7 Replies Latest reply on Sep 8, 2015 10:23 AM by backFireX64

    Advanced Warfare - CrossfireX Now Functional W/AMD™ 15.8 Beta Drivers + Test Data

    savagebeastzero

      CrossfireX Testing To Gauge Multi-Gpu CrossfireX Scaling and Stability

       

      Hey all ,

       

      I conducted scaling and stability tests in CrossfireX configuration to enable the community to better judge the CrossfireX performance after the 15.8 Beta Driver release. Especially considering any Call of Duty release hasn't had a properly functioning CrossfireX profile in quite some time. During my tests in the now functional CrossfireX mode, I received incredibly positive gpu scaling and overall absolutely impressive results.

       

      With all in game graphics settings set to the following I recieved between 71%-87% syncronous gpu usage depending on the resources needed in game at the moment.

       

      Note: That V-Sync was used for the purpose of maximum gpu utilization via settings and not simply maximum frames to properly test syncronous gpu usage in a controlled testing environment. With that being said, I also used 60Hz instead of 120Hz and maximized the in game graphics settings to gauge the greatest visual gains and gpu usage/scaling overall.

       

      Note: Super Sampling was set to 2X for an total effective rendering resolution of 6400x3600 during the tests.

       

      Actual Testing Environment

       

      Ambient Temperature: 92 degree Fahrenheit / 33.3333333 degree Celsius

      Humidity: 47%

       

      Testing Scenario

       

      • In a CrossfireX configuration, I tested multiple online multiplayer matches all in public lobbies to ensure real world results were accounted for in the tests.

       

      • In a CrossfireX configuration, I tested the multiplayer map "Sideshow" 4x consecutively, due to it requiring the most resources overall out of all the maps available at the time of the testing. This was conducted in a private lobby against bots, with a total of 12 players including myself on the map at any given time utilizing the following settings mentioned below.

       

      • In a CrossfireX configuration, I tested the multiplayer map "Defender" 4x consecutively, due to it previously being the most poorly performing map overall according to the Steam community that has requested my troubleshooting assistance over the past year, consisting of more than 200 users.  This was conducted in a private lobby against bots, with a total of 12 players including myself on the map at any given time utilizing the following settings mentioned below.

       

      Primary Components Used During CrossfireX tests

      OS: Windows 10

      CPU: FX8320 @4.8Ghz
      GPU #1: MSI R9 290 (std clock/memory speeds to properly gauge gpu performance* Both GPU's have been applied with Gelid GC Extreme TIM, thus temperature results may vary on a user to user base)
      GPU #2: MSI R9 290 (std clock/memory speeds to properly gauge gpu performance* Both GPU's have been applied with Gelid GC Extreme TIM, thus temperature results may vary on a user to user base)

      Motherboard: Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0

      Memory/Ram: Corsair Vengeance LP Pro 2133Mhz 16GB
      Storage Media Used For Test: OCZ ARC 100 120GB SSD
      PSU: EVGA 1300G Super Nova 80+ Gold

      Case: CoolerMaster HAF XB Evo Revision 2.0


      Native Resolution
      3200x1800

       

      Display Options
      [*]Screen Refresh Rate: 60Hz
      [*]Sync Every Frame: Yes
      [*]Field of View: 65
      [*]Monitor Aspect Ratio: 16:9
      [*]Render Resolution: 3200x1800

       

      Texture Options
      [*]Texture Quality: Extra
      [*]Texture Resolution: Extra
      [*]Normal Map Resolution: Extra
      [*]Specular Map Resolution: Extra
      [*]Anisotropic Filtering: High

       

      Shadow Options
      [*]Shadows: Extra
      [*]Shadow Map Resolution: Extra
      [*]Cache Sun Shadow Maps: On
      [*]Cache Spot Shadow Maps: On

       

      Post Process Options
      [*]Depth of Field: On
      [*]Screen Space Ambient Occlusion: HBA0+
      [*]Medium Distance Ambient Occlusion: ON
      [*]Subsurface Scattering: On
      [*]Depth Prepass: On

       

      Anti-aliasing Options
      [*]Post Process Anti-Aliasing: Off (Redundant at such a high rendering resolution and native resolution)
      [*]Supersampling: 2X

       

      Shadow Preload
      [*]Shader Preload: On

       

      Miscellaneous Options
      [*]Bullet Impacts: Yes
      [*]Dynamic Light Limit: 8

       

       

      Previous Crossfire Test Results with the 15.7.1 Catalyst Drivers

      Minimum Syncronous Gpu Utilization: 31% Per Gpu
      Average Syncronous Gpu Utilization: 35.5% Per Gpu
      Maximum Syncronous Gpu Utilization: 42% Per Gpu
      Minimum Frame Time: 31ms
      Average Frame Times: 135.73ms
      Maximum Frame Times: 300.23ms
      Frames Per Second Maintained Without Fluctuation During Tests @60 Fps: 47%

      GPU #1 - Maximum Temperature @ Maximum load: Data Insufficient due to improper Gpu Utilization

      GPU #2 - Maximum Temperature @ Maximum load: Data Insufficient due to improper Gpu Utilization

       

      Current Crossfire Test Results using the 15.8 Beta Drivers

      Minimum Syncronous Gpu Utilization: 71% Per Gpu
      Average Syncronous Gpu Utilization: 79% Per Gpu
      Maximum Syncronous Gpu Utilization: 87% Per Gpu
      Minimum Frame Time: 16ms
      Average Frame Times: 24.5ms
      Maximum Frame Times: 31ms
      Frames Per Second Maintained Without Fluctuation During Tests @60 Fps: 100%

      GPU #1 - Maximum Temperature @ Maximum load: 86 degrees Celsius

      GPU #2 - Maximum Temperature @ Maximum Load: 71 degrees Celsius

       

      Note: TjMax for the R9 290 is 94 degrees Celsius, thus the above results never encroached even close to it's peak safe operating temperatures....Quite Impressive.

       

      Miscellenious Results:

      [*]I recieved no errors during the tests over a four hour period (Crashes, Driver errors etc).

      [*]CrossfireX rendering times are vastly improved.

      [*]No micro stutter was present whatsoever during the tests which is always welcome for multi-gpu users.

       

      Closing Thoughts

      As you can see from the data, the 15.8 beta drivers were an immense success in regards to Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare and there's simply not a bad thing to say. Utilization was far greater than I expected, along with stability as well. The AMD™ team seriously deserves a standing ovation for their work, because they have successfully provided the AMD™ customers a 100% fully functioning driver for CrossfireX utilization within a Call of Duty title. This hasn't occurred in years on either the AMD™ CrossfireX side, nor for Nvidia's SLI customers.

       

      As Nvidia's SLI support worsens as time goes on, the AMD™ team simply keeps progressing in incredibly positive directions, showing their superior multi-gpu support at every turn. Although, there have been many previous success stories in regards to AMD™ providing stellar multi-gpu support with positive scaling, this success is of a different kind. Although the Call of Duty series may not be the most graphically demanding title on the market, it has been one the most requested titles for multi-gpu support that properly functions and scales well, yet has eluded both AMD™ CrossfireX and Nvidia SLI customers alike for nearly a decade. That day has finally some!

       

      To put it into Call of Duty terms....the team at AMD™  just called in their Advanced Warfare Paladin Gunship killstreak for the win! With Black Ops 3 on the near horizon, it looks as though AMD™ is possibly prepared for it's November 6th launch with full CrossfireX support on day one and I'll take 4k with 2x Supersampling CrossfireX support any day over paid early access exclusives that Sony is bringing to the table..

       

      Thank you for your hard work! As a huge Call of Duty fan (Don't judge me ), this one brought a tear to my eye.

       

       

      I hope you found the data useful and somewhat interesting considering it's dry nature. Hopefully, this helps bring this to the attention of Call of Duty CrossfireX users in the AMD™ community. I thought my fellow nerds below specifically would find this data most useful and interesting, because we're exciting people like that! Always the life of the party as you can see, well..In our circles anyways!

       

      Anyways glad to be back and as always, have a nice day to all, be well!!

       

      amdmatt erin.maiorino backFireX64 ray_m crazycarl demonvesper theriaya kingfish j3ster727 mssexygeek jtrudeau goodplay

        • Re: Advanced Warfare - CrossfireX Now Functional W/AMD™ 15.8 Beta Drivers + Test Data
          theriaya

          That is awesome. I was having a lot of issues with my custom Skyrim on 15.7.1. Hopfully things are different with this beta. Maybe that is a oh please just work hope thing but it would be awesome haha. Seeing how much they improved for COD AW that is just beautiful!

          --

          Well that fools hope ended quicky! LOL

          • Re: Advanced Warfare - CrossfireX Now Functional W/AMD™ 15.8 Beta Drivers + Test Data
            backFireX64

            Really impressive results for a beta driver on Windows 10, regarding crossfirex scaling.

            What would also be interesting is to make similar comparisons on a driver level in Windows 7 & Windows 8.1, being more mature platforms to test with.

            I am saying this cause 15.7 and 15.7.1 (and all the display driver revisions till .1004 within the catalyst package) were the first ones that supported the new os, and as such, one would think that the tremendous boost in crossfirex performance seen between those 2 catalyst suites and the 15.8 beta is only natural for early driver versions that support a new os on its first cycle of life. If the same could be observed in w7/ w8.1 latest drivers, then this would be very interesting for things to follow indeed.

             

            Still, it is clearly evident that AMD does deliver, when deciding to put some effort into crossfirex support, but for me personally, it would take more games to impress me. And preferably earlier on. That is another discussion though, since game devs do not optimize their games for multi-gpu setups anymore. Heck, most games nowadays are not optimized on PC at all on day1, or even after several game patches, so, to be fair, crossfirex and sli users do not get a smooth ride until the game is optimized first. And that is not AMD's or NVIDIA's fault to a good extent. We did get that useful CAP profiles in the past though, so i would still like to see some earlier efforts on the driver software alone, and not wait too long.

            Hopefully, DX12 would help change things for the better, but high-end gpus like the Radeon R9 Fury X or the GeForce GTX 980 Ti are so powerful single-gpu adapters, with plenty of vram, that can spare you the pain of micro-stuttering (among other issues) and the painful wait for multi-gpu scaling optimizations, and thus leave you wondering why investing on a crossfirex setup in the first place.

            The next gpu generation from AMD and Nvidia are expected/ rumored  to introduce very powerful single-gpu cards with >4 Gb video memory HBM 2nd gen. to drive ~60fps 4K gaming on ultra gfx settings, so it is probably not the most ideal period in time to talk about or consider multi-gpu, at least for hardcore gamers and enthusiasts that want the best of the best. The mid and lower end gpu cards will still gain the most of a crossfirex setup, so giving it a second thought, it is not that it is becoming an obsolete hardware/ software technology or anything. I guess the price range, TDP and thermals inside a PC case are factors that determine one's final decision, so we'll see...

             

            Anyway, I am considering doing a quick check on how quadfire performs now on Windows 10 (previously a no-go), but my hardware is not very representative and it is too old by now for safe conclusions. Still, you got me intrigued.

             

            Finally, i want to say, as a fellow AMD user, that it is very nice to see fellow users like you savagebeastzero , taking the time and making the effort to give some good and precise feedback on the things that matters the to all us AMD users, which is mostly GAMES, and doing a pretty nice job while at it. Thanks for the info mate.

            • Re: Advanced Warfare - CrossfireX Now Functional W/AMD™ 15.8 Beta Drivers + Test Data
              backFireX64

              Just checked 4-way crossfirex on 2 HD5970 adapters and the system hanged and reseted. Still no-go.


              Crossfirex is still working really good on 2-way crossfirex, seeing as much as 99% gpu usage without vsync and frames from 65-170 fps (max fps i saw was ~205-220 looking at the floor ), depending on what is rendered.

               

              With vsync on, i got stable 60fps, unless the frame buffer exceeded the 1gb limitation of my hardware.

               

              I noticed minor microstuttering, until i enabled the 60fps frame limiter of msi afterburner (frame pacing=off at all times; i just don't like it)

               

              Used:

              1080p 60Hz

              Texture Options -> all at "high"

              SMAA=on, supersampling=off

              Shadows=high (both 4gb options were off)

              Post Process Options -> all enabled, HBAO+

              Dynamic Lights=8

               

              Driver used: 15.8 beta (too lazy to test on previous as well )

              O.S. -> Windows 10 64bit, up to date (installed on SSD - SATA3 connection)

              CPU - > i7 975 at ~4,00 Ghz (8-threads)

              12 Gb DDR3 RAM at ~1600 Mhz (7-7-7-20 basic timings)

              2 x HD5970 overclocked (and overvolted) at 940 Mhz / 1000 Mhz ,stable

              Game installed on WD black HDD (7200 rpm/ 100% health/ no fragmentation) - SATA2 connection

               

              All options are tailored for best visual fidelity and performance, and, most important of all, ~90% of the time within the 1 Gb vram limitation of my cards. Tested on main single player campaign.

               

              All in all, good performance and smooth gameplay. Nothing like "Ghosts", that's for sure !!!