Brink: ATI Performance Review


(shiney_face) #1

I spent some time tonight trying to get to the bottom of the frame rate issues that Brink suffers from. The most frustrating thing is that the performance is fine 70% of the time but as soon as you go outdoors it seems to plummet. Here are my findings.

Experiments 1 and 2 are performed at an outdoor location where the frame rate always drops below 60 FPS for me. There are many other such locations. Experiment 3 is performed at various locations that have satisfactory performance.

Hardware Used:
CPU: AMD 1090t @ various speeds
RAM: 8 GB, 2000 MHz
GPU: HD6970 x 2
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64
Drivers: 11.6
CAP: 11.6_cap1_june15
Resolution: 1920x1080

Experiment 1, r_shadows:
Performance is tested at lowest possible settings and compared to results at high settings. Both settings are tested with r_shadows turned off and on.

Brink-A

detail = high

crossfire = on

CPU = 3.25 GHz

seta image_anisotropy “8”
seta r_useAntiAliasing “1”
seta r_multiSamples “4”
seta r_shadows “0”
FPS = 48

Brink-B

detail = high

crossfire = on

CPU = 3.25 GHz

seta image_anisotropy “8”
seta r_useAntiAliasing “1”
seta r_multiSamples “4”
seta r_shadows “1”
FPS = 33

Brink-C

detail = low

crossfire = on

CPU = 3.25 GHz

seta image_anisotropy “1”
seta r_useAntiAliasing “0”
seta r_multiSamples “4”
seta r_shadows “0”
FPS = 49

Brink-D

detail = low

crossfire = on

CPU = 3.25 GHz

seta image_anisotropy “1”
seta r_useAntiAliasing “0”
seta r_multiSamples “4”
seta r_shadows “1”
FPS = 36

The minimum frame rate doesn’t depend much at all on texture detail, anti aliasing or anisotropic filtering. This indicated the performance is not GPU bound. Regardless of other settings, turning shadows off results in around 15 FPS gain.

Experiment 2, overclocking:
Performance is tested using the same settings but overclosking the CPU. All trials have;

detail = high

crossfire = on

seta image_anisotropy “8”
seta r_useAntiAliasing “1”
seta r_multiSamples “4”
seta r_shadows “0”

Brink-A-2.5GHz

CPU = 2.5 GHz

FPS = 44

Brink-A

CPU = 3.25 GHz

FPS = 48

Brink-A-3.75GHz

CPU = 3.75 GHz

FPS = 58

Overclocking the CPU increases the minimum FPS significantly. This indicates that the performance is limited by the CPU speed rather than GPU. The results from experiment 1 support this since the minimum FPS did not depend significantly on detail settings, anisotropic filtering or anti aliasing.

It would seem that a CPU frequency higher that 3.8 GHz is required in order to prevent the game from dipping below 60 fps with shadows turned off. An even higher frequency would be required with shadows turned on.

Experiment 3, crossfire:
Performance is tested with crossfire turned on and off at various locations. All runs have,

detail = high

CPU = 3.25 GHz

seta image_anisotropy “8”
seta r_useAntiAliasing “1”
seta r_multiSamples “4”
seta r_shadows “0”

Brink-E

crossfire = on

FPS = 94

Brink-F

crossfire = off

FPS = 116

Brink-G

crossfire = on

FPS = 101

Brink-H

crossfire = off

FPS = 106

Brink-I

crossfire = on

FPS = 119

Brink-J

crossfire = off

FPS = 122

These results are extremely disappointing. Crossfire has a negative impact on performance. The performance hit is usually negligible however there are locations where the performance drops up to 20% using crossfire. You are better off turning crossfire off for this game. I have also noticed that framerate is more variable with crossfire turned on.

Test locations:
These screenshots are taken looking directly at the floor at all test locations so that others may replicate the results if they desire.
Brink-posABCD
Brink-posEF
Brink-posGH
Brink-posIJ

All screenshots:
This is an album of all the screenshots.
All-Results

Summary:
-> Even with latest drivers there are numerous locations (mostly outdoors) with unacceptable frame rates.
-> Performance at these low FPS locations is severely CPU bound, overclock to over 3.8 GHz if at all possible.
-> seta r_shadows “0” will raise your minimum FPS by around 15 including at problem locations.
-> Crossfire scaling is still negative.
-> This is all very disappointing.


(esomonk) #2

This is just a guess but I’m thinking is that ATI users are having some effects rendered by the CPU as opposed to Nvidia in which the effects are rendered by the GPU. If someone ran some test similiar to these with nvidia we could figure it out. This also would explain the hard ceiling ATI users experience. I can change all sorts of texture, resolutions and anti aliasing but on some areas of sec tower the framerates never change from 27 fps. I simply cant raise the framerate when looking at an open area. This would indicate it being CPU bound.


(Makino) #3

So the conclusion is: 5GHZ+ CPU to play with shadows and with nothing moving… LOL


(Affe_mit_Waffe) #4

someone has tested how much load the GPU has while playing brink?

i have 280 fps in the menue at 99% load

but when im “ingame” on some map my GPU load never gets over 50%
and i have 20 - 80 fps

if this happens for all ati cards that would explain ati cards suck that bad for brink at the moment


(Mustang) #5

Hardly, I’m running at only 4GHz (which has been available at a reasonable price for 3 years now) and get a constant 120fps with shadows on, ambient occlusion off and 90fps with shadows on, ambient occlusion on
Might be moot as I am running nVidia, but just for comparisons sake is worth a mention


(Je T´aime) #6

Unfortenely you prooved what i suspected, that brink running with crossfire have less fps compared to just 1 graphic card : <

I have ati 5770 crossfire and i have less 5 to 10 fps average if i use the crossfire .\ so the ati patch for brink to run with crossfire is kinda fail if one graphic card alone gives more perfomance then 2 graphic cards in corssfire oO


(Smoochy) #7

SD need to knock heads with ATI and give us some feedback. either way its annoying. whatever i do i cant get this game to play with decent FPS AT ALL TIMES. sure, i can get upto 120 but thats irrelevant when sometimes it crawls around the 20fps mark.


(Smoochy) #8

[QUOTE=Mustang;341951]Hardly, I’m running at only 4GHz (which has been available at a reasonable price for 3 years now) and get a constant 120fps with shadows on, ambient occlusion off and 90fps with shadows on, ambient occlusion on
Might be moot as I am running nVidia, but just for comparisons sake is worth a mention[/QUOTE]

the best processors you can buy are less than 3.5Ghz but i guess you mean overclock too.

i think the main thing you mentioned about performance was the nvidia!


(Qbix) #9

finally some confirmation of my claim