godrays off and the shadow distance to Medium.

 

Only difference between the 390 and 970 in Fallout 4 is the 970 can run Weapon effects and the 390 has more VRAM for modding.

 

So I wouldn't consider Fallout 4 in your purchase unless ether of those two matter to you.

[DJ25380]

3 hours ago, ulti2x said:

I have a couple of questions for all you guys..

 

Is the AMD issue with fallout 4 running like crap completely fixed? Like if I turned God Rays and tessellation all the way up will my frames be hindered, and will the performance be nearly up to par with the 970 in fallout 4? Its the only thing holding me back from getting an r9 390 over the 970. By the way, which 390 brand should I get, Sapphire or MSI?

 

Thanks all for your replies
 

My game crashes running on a R9 270x when i get into a firefight

[vanished]

Yeah, AMD cards got a big boost with 1.3 (about 20% iirc) while maxwell actually dropped about 10% and kepler about 30%

[ulti2x]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

Sapphire for cooling, MSI for overclocking, both cards are excellent

AFAIK performance on Nvidia cards actually tanked quite a bit with the latest Fallout 4 patch, so a 390 should outperform a 970 atm.

Really? What happened with nvidia and the patch?

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, ulti2x said:

Really? What happened with nvidia and the patch?

Ask @App4that , he knows more about that

[App4that]

No, Nvidia did not drop that much. I keep very close tabs on my performance. There was a drop outside in curtain conditions but the performance in cities offsets the loss. 

[vanished]

4 minutes ago, ulti2x said:

Really? What happened with nvidia and the patch?

Basically NVIDIA added a bunch of nvidia specific stuff, which usually ends up hurting amd more than anyone, but clearly they massively messed up.  there was a good video about it somewhere...

 

edit: here we go:

 

 

Edited February 11, 2016 by Ryan_Vickers

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Basically NVIDIA added a bunch of nvidia specific stuff, which usually ends up hurting amd more than anyone, but clearly they massively messed up.  there was a good video about it somewhere...

Or, just a thought. Talk to the guy who doesn't have a TV because he plays too much Fallout. 

 

Like I said. Outside with a bunch of trees, performance tanks. But it's the same loss as you used to get in cities which is gone. So the problem isn't new, it just moved.

[ulti2x]

2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Basically NVIDIA added a bunch of nvidia specific stuff, which usually ends up hurting amd more than anyone, but clearly they massively messed up.  there was a good video about it somewhere...

If you can link me to that video that would be greatly appreciated!

[vanished]

Just now, App4that said:

Or, just a thought. Talk to the guy who doesn't have a TV because he plays too much Fallout. 

 

Like I said. Outside with a bunch of trees, performance tanks. But it's the same loss as you used to get in cities which is gone. So the problem isn't new, it just moved.

What's you opinion on that video then (look starting at 13m to jump to chart I was referencing)?

[App4that]

Just now, Ryan_Vickers said:

What's you opinion on that video then (look starting at 13m to jump to chart I was referencing)?

Haven't seen it. But I'll look into it. I know the shadow distance doesn't help much. I see reports that turning the weapons effects off fixes it but haven't been able to test that

[PlayStation 2]

I can already tell this is gonna turn into a salt thread. OP, don't let Fallout 4 affect your choice in GPU.

[App4that]

16 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

What's you opinion on that video then (look starting at 13m to jump to chart I was referencing)?

Dude, the guy might as well be telling you aliens are behind the development of Fallout 4  much salty, so misinfomation 

 

You can't be taking them seriously. AMD and Nvidia always perform differently in different areas. Without a benchmark it's not valid without context. 

 

Nvidia is not behind update 1.3, that's Bethesda. Bethesda was under the gun because of performance in cities. So they made changes to help, everyone should know if you fix one thing in software, you create 5 more problems. 

 

That said. Nvidia is definitely hiding information on the problem because they optimize Fallout 4 by turning their own features off  fucking laughed my ass off when I saw that, fuckin tools  

[vanished]

1 minute ago, App4that said:

Dude, the guy might as well be telling you aliens are behind the development of Fallout 4  much salty, so misinfomation 

 

You can't be taking them seriously. AMD and Nvidia always perform differently in different areas. Without a benchmark it's not valid without context. 

 

Nvidia is not behind update 1.3, that's Bethesda. Bethesda was under the gun because of performance in cities. So they made changes to help, everyone should know if you fix one thing in software, you create 5 more problems. 

 

That said. Nvidia is definitely hiding information on the problem because they optimize Fallout 4 by turning their own features off  fucking laughed my ass off when I saw that, fuckin tools  

I know nvidia didn't create the update themselves, but they worked with bethesda did they not?  They added a bunch of nvidia stuff to the game...

 

Anyways, those numbers are from a benchmark... I think they were in different places in the game but do you think it was that alone that caused such a massive difference?  I know AMD and nvidia often trade blows on which games each runs better, but to have specific areas of the map be that different... that's hard to imagine.  What was your issue with the test specifically?

[ivan134]

55 minutes ago, ulti2x said:

I have a couple of questions for all you guys..

 

Is the AMD issue with fallout 4 running like crap completely fixed? Like if I turned God Rays and tessellation all the way up will my frames be hindered, and will the performance be nearly up to par with the 970 in fallout 4? Its the only thing holding me back from getting an r9 390 over the 970. By the way, which 390 brand should I get, Sapphire or MSI?

 

Thanks all for your replies
 

[App4that]

45 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

This is what frustrates me. All those clock speeds are complete bull shit. So not only does it tell you nothing without context as to where and at what time of day they tested (if you could trust them), but it only tells you what those cards will do at clock speeds no one runs them at.

 

All that does is confuse the issue.

[App4that]

1 hour ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I know nvidia didn't create the update themselves, but they worked with bethesda did they not?  They added a bunch of nvidia stuff to the game...

 

Anyways, those numbers are from a benchmark... I think they were in different places in the game but do you think it was that alone that caused such a massive difference?  I know AMD and nvidia often trade blows on which games each runs better, but to have specific areas of the map be that different... that's hard to imagine.  What was your issue with the test specifically?

I have a copious amount of time in the game, arguably more time with both companies cards than anyone here. I have over 200hrs with a i5 and i7. I know what it takes to run the different setting and resolutions using different CPUs, graphics cards, and RAM.

 

That guy has a bug up his ass like a lot of the people here on this forum and has no interest in the truth, just throwing poop at Nvidia. I have zero respect for that behavior. Nehter company can run Fallout 4 properly, do you know who's fault that is?

 

BETHESDA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

No matter what card you have you're going to have choices to make if you want to hold 60fps. No bad guys, no conspiracies, no advantage to ether that's not balance by a advantage on the other side.

 

So sick of this shit. Every day the same shit. Confirmation bias and internet fights at the cost of those coming here looking for advice. Have useful information for the person looking for it, you have to wade through a flood of fans looking to validate their purchase.

[vanished]

4 minutes ago, App4that said:

I have a copious amount of time in the game, arguably more time with both companies cards than anyone here. I have over 200hrs with a i5 and i7. I know what it takes to run the different setting and resolutions using different CPUs, graphics cards, and RAM.

 

That guy has a bug up his ass like a lot of the people here on this forum and has no interest in the truth, just throwing poop at Nvidia. I have zero respect for that behavior. Nehter company can run Fallout 4 properly, do you know who's fault that is?

 

BETHESDA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

No matter what card you have you're going to have choices to make if you want to hold 60fps. No bad guys, no conspiracies, no advantage to ether that's not balance by a advantage on the other side.

 

So sick of this shit. Every day the same shit. Confirmation bias and internet fights at the cost of those coming here looking for advice. Have useful information for the person looking for it, you have to wade through a flood of fans looking to validate their purchase.

So... No card runs it well?  Is that what your saying?  This rant, though clearly well founded, doesn't seem entirely necessary or useful... Remember the point here is to decide what card runs it best. I thought I had provided new insight but I guess that guy is not to be trusted

 

Anyways, so 390 or 970?

[ivan134]

10 minutes ago, App4that said:

I have a copious amount of time in the game, arguably more time with both companies cards than anyone here. I have over 200hrs with a i5 and i7. I know what it takes to run the different setting and resolutions using different CPUs, graphics cards, and RAM.

 

That guy has a bug up his ass like a lot of the people here on this forum and has no interest in the truth, just throwing poop at Nvidia. I have zero respect for that behavior. Nehter company can run Fallout 4 properly, do you know who's fault that is?

 

BETHESDA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

No matter what card you have you're going to have choices to make if you want to hold 60fps. No bad guys, no conspiracies, no advantage to ether that's not balance by a advantage on the other side.

 

So sick of this shit. Every day the same shit. Confirmation bias and internet fights at the cost of those coming here looking for advice. Have useful information for the person looking for it, you have to wade through a flood of fans looking to validate their purchase.

I'm not really sure why you're trying to take the moral high ground here. I said this since the day Fallout 4 launched. AMD had their issues at launch, but the majority of the game's fault were because of Bethesda. You were blaming AMD instead. You, like all the other Fallout 4 fanboys who think it's the 2nd coming of Jesus, had no interest in the truth.

[App4that]

Just now, Ryan_Vickers said:

So... No card runs it well?  Is that what your saying?  This rant, though clearly well founded, doesn't seem entirely necessary or useful... Remember the point here is to decide what card runs it best. I thought I had provided new insight but I guess that guy is not to be trusted

 

Anyways, so 390 or 970?

I've said a few times, doesn't matter. The 390 will offer the same average fps as the 970. The fps loss will occur in different situations. The 390 handles interiors as long as there isn't a lot of exterior light coming through windows. The 970 will have an advantage just about everywhere accept in open areas with a good line of sight and a lot of trees. Not just a few trees. But the northern part pf the map seems to be the problem area to the east and west of Sanctuary.

 

The 970 has access to the Weapons effects, which is no joke and adds a lot of immersion to firefights. Getting hit in the face by chunks of cement and wood while pinned down has to be seen to appreciate.

 

The 390 has the added ram which does help with mods. Not your ordinary mods, but the texture heavy ones. Not that it can't be done with 4g, I got by just fine. But the 390 has to get credit where it's due.

 

Nether of these are worth choosing it over the other. WAY too close. And honestly the player having a i5 or i7 makes much more of a difference.

3 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

I'm not really sure why you're trying to take the moral high ground here. I said this since the day Fallout 4 launched. AMD had their issues at launch, but the majority of the game's fault were because of Bethesda. You were blaming AMD instead. You, like all the other Fallout 4 fanboys who think it's the 2nd coming of Jesus, had no interest in the truth.

AMD broke the fucking game, they literally shipped a driver they knew broke the fucking game and didn't care. All to add a few fps on the benchmarks. No one's making YouTube videos calling AMD a dick, because liking AMD is trendy and hating Nvidia is what trendy peeps do.

 

When you can hold AMD responsible for shipping a driver they knew caused an issue with the compass that wasn't there before the driver, and then fixed the problem THEY cause on the 390 WEEKS before they fixed it on the 290. Then you can call me a fanboy, and only then.

 

[vanished]

23 minutes ago, App4that said:

 

 

2 minutes ago, App4that said:

I've said a few times, doesn't matter. The 390 will offer the same average fps as the 970. The fps loss will occur in different situations. The 390 handles interiors as long as there isn't a lot of exterior light coming through windows. The 970 will have an advantage just about everywhere accept in open areas with a good line of sight and a lot of trees. Not just a few trees. But the northern part pf the map seems to be the problem area to the east and west of Sanctuary.

 

The 970 has access to the Weapons effects, which is no joke and adds a lot of immersion to firefights. Getting hit in the face by chunks of cement and wood while pinned down has to be seen to appreciate.

 

The 390 has the added ram which does help with mods. Not your ordinary mods, but the texture heavy ones. Not that it can't be done with 4g, I got by just fine. But the 390 has to get credit where it's due.

 

Nether of these are worth choosing it over the other. WAY too close. And honestly the player having a i5 or i7 makes much more of a difference.

 

Alright then, now that's an answer

[ivan134]

1 hour ago, App4that said:

I've said a few times, doesn't matter. The 390 will offer the same average fps as the 970. The fps loss will occur in different situations. The 390 handles interiors as long as there isn't a lot of exterior light coming through windows. The 970 will have an advantage just about everywhere accept in open areas with a good line of sight and a lot of trees. Not just a few trees. But the northern part pf the map seems to be the problem area to the east and west of Sanctuary.

 

The 970 has access to the Weapons effects, which is no joke and adds a lot of immersion to firefights. Getting hit in the face by chunks of cement and wood while pinned down has to be seen to appreciate.

 

The 390 has the added ram which does help with mods. Not your ordinary mods, but the texture heavy ones. Not that it can't be done with 4g, I got by just fine. But the 390 has to get credit where it's due.

 

Nether of these are worth choosing it over the other. WAY too close. And honestly the player having a i5 or i7 makes much more of a difference.

AMD broke the fucking game, they literally shipped a driver they knew broke the fucking game and didn't care. All to add a few fps on the benchmarks. No one's making YouTube videos calling AMD a dick, because liking AMD is trendy and hating Nvidia is what trendy peeps do.

 

When you can hold AMD responsible for shipping a driver they knew caused an issue with the compass that wasn't there before the driver, and then fixed the problem THEY cause on the 390 WEEKS before they fixed it on the 290. Then you can call me a fanboy, and only then.

 

There's that dishonesty and lack of comprehension again. The broken compass was the reason you sold your 4690k and bought a 4790k? You also still seem to have a very hard time distinguishing between a mistake and malicious intent. You are insinuating that AMD purposely shipped a broken driver for one game in hopes that people would sell or throw away their current cards and buy a new card with the same performance. Alright buddy.