bavor

GloR1ouS_
I honestly don't know how you say capframex is unreliable.

 
Its rather obvious that you didn't bother reading before replying or you are just trolling at this point.  I'm not sure what it is. 
 
Its your methods that are inaccurate, inconsistent, and unreliable.  There are too many external variables that can have an effect on your results.  Instead of addressing those variables, you keep trying to defend your inaccurate, inconsistent, and unreliable results.
 

GloR1ouS_
You could have the exact same hardware as 20 people and all have variations on a specific game engine. Capframex is an amazing software for testing ones own system. For anyone confused by how bad driver variation is I incourage you to download the software and run tests in games on your system. High density ram could tank your fps to an unsuspecting person. This has been proven by multiple tech channels. You could bench incredibly in a synthetic bench but get way less performance in a game without even knowing it. The knowledge is out there, it's whether people care to actually go in depth and care about system latency and maximizing their expensive hardware.

 
You really aren't comprehending the issue with your claims.  Your methods are not reliable and consistent enough to make those claims.  
 

GloR1ouS_
Gamers nexus did an amazing video on 0.1% lows and 1% lows and how they effect your actual average fps. You could be getting 600 fps (lowers latency) but if your 0.1% was say 100 fps, you would get noticeable stutters destroying any latency advantage you obtained by buying "the best of the best" I myself am a competitive gamer and want every edge I can get vs these absolute cracked out players that exist in every game these days from gaming growing over the years.

 
Thanks for repeating common knowledge.
 

GloR1ouS_
Im not sitting here like some kind of mad scientist writing numbers down on a spreadsheet. I simply try a new driver and see how it performs. Its not rocket science to capframex and see my 0.1% lows tanked or 1% tanked. I could feel a stutter in the game and wanted to see what was going on. 150 fps on a 0.1% vs 210-220 is just common sense. I'm not reading into it too hard, I was simply putting it out there for people that this actually exists. Do, don't, it doesnt matter to me.

The whole issue is your methods, which I said before.  They are inaccurate, unreliable, and inconsistent.  You are blaming driver versions when you didn't eliminate the other variables.

GloR1ouS_

As for people who are wondering what the methodology is, its very simple. CapFrameX uses rivatuner statistics and captures your 0.1% low and 1% low and average fps. These actually matter on the grand scale of things and input lag at its finest. Youd be amazed how 1 driver difference can tank these numbers.

kevinc313

GloR1ouS_

As for people who are wondering what the methodology is, its very simple. CapFrameX uses rivatuner statistics and captures your 0.1% low and 1% low and average fps. These actually matter on the grand scale of things and input lag at its finest. Youd be amazed how 1 driver difference can tank these numbers.

I watched the video.  While I don't doubt the ability of CapFrameX to record frame rate, the video shows him manually running through a creative test course, so I have to question how repeatable the test material is. 

kevinc313

GloR1ouS_

kevinc313

GloR1ouS_

As for people who are wondering what the methodology is, its very simple. CapFrameX uses rivatuner statistics and captures your 0.1% low and 1% low and average fps. These actually matter on the grand scale of things and input lag at its finest. Youd be amazed how 1 driver difference can tank these numbers.

I watched the video.  While I don't doubt the ability of CapFrameX to record frame rate, the video shows him manually running through a creative test course, so I have to question how repeatable the test material is. 

Its an endless loop of the same sprites on the same map every time. Its a benchmark map designed to stress your gpu. There will always be some variation but if it consistently hits a very close number thats fine. When you swap drivers and theres a huge variance thats how you can single out a problem. I consistently hit 150-160fps on 0.1% on 471.61 and 210-220 on 472.12

Sorry man, I'm with Bavor on this one.  Everything you're doing is too inconsistent to conclusively sus out that the driver is causing lower single digit percentage variations.  Sure, if there's large variation due to a major driver defect what you're doing will pick it up, but beyond that no.

GloR1ouS_
 
Basically a 3070 was outperforming my 3080 TI on the 3070's "golden driver" which was not a good driver for the 3080 TI. It's why its so key to actually use a program as good as CapFrameX. Honestly this program has helped me so much in optimizing my games its not even funny.
 
As a side note, W11 is great but its a real pain. Its an actual task to completely remove gamebar and "gamebar presence writer". I'd say W10 21H1 is just overall a superior gaming experience.

GloR1ouS_
Do me a favor and test fortnite. I have tested Apex with damn near identical results across the board along with r6 siege. The games I have heard of with big differences are usually COD and Fortnite.

kevinc313
So OP, if a game has a built in benchmark, do you think that's worth testing with vs. a simulation of gameplay?

GloR1ouS_

Sajin
Try 4K see what you get. I doubt 4k is making things more consistent, but I could be wrong.

I made a mistake the top two DX12 were done on low not epic. Also it seems like 4K is a lot more consistent where as uncapped high fps seems to throw things for a loop a bit. This driver feels very stable on FN though on comp settings.