Single-GPU CPU Frame Latency - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 7 Old 02-12-2013, 08:07 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
macks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 31
I found the commentary posted after this article interesting. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-processor-frame-rate-performance,3427-9.html

This response is by Cleeve who is the Author. I think.


ingtar33 :

so... the amd chips test as good as the intel chips (sometimes better) in your latency test, yet your conclusion is yet again based on average FPS?what is the point of running the latency tests if you're not going to use it in your conclusion?




We absolutely did take latency into account in our conclusion.
I think the problem is that you totally misunderstand the point of measuring latency, and the impact of the results. Please read page 2, and the commentary next to the charts.

To summarize, latency is only relevant if it's significant enough to notice. If it's not significant (and really, it wasn't in any of the tests we took except maybe in some dual-core examples), then, obviously, the frame rate is the relevant measurement.

*IF* the latency *WAS* horrible, say, with a high-FPS CPU, then in that case latency would be taken into account in the recommendations. But the latencies were very small, and so they don't really factor in much. Any CPUs that could handle at least four threads did great, the latencies are so imperceptible that they don't matter.
macks is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 7 Old 02-12-2013, 10:27 AM
 
darklordjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Go read the article again. Look at their fps charts. They weren't hitting anything close to a reliable 60fps in the first place. If the fps is bouncing around all over from 20-60fps, then of course they aren't going to notice latency. Throughout their entire article there is already a far more serious frame rate issue in play that vastly overshadows the issue of latency.

Latency matters when you are reliably hitting 60fps. Then you've got long frames jumping in to interrupt your smooth motion, which again, is noticeable and disrupting to the experience.

In short, Toms Hardware does exactly what Toms Hardware has been known for for the last decade: A half-ass job with unreliable conclusions.
darklordjames is offline  
post #3 of 7 Old 02-12-2013, 02:58 PM
 
darklordjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Ooh! I've got the analogy:

Looking for frame latency inside of a wildly fluctuating 20-60fps render is like looking for a spec of dust on the lens of a noisy, low-light photo. The image is so noisy that the extra 1% of noise from the dust isn't enough to be noticeable. That same spec of dust on the lens of a well-lit photo that is sharp and noise-free? Blindingly obvious and it destroys the image. A dropped frame in a sea of dropped frames? Impossible to find. A dropped frame in an otherwise stable render? Again, blindingly obvious as it disrupts the illusion of smooth motion.

macks, I understand that you are trying to draw a narrative where frame latency doesn't matter. We've also discussed what your system is currently running. In effect, you are looking at that noisy, low-light photo and repeatedly declaring that because you can't find the dust in that image it is therefore impossible for anybody to find dust on the lens in any image ever. It's speaking from a place of ignorance. Being ignorant on a subject is fine, especially if it isn't willful. Pushing that ignorant view as fact though? No, that is not okay.

Tom's Hardware got this one wrong by missing the obvious. Finding incorrect views that match your own is not how we learn.
darklordjames is offline  
post #4 of 7 Old 02-12-2013, 03:03 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
macks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Didn't know I posted a point of view when I posted this. Guess I need to re-read my post.

Edit: The 1100t looked good.
macks is offline  
post #5 of 7 Old 02-12-2013, 03:15 PM
 
darklordjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 93
There is no mention of any CPU in your post. The entire content of your post is a re-post of what some nub over at Toms thought. It sure looks to be mirroring what you've been repeatedly telling us around here about how frame latency doesn't matter.

You'll also notice that that 1100T hangs out right around the Phenom II X4 in all of the graphs, whether it's the almost useless FPS graph, or the poorly constructed Latency graph. Again, it would not be a worthwhile upgrade over your Phenom II X4.

Also too, you'll notice that for their frame latency graphs they cut off at the 95% mark. In effect they are saying "It's perfectly okay to drop 3 frames every single second". Three frames in a row is 1/20th of a second, which is very obvious judder. Three frames spread out is more manageable, but not ideal. Really, you want to drop less than a frame a second. 95% is a bad place to make the cut-off. You'll notice that Tom's competition makes the cut-off at 99%. You'll also notice that the vast majority of difference between CPUs shows up in that last 4%. This is a bad article, through and through.
darklordjames is offline  
post #6 of 7 Old 02-12-2013, 03:26 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
macks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 31
I edited my post, btw.

At the beginning of the article they mention that in dual-graphics cards situations frame latency is much more important. Maybe I'm paraphrasing too much.

You are an angry angry little man.
macks is offline  
post #7 of 7 Old 02-12-2013, 11:21 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DaGamePimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WA State
Posts: 15,496
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by macks View Post


You are an angry angry little man

Indeed dlj is jaded on just about every single post/topic and constantly tells everyone just how wrong they are, don't take it personal, he just spends far too much time reading wiki.

We have to take it easy on him though, imagine how complicated life must be having the IQ of Stephen Hawking and knowing everything about everything. eek.gif

wink.gif
Jason
DaGamePimp is online now  
Reply HTPC Gaming

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off