The ACC GPU Benchmark Thread

Yeah...if GPU % drops than it might be CPU after all.

Anyways, here's some advice on using Vegas:

- You should absolutely undervolt it by ~100 mV. Wattman or Afterburner will allow you to do so. It will reduce power consumption and give you a FPS boost.
- You can give it a slight OC, as well. I increased the core clock in Afterburner from 1630 MHz to 1650 MHz. If you overdo it, you will get the "d3d device hung" CTD in ACC.
- Wattman should be used with care. I had it act strangely a lot so I made a fresh install and never used Wattman anymore. I prefer and recommend Afterburner. It does the same in the end and much more reliably so.
- Setting filtering quality in Radeon Settings to "performance" will give you a nice FPS boost with very little degradation of the image quality.

 

Hi there, nice thread.
Im running an AMD build myself, with a Powercolor Vega 56 Red dragon, OCed with Afterburner to about 1680 Core 945 Memory.
I had 2 questions regarding the difference in performance in ACC:
Has anybody with an Vega 56 Bios flashed to a Vega64 and Undervolted / Mem Oced (1100?) it with the normal 50 powerlimit? Or with Power registry edits ? If yes, then what was the performance difference between those?
Im very interested in this if it has any tangible effect on FPS / frametimes.
Thanks in advance.

 

Thanks, but stuff like that isn't really a big concern for me.
I'm happy with the performance for the moment, since the rest of the system just plain sucks (compared to today's standards).
Once that's fixed, I might look at overclocking, but even then I'm not sure if there is much of a point to it.
Also won't switch to Navi for the time being, I'll wait for the next-gen high-performance cards by AMD that are supposed to come out next year iirc.
For me, Nvidia was never an option, since I want to switch to Linux and AMD in contrast to Nvidia does almost everything open source now, which is just so much less pain in the ***.

Regarding undervolting: also not a big deal for me. That PC is for gaming only and it's running only if I'm driving (or maybe am playing some other game).
I've got a dedicated desktop that's much more energy-efficient anyway, so not concerned about the power usage.
Noise maybe, but I don't notice the fan when I'm driving, so whatever.

 

Yes, switching from Vega to Navi probably won't be sensible.

Although the reviews I've seen Navi is doing rather well in games where Vega and Polaris were falling quite far behind Nvidia, so I'm curious how Navi will perform in ACC since it seems to benefit Nvidia cards.

 

Yes, Navi is definitely a good addition and a real alternative for those that were held back by the drawbacks of Vega.

 

If my calculations/assumptions from another thread were right, Navi might be 37 % faster than Vega in ACC. That would make it an interesting upgrade for me. But if the next series comes out any time soon, waiting also makes sense.

 

Mate, I might have phrased all of this too complicated, so that it sounds like a huge deal of fiddling. I'll try again and then rest my case:

Undervolting your GPU is what pretty much every Vega owner does. There is zero risk to it (other than a GPU driver crash if you overdo it), it's a matter of a few clicks in either Afterburner or WattMan. It will gain you ~7 % FPS. 80 mV should work well on any Vega. I use 100 mV.

Setting the filtering from "quality" to "performance" in Radeon Settings is also just few clicks and will gain you another ~ 5 % FPS.

Those two very simple tweaks, I'm quite sure, will increase your AVG FPS in the benchmark from 59 to ~67. For free, without any risk. I don't know why someone would not want this.

 

Well, I gave the undervolting a try, no positive effect.
Keep in mind that I have a custom design card. These are usually better optimized than the reference design cards, so maybe there isn't as much to gain for me.
I guess we'll have to see how things change once I finally make that system upgrade.

I'll test the other stuff tomorrow, too late today already.

 

Ok, went through the options but the differences were pretty low. Morphologic Filtering gave me the biggest boost here.
Also profiled the CPU usage when running the benchmark. 3 out of 4 cores are at > 90% the whole time and one core was at around 80%.
So I think it's quite certain that a CPU upgrade would help a lot here.

Just have to decide whether it'll be the 8 core or the 12 core.

 

Yes, I agree that this sounds a lot like a CPU bottleneck...even in the GPU benchmark

 

Go with the flow!

 

Sooo, anyone planning on or already bought a 5700XT?? Please post your results if you have!

 

I am planning to buy a 5700XT but have to wait for a less noisy custom design. I'm afraid these will not be available before mid of August. Hate to wait.

 

Ok, nice. There seems to be a lot of room for overclocking so that's another reason to go for custom...Sapphire will possibly provide a top design, as usual.

So make sure to report your results here.

 

It will be interesting to see the Navi results
Btw @LeDude83 how you calculate that Navi will be 37% faster than Vega ? (i cant find the other thread)
This means 2070 level ? Bcs from what i see the results in unreal are not that impressive.

 

Are there a few users who tried the benchmark in 4k instead of FullHD?

 

Friends, do I need to buy a 2560x1440 monitor for ACC on the system:
Ryzen 2600x
GF 2070
RAM 16 GM 3200

I'm afraid it won't be enough fps... Except for the ACC, I don't play anything.

Now I have a DELL '24(1920x1080), but my eyes are getting tired of it and I want to change it to something else. I don't want a big resolution, just looking for a color monitor like my iMac 2016(1920x1080).

 

I think that you will have enough FPS with a 2560*1440 monitor. You could even buy a 3440*1440 Ultrawide. Go for it, even if it means that you have to reduce GFX settings a bit. Biggest problem with ACC image at the moment is aliasing and blur. A higher pixel density monitor will naturally improve this.

 

If you go ultrawide, go for the Samsung C49RG90 49" 5720×1440.

I'm still waiting for mine though.

 

Thank you, good news. I liked it HP 27 G2(2560x1440)and it has built-in speakers as an option (this is important because I can't afford separate ones due to lack of space on the table). I'll give up 4k for sure, because I'm, let's say, fps-user)