This is an old machine. Specs:
CPU: Core2Duo e8600 @ 3.33 GHz stock
memory: DDR2 ADATA Vitesta @ 800 MHz stock
GPU (now): R9 280X, the Gigabyte Battlefield 4 edition with WindForce 3 cooling
The card seems to perform worse than my older, weaker cards, both from Gigabyte.
Trying to force nicer AA through Catalyst is not an option, even though it was doable with my previous HD 4850 to some extent. The HD 4850 also seemed to run the game faster, more easily than this new Radeon (though with an aftermarket cooler, as the stock one couldn't cope).
This card also gets hotter and has to run the fans at full speed very soon after launching the game — something that wasn't a problem with my old GeForce 460 with the older version of the same cooling (2 fans only), which was capable of pretty much always staying quiet.
According to tests, the same cooling manages to keep the GeForce 960 at like 23 dbA under load.
Is it possible that this beefy card somehow has poor DirectX 9 performance, despite being so massively well-specced? Or that can't work well with a less-than-current CPU?
The game I'm talking about is Crusader Kings 2, which runs in DirectX 9. It probably isn't particularly well optimized, but it's still a map-based strategic game, it shouldn't be taxing a modern card so hard (especially after how it was a walk in the park for the GTX 460).
AA mode: application
AA samples: application
AA method: multisampling
aniso mode: application
aniso level: application
texture filtering quality: high quality
surface format optimization: off
trible buffering off
tesselation: AMD optimized
max tesselation level: AMD optimized