Do AMD's Radeon HD 7000s Trade Image Quality For Performance?

[jaquith]

With a pre-release version of the fixed driver in hand, we went on to see if AMD's solution solved our problem without negatively impacting anything else.

As a tech journalist, it’s somewhat gratifying to identify a problem and then work with a vendor to get it fixed, and Tom’s Hardware has a rich history of this kind of investigative journalism.

Some of you guys need to read a little more than the captions and read the purpose here.

Be thankful Tom's Hardware and others actually took the time to identify a problem and have it solved for -- YOU!!!

I've used both (ATI) AMD, and nVidia I have a list of loves and hates myself. The responses here are unfounded and reminiscent of an 'Apple haters' article.

 

[daglesj]

[citation][nom]Ilander[/nom]Thank you, Don for checking on this. The only way we ever have truly accurate comparisons of GPUs is through scientific testing based upon controlled testing scenarios, and that means anything that affects IQ is to be dealt with with utmost of seriousness. While some may see this as nVidia-bias (it's not), I thank you all for your hard work. Toms' is a great resource for us all and keep up the good work.[/citation]

Wow, like so serious? Did people actually die over this? Outrage! Outrage! Etc. etc.

Hilarious.

 

[trumpeter1994]

If they really are sacrificing image quality for performance and they're still getting beat out in most games by the cheaper 680, then they better be seriously planning a price drop and hope that Nvidia continues to have availability issues.....

 

[Ilander]

Wow, like so serious? Did people actually die over this? Outrage! Outrage! Etc. etc.

Hilarious.

At least 100,000,000 people are killed every minute by bad image quality. Haven't you ever heard of Africa?

I jest, but the tech world needs scientific rationalism, otherwise we're just making things prettier without actually improving anything. This is the feedback system. If one of us at home noticed a problem like this, the driver team might respond, but if Tom's publishes it, the will/i].

 

[cknobman]

I love the article but hate the misleading sensationalist title.

 

[SuperVeloce]

[citation][nom]itsmekirill[/nom]I think the title of this article is a bit sensational.That being said, I fail to see the cause of the outrage. If Tom's didn't point this out to AMD, would anyone? Would it ever be fixed?It's not a big difference in quality. Neither is the difference between $5.00 and $4.99. But if you take away one cent at a time, each step is hardly noticeable and before long you're left with jack shit. So while I agree that the headline and sometimes the tone of this article smell like yellow journalism, the point about quality is entirely valid.[/citation]

could not agree more! There is no reason for a single person to defend any capitalist company, regardless of product or profits they make.

 

[catatafish]

1) I can't even tell the difference in how blurry each are. Just some changes between images due to not snapping the shot at the exact same moment, or creek water changing. In fact, some of the so called blurry ones look better.
2) For all the nerd raging about Tom's being biased......then why are the majority of the monthly review cards AMD by a margin of 2-1? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107.html
3) The reason writers write about stuff like this is because its what people want. Every other post in Tom's is about "what card should I get" and gamers worrying that their friend might tell them their card sucks because "you don't have enough shaders" or "oh that series suxorz because they are blurrier".

Stop nerd raging and epeening so much about video cards and pointless articles like this will stop.

 

[MMO Fan]

[citation][nom]catatafish[/nom]1) I can't even tell the difference in how blurry each are. Just some changes between images due to not snapping the shot at the exact same moment, or creek water changing. In fact, some of the so called blurry ones look better.2) For all the nerd raging about Tom's being biased......then why are the majority of the monthly review cards AMD by a margin of 2-1? http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] ,3107.html3) The reason writers write about stuff like this is because its what people want. Every other post in Tom's is about "what card should I get" and gamers worrying that their friend might tell them their card sucks because "you don't have enough shaders" or "oh that series suxorz because they are blurrier".Stop nerd raging and epeening so much about video cards and pointless articles like this will stop.[/citation]
Is it not obvious to you that most of the readers do not want to read a pompas article against AMD or Intel/Nvidia when it is about nothing and ends in a moot. Don's write up has no tangible point so you can see how it looks like AMD bashing by way of the title. How about an articul between the IQ of GTX 580 and HD 6970 again nobody cares cause they are both great when it all comes out in the wash in real time gaming we will not see a darn bit of difference.

 

[lowenz]

Excellent article. You can be proud of it.

 

[cookoy]

That's why i stick with Tom's and another tech site because of these types of in-depth investigative reviews. Most other sites just do surface tests and publish the numbers.

 

[ET3D]

Well done Tom's Hardware. Thanks to you image quality is a little better.

 

[grody]

This is a noteworthy point of discussion. There was an incident several years ago in which nVidia claimed, with substantial evidence, that AMD was only able to match them in FPS by offering inferior video quality (Google "FP16 Demotion").

And hey, by doing an article, AMD responded with a better driver. And anything to force AMD to update their drivers is extremely appreciated (I own two of their cards).

 

[catatafish]

readers do not want to read a pompas article against AMD or Intel/Nvidia when it is about nothing and ends in a moot. Don's write up has no tangible point.

Yeah, totally agree with that.

 

[jabliese]

OK, boys and girls, it is hand holding time. Step by step, here is why you should care.

1) AMD did not catch this. For months, AMD did not catch this. Even after Tom's and others mentioned quality difference in reviews, AMD did nothing to fix this. Finally, it took a big chunk of one person's time to lay things out indisputably to get AMD to look at this. Does this not sound like a company with a problem?
1a) Most companies who are interested in working WITH people will consider communication a 2 way street. As in, Tom's tells AMD, "We have these interesting results here." AMD SHOULD say, "Hmm, give us some time to take a look, and we will get back to you." NOT leave you hanging, wondering if your comment ever got noticed. Does this not sound like a company with a problem?
1b) Aside from the video card industries dodgy history with benchmarks and quality, AMD AND ONLY AMD, had a huge 2D rendering problem a few years back. Many, many users, including the Linux community, caught this and tried to contact AMD about it. Not until Tom's did the research and posted the numbers did AMD truly get involved and realize they made a huge mistake. Still thinking AMD does not have a problem?

Opinion, feel free to skip. Seems to me AMD has inherited and perpetuated ATI's lack of response to the community. And if Tom's is as pro nVidia as some of you seem to think, why would AMD even care what Tom's writes?

2) AMD screws up, and most of the posters are all "Meh, stop the AMD bashing." If nothing else, AMD quality control needs some help! In your defense, you are absolutely right, the texture difference is very small. But, don't you think AMD should have processes in place to catch even small problems as this? And don't you think the fact their current processes missed this problem is cause for concern?

Honestly, if you truly do not care that Tom's did the research and put together an article that directly resulted in a driver update, especially when AMD was not responding to any other input on the subject, go somewhere else. This site is not for you.

 

[-Fran-]

Good finding Mr. Don!

Like the bottom of this, but I don't like the way you pointed things out in some parts of the article. Seems a little "bash AMD" focused.

The title could use a little less hating as well.

Cheers!

 

[rantoc]

Its not unusual that image quality suffers to provide performance boosts, good article. Proves who cares more about img quality over performance. Ohh and the quality winner also provide the best performance for a cheaper price with the 680gtx. I would call that a field day, bought two and have em in sli. Got tiered of the 7970's small issues here and there with the Amd drivers. I hope they improve and Amd will have a very nice contender, the hardware is really nice but the driver support for new releases are lagging!

 

[rantoc]

[citation][nom]Yuka[/nom]Good finding Mr. Don!Like the bottom of this, but I don't like the way you pointed things out in some parts of the article. Seems a little "bash AMD" focused.The title could use a little less hating as well.Cheers![/citation]

How is that title bashing, its a question in a fair tone and it was then answered. Not like "AMD are proven to cheat" or anything, just a fair question!

 

[bigman8291]

I am running BF3 right now on an HD 6970 and my little bros comp is in the same room running BF3 on a 7850. There is no difference visually whatsoever and barely any diff in frames.

 

[sp0nger]

Not suprised knowning AMD probably knew kepler was much better anyway

I laugh that team red is up in arms and yet if this was an article about nvidia they would be ready to burn nvidia down

 

[OntarioHero]

To me, the differences are subtle enough for me to think that it's not loss in detail, but rather softening due to different filtering algorithm. If that's the case, it's may in fact have been a conscious decision to reduce aliasing in texture sampling and people are misconstruing as some sort of cheating going on in the drivers (think back to when AA was first introduced in games and how many people were complaining that everything was blurry, or when mipmaps were introduced and people thought they were losing detail even though it was in place to reduce aliasing/moire/shimmering).

Of course if that were true, they would defend their decision rather than to crumble under community pressure to revert to the old algorithm.

 

[ern88]

I think this is a really good article to be honest. It's called investigative journislism. I just hope that the did the same comparision with the Nvidia GTX 680. I think that a well informed consumer is a smart consumer. Would you buy a new car that had paint runs in it. I bet you wouldn't. I am glad the Tom's informed AMD and AMD acknowledged it and have implemented a easy driver fix. I like to play my games with detail. You may not notice it. But does that mean it's OK to reduce quality for speed??? NOPE. And I currently own a HD 5850. So, don't call me a Nvidia fan boy, cuz I am not. Great article.

 

[pacioli]

[citation][nom]Ilander[/nom]At least 100,000,000 people are killed every minute by bad image quality. Haven't you ever heard of Africa?I jest[/citation]

In Africa there are people still gaming on Geforce 4 cards... That is not funny...

 

[oxiide]

[citation][nom]therabiddeer[/nom]Is it just me or is toms heavily biased towards nvidia? We see tons of articles for the Nvidia 6xx but very few for the 7xxx. Nothing negative for nvidia, but an article like this for AMD's, which is already being fixed even though it is undetectable... and the fix doesnt even yield a real change in framerates.[/citation]
"Hey AMD, we found a problem with your driver. Oh, you're letting us test a fix and it does what its supposed to? We'll be glad to tell our readers, thanks." Yeah, sounds real biased to me.

I'm not sure why you want to drag Nvidia into an investigative article that has nothing to do with Nvidia. If there's a legitimate reason to believe the GTX 680 might be tuning down image quality to inflate benchmarks, I want to see that article too. But its a separate issue.

 

[maxinexus]

The performance differences are so minor that it really doesn't matter until you start taking screen shots otherwise this is not noticeable in a game play.

 

[cmi86]

Theres "seemingly no difference" between pictarin release drivers and 12.2 ? Are you kidding me the images are far more crisp and detailed with 12.2. I think this reviewer may suffer from selective blindness..