Why 'Watch Dogs' Is Bad News For AMD Users -- And Potentially The Entire PC Gaming Ecosystem

[Stanners]

Hold on so we take AMD's word but we can not listen Nvidia. The depths never cease to amaze me. At the end of the day this thread is fail, AMD perform well compared to Nvidia. This thread just needs to die.

 

[llamadal]

Nvidia are the devil, didn't you know that

 

[LtMatt]

Hold on so we take AMD's word but we can not listen Nvidia. The depths never cease to amaze me. At the end of the day this thread is fail, AMD perform well compared to Nvidia. This thread just needs to die.

No, we listen to both and draw our own conclusions on the evidence presented over many GameWorks titles. Agree or disagree, your choice. If you don't like the thread, best ignore it.

 

[nashathedog]

So many tin foil hats being worn here but when someone says it runs like dog poo on nVidia cards, they completely ignore it because they want to see a problem where there isn't one.

Runs like poo on AMD? - Check
Runs like poo on nVidia? - check

nVidia purposefully crippling it on AMD? lol

Exactly, All I'm seeing is the sort of conspiracy theories that would make the UFO guy's proud, This thread is not being used objectively, It's become a hate thread with people ignoring some of the evidence that's provided when it conflicts with there "Your the bad guy's" theories, And before someone say's if you don't like it don't come on the thread the problem with that is if no-one at least tries to to be objective you'll end up sit here patting each other on the back congratulating each other on how you've proven your case.

 

[Martini1991]

AMD's driver made the gameworks effects run worse for me
I was driving, and it just stuttered constantly (Which it didn't before)

 

[nashathedog]

No, we listen to both and draw our own conclusions on the evidence presented over many GameWorks titles. Agree or disagree, your choice. If you don't like the thread, best ignore it.

So if people find the subject of interest but don't want to be subjected to biased unproven info acting like it's somehow related to or proven by the info in the original article maybe the thread shouldn't of used the original articles title or should have at least had "An AMD users perspective" added to it.

 

[Martini1991]

The Intel CPUs show a much smaller improvement,and Mantle makes the AMD CPUs far more competitive in the game now.

So, a bunch of GPU bottlenecked results, and then an FX83 using Mantle reaching parity with an i3 41XX using DX11 and getting beaten by it when it uses Mantle.

You couldn't have shown worse results.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

an extremly long post, with all facts wrong.
it's stands to reasons that i7 high end cpu sees the lowest benefit from Mantle, because the cpu on itself has very little bottleneck, and lower end cpu like i3 or even lower get higher perf boost just like FX APU and ****, same that FX4300 have better boost than FX8350.
so Mantle isnt for AMD CPU only, and it work's as good for intel too.

All your facts are wrong. Many of you don't seem to understand basic business at all,which is the problem and are so focussed on one area you cannot get your head out of the sand.

AMD sells BOTH CPUs and GPUs,and their large core CPU business is going down at at a larger pace than the rest of the company.

Look at the financial data over the last year FFS.

The AMD FX CPUs are not being updated for a while now as roadmaps stated they are current until at least next year,and at the APU level performance boosts are not massive on the desktop as AMD chases after improved performance/watt and better IGP performance in mobile.

Carrizo is aiming at a reduction in TDP from 95W to 65W for the desktop versions.

Which again you don't seem to understand.

Only a few engines are showing parity between Intel FX83** and FX63** CPUs ATM,but not many,because many are not massively multi-threaded.

Its going to take time for devs to move over to them,and its not going to happen instantly.

In many games AMD is not as competitive as it should be,or is starting to lose competitiveness.

I have been on forums since 2006,and people know me as fighting AMD sides whenever I can,but the facts are quite clear at least for the next 18 months.

It will take YEARS until they become common for everything,and ATM AMD needs to make sure their CPUs look competitive until the current core is replaced in 2016.

LOOK at the roadmaps.

You can deflect all you want from the benchmarks I posted,but Thief due to Mantle is now on par with Intel CPUs which cost more.

Its based on a engine with prioritises two threads which usually shows large advantages for Intel.

As others have pointed out to you, it's not about CPU directly, but indirectly and NOT about AMD cpu's, because it helps Intel cpu's JUST as much meaning a i3/i5 become as viable as AMD chips so it makes absolutely no difference.

You're also forgetting something, the entire games industry wanted a low level api and after Mantle finally MS went low level(I should say, is going), which Nvidia(who don't make desktop cpu's) is fully behind, which game dev's are still fully behind.

None of them care which cpu you buy or don't, it's about game making. Low level is better(for higher end game making). Look at the minimums and steadyness of Mantle frame rates when it's working (yes DX still gets fixes and new drivers to fix problems... expecting Mantle's alpha to be perfect is laughable for those who would bring it up).

When programming with complete transparency to the game dev they can quite literally decide how long just about each frame will take. Add this effect, that is going to take 2ms to finish, we are at 13ms and aiming for sub 16ms so can add that effect.

The issue with DX, and why frame rates are MUCH less smooth, is because the driver randomly chooses to do things when IT wants to, not when the engine tells it to. Game makers have wanted a low level api for many many many reasons and the majority of them are about making games better, smoother, for the game devs themselves, more predictable, easier to make smoother and better, easier to provide a better experience.

The games industry has for a LONG time said it's wanted a low level API and from their end it had nothing at all to do with whose CPU's would sell better as a result and as explained, it boosts Intel cpu's precisely as well as AMD cpu's, so is no net gain for AMD at all.

If AMD's £150 cpu couldn't compete with Intel's £250 cpu, and Mantle makes it, woo, but then Intel's £150 cpu will compete as well now, meaning AMD still has competition, the same competition.

AMD is business first not a charity - maybe you missed out what type of CEO Rory Read is. He is not an engineer,and any projects leftover will be there to help AMD's bottom end.

Plus your last statement,contradicts yourself.

If AMD is not competing with a £150 or £250 Intel CPU without Mantle,it means they lose a sale to Intel.

If they are now competing they have a chance at that sale.

Look at how many build guides on the internet,printed media and forums,recommend Intel outside of APUs. Things like Mantle and DX12 will mean AMD can compete far better.

So, a bunch of GPU bottlenecked results, and then an FX83 using Mantle reaching parity with an i3 41XX using DX11 and getting beaten by it when it uses Mantle.

You couldn't have shown worse results.

Wrong and you can deflect all you want.

I like how you ignore the FX4170 now hitting Core i3 levels after Mantle is used,or the fact that it improves AMD CPU performance massively.

People were saying only high end cards would work.

Yeah,right.

 

[LtMatt]

So if people find the subject of interest but don't want to be subjected to biased unproven info acting like it's somehow related to or proven by the info in the original article maybe the thread shouldn't of used the original articles title or should have at least had "An AMD users perspective" added to it.

I think you're mistaking me for the persons who are writing these articles. They are tech journalists, they do not work for either AMD or Nvidia. I merely post the articles here for discussion and give my two cents, as others are entitled to do as well. Nothing more to be said about it really.

 

[Martini1991]

Cat, take your blinkers off.

I've ignored the 250x results (And the 270), because they're at the GPU bottleneck, you're just twisting to suit your argument, I ain't deflecting.
Also, where's the FX4170 and i3 in the same graph? Unless I'm silly, there isn't.

http://i.imgur.com/M4aUL5s.png

That's what I'm basing it on, the graph YOU posted.

Actually Cat, don't bother replying, if you want to split hairs over GPU bottlenecked scenario's, be my guest (Well, even when sometimes the AMD CPU's can't even max out the R9 270 completely without bottleneck). I wasn't ignoring the performance gains made by the AMD CPU's) merely your examples are TERRIBLE, unless you think performance parity between AMD and Intel using 250X's is good, or an FX83 reaching parity with an i3 (Using an inferior API) again is good.

They're poor examples, and show the complete opposite of competition.

 

[pgi947]

Why the **** is a mantle debate going on in here?

Its about the **** poor perf of watch dogs and the debatable effect game works has on other vendors, not if an amd cpu works well under an api not related to this game!!

 

[PhysicsMan94]

Personally I think this thread should just be closed, it's run its course and is now just full of irrelevancy and speculation/lies/slander about Nvidia with no form of evidence.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Cat, take your blinkers off.

I've ignored the 250x results (And the 270), because they're at the GPU bottleneck, you're just twisting to suit your argument, I ain't deflecting.
Also, where's the FX4170 and i3 in the same graph? Unless I'm silly, there isn't.

http://i.imgur.com/M4aUL5s.png

That's what I'm basing it on, the graph YOU posted.

Actually Cat, don't bother replying, if you want to split hairs over GPU bottlenecked scenario's, be my guest (Well, even when sometimes the AMD CPU's can't even max out the R9 270 completely without bottleneck). I wasn't ignoring the performance gains made by the AMD CPU's) merely your examples are TERRIBLE, unless you think performance parity between AMD and Intel using 250X's is good, or an FX83 reaching parity with an i3 (Using an inferior API) again is good.

They're poor examples, and show the complete opposite of competition.

Take your blinkers off.

You ignore the 250X and 270 results because they are inconvenient for you. People were saying Mantle was pointless since you would need a high end card to show improvements but when it does with £130 cards and lower,it is ignored on purpose. Anyone who sees the Mantle enabled games with AMD getting within spitting distanct,in a worse case scenario,seems to be twisting the outcome for some reason.

You also fail to understand,UE3. It uses upto 4 threads,and prioritises two.

That means a Core i7 4770,is probably a bit faster down to clockspeeds,but not massively when compared to a Core i3.

Its a huge improvement in a worst case scenario for an AMD CPU,and the Intel chips are a bit faster,but the speedups with the AMD chips are massive.

They go from not competing in any sort of way,to getting much closer.

That is also before looking at latency,which I suspect would have been improved quite a decent amount too,making playablity nearly identical to the Intel setups.

Mantle from the very beginning has been a business decision to improve AMD's competitive standing as a business,and that includes its CPUs.

They are not a charity,they are here to make money,especially with the CEO they have now.

I said from the very beginning Mantle(last year) would be more useful for slower and older CPUs,and I was right.

However,as like with many enthusiasts other get so focussed on one area,they cannot see the wood for the trees.

So I will have to agree to disagree with a number of you.

 

[Martini1991]

You're arguing a point no one's contradicting or arguing against though....
The results aren't inconvenient to me, they're just somewhat irrelevant, AMD with low end GPU's, needing mantle to gain performance parity isn't a good thing. It's good that can gain parity, but they should be running parity in DX11 already, also there's thousands of games that aren't Mantle enabled.

But you can argue with yourself now, I mean you're already twisting the argument to suit your viewpoint (Which people aren't actually disagreeing with, well, I'm not, not with the slower CPU stuff, it was obvious they'd see the most gains, but you're just gagging to argue over nothing by the looks of it)

 

[Rusty0611]

Topic lads.

 

[Martini1991]

Topic lads.

Should have been laid to rest in the first page and locked, everything's pretty much anecdotal.

 

[Rusty0611]

True .

But Matt does like his drama threads.

 

[opethdisciple]

Nvidia seem to be taking a bit of an Apple approach here. Black box, closed source secrecy. It does mean you get a level of shine and polish. Or at least everything done there way.

Where as AMD are more like Linux. Openness, collaborative etc.... But I think this is born out of necessity.

AMD are too small to exist as a closed source company and use Open source methodologies in order to simply exist and stay competitive.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

You're arguing a point no one's contradicting or arguing against though....
The results aren't inconvenient to me, they're just somewhat irrelevant, AMD with low end GPU's, needing mantle to gain performance parity isn't a good thing. It's good that can gain parity, but they should be running parity in DX11 already, also there's thousands of games that aren't Mantle enabled.

But you can argue with yourself now, I mean you're already twisting the argument to suit your viewpoint (Which people aren't actually disagreeing with, well, I'm not, not with the slower CPU stuff, it was obvious they'd see the most gains, but you're just gagging to argue over nothing by the looks of it)

You have just contradicted yourself with the bolded statement and your the one who started argueing with me,saying the results shown were useless(then deflect away). Do you think AMD does not know the situation they are in??

They are 1/10th the size of Intel,and BD was a failure,and core re-designs take years. Don't believe me - look how long Intel took to replace the P4 with so much more resources??

Think of it is a bandaid,but still Mantle is a tool anyway,and far cheaper to do than core redesigns until 2016.

Plus,AMD just needs to show its competitive in a number of AAA titles like Thief,to give itself a better name,and chance of better sales.

People read current reviews,and if in current reviews Mantle makes AMD CPUs look better in a number of games,it only helps them.

Mantle is a business decision by AMD to help it own CPU sales and GPU sales,and give it some good PR.

They are not a charity,and some of you seem to think they are one.

 

[Martini1991]

If you say so Cat.

/End.