AMD confirms that AMD Radeon Anti-Lag It is able to interact with both the CPU and the GPU in a unified way, especially when the CPU is very limited, giving even more responsibility to the GPU's load and requirements.
While the details provided by AMD refer to the time it clicked until the game's reaction, all in a milliseconds, this upgrade should also be presented during graphics card operation and especially on the CPU, would it be as good as the paint? Is there a performance benefit?
AMD Radeon Anti-Lag: does it really work?
To test it we used our second test equipment, based on the following items:
- AMD Ryzen 3600X
- ASUS Strix X570-F Games
- ASUS RX 5700 8G
- Corsair Revenge Pro RGB 4 X 8 GB 3200 MHz Cas 16 (XMP on)
- Corsair AX860
- Corsair MP510 240 GB
- Corsair Crystal 570X
- Corsair Hydro X Series Full WC
- ASUS MG278Q
- AMD Radeon Adrenalin 2020 20.1.4
To see our test team decide to choose one of the games that support this technology as standard, Rise of the Tomb Raider
At the same time, we have worked in all cases FreeSync to ensure that interruption of possible delays, scratches or tremors was a minor factor in data collection. In addition, the standard AMD profile configuration is set without the image A closer look either Advanced Sync
Frame level
From a graphics card performance standpoint it shouldn't affect the performance or make this technology possible, but the fact is it shows little progress at some points if we don't use it. The average difference between the two shot shows a 0.92% (86.9 FPS vs. 87.7 FPS), minimum and minimum values are followed and we can only see that in some parts one setup achieves greater performance than the other and vice versa.
Although the standard rate is the same, it's amazing to know how the card behaves and how Anti-Lag affects its performance, but to see it better, it's important to turn off FrameTime.
Time frame
Keeping the AMD Radeon Anti-Lag disabled is not only perfect overall performance with very small percentages (within the range of any error, of course) but it also achieves better FrameTime in some way. The higher level of load retention in VRAM is much better, the change of shape is smooth and we generally see that performance is better by not letting it.
The problem is that when we look at the numbers we will see that they are the same and the difference is so small that it is impossible for a human eye to see it on the screen as more or less smooth without the points where milliseconds shoot.
CPU usage
0.1% and 1% LOW
Percentages 1% and 0.1% do not provide AMD, at least in this game, because although the FPS rate is one, in the first setting this difference goes to 3 FPS and then the second to 2 FPS So, overall performance decreases , small, but practical.
Comparing the Measurement Framework
Comparing FrameRate we clearly see that, even though we have a quick click on the idea, this doesn't match or compensate for the slight increase in speed and the variance FPS offers.
Obviously, data with Anti-Lag On is somehow worse than generated, where we also see that the difference is small.
FPS and the flexibility of flexibility
Overall observations in milliseconds indicate the differences between the two components. The SPF variance is small at OFF, and the starch generated.
We're talking about half a millisecond, but like AMD advertised for that 31% LAG, to enable Radeon Anti-Lag 12.73% more styling and 6.60% FPS variance.
Conclusion
Radeon Anti-Lag is a very promising technology for casual and hardcore gamers, including professionals. But the reality is that GPU performance and ease of use are increasing.
The problem is, though the difference is quite small, we have yet to see a difference in the maximum reduction of clicks. The answer is not a quick one, not to guarantee that, on average, we will have a 31% response time between what we do and what appears on the screen.
It is a very broad line to realize that this is possible, especially when it is possible when we have high FPS levels as seen on other occasions in the game.
Therefore we do not see the use of the Radeon Anti-Lag adjusted, especially when several types of drivers have passed and conditions are too good to compare: relative play, minimum external audience, perfectly stable temperature etc.
That said, you've seen the details and according to what we've tried a lot with this technology, it doesn't seem to be impactful and provocative enough, because the gaming experience is slowly increasing and CPU usage is high (32% vs 28%).
Having the worst performance and game experience in the GPU and high CPU usage, other than click-through improvements, we see no reason to keep the AMD Radeon Anti-Lag running.
Table of Contents
