Not true
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Huddy on Gameworks round 3
- Thread starter Orangey
- Start date
Not true
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,747
- Location
- Planet Earth
It makes me wonder what they were thinking TBH. Even the R9 290 series launch could have been handled so much better.
To be fair, nVidia is currently valued at nearly 12 billion and AMD less than 2. They're bound to have ... a certain roughness trying to compete. Not only that, AMD work toward the advancement of PC gaming with work on Mantle (that has since disseminated into DX12 and Vulcan) and pushing new technologies like HBM. nVidia works toward locking people into their tech a la gameworks which intentionally cripples their opponent (arguably), and providing as smaller power increases on their cards as to just stay a little ahead of AMD - which with their budget is either incompetence or just dirty.
Much as the nVidia camp hate on AMD, I just hope they realise that they need AMD - and they need AMD to start getting some wins soon. AMD definitely need to stop attacking nVidia like this though, however right they are it just comes across as petty.
Much as the nVidia camp hate on AMD, I just hope they realise that they need AMD - and they need AMD to start getting some wins soon. AMD definitely need to stop attacking nVidia like this though, however right they are it just comes across as petty.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,883
- Location
- Surrey
I think both Richard and AMD need organise their agenda given the current situation.
It's getting to a point where people if they are listening will in fact just stop listening because it is of no concern if they're able to just use NVIDIA hardware and make use of these additional middleware layers regardless of how they are implemented.
It's getting to a point where people if they are listening will in fact just stop listening because it is of no concern if they're able to just use NVIDIA hardware and make use of these additional middleware layers regardless of how they are implemented.
Do people still take these threads serious? In fairness to all who have posted, it has been pleasent reading and no snide comments. Well done lads
On Reddit the CircleJerk has shifted from bad developers like Ubisoft and IronGalaxy/Rockstead to NVIDIA.
The sheer amount of posts saying TWIMTBP and Gameworks are the sole reasons Batman and Assassin's Unity were broken is increasing daily.
Then you have folks like AMD_Roy retweeting such comments on Twitter as if it was true.
Bad developers with broken games are off the hook, it's NVIDIA that's apparently bribing them to break the games...
I guess if you repeat something over and over folks will believe it in the end.
Mantle was just an attempt by AMD to shift responsiblity of fully optimising games for their cards onto developers, aside from those developers payed to promote Mantle nobody else was buying it. Why should impoverished developers be responsible for fully optimising cards that AMD charge hundreds of pounds for? developers only need to meet the DirectX specification, if AMD want more they should put the work in like NVidia do.
I mean, AMD haven't even bothered optimising Fury X for Mantle after putting Mantle logos all over the boxes which shows you the kind of attitude they have. AMD weren't always struggling financially but their attitude has always been the same.
They simply have an inferior product/service and to counter that they blame all manner of external sources as the reason.
With HBM, they pushed it because they needed it to stay competitive.
Last edited:
Uh... Mantle allowed low level control.. what does DX12 and Vulkan do? Allow low level control? Oh really? It's not that AMD were trying to pass the buck, well - it is - but it's a buck some devs want and the direction of DX12 and Vulkan show this. As for the Fury and Mantle - it's because Mantle has been disseminated into Vulkan and "copied" in DX12, AMD don't need to push Mantle anymore.
And of course they pushed HBM to stay competitive, that's the entire point! nVidia would never do that alone - that's why you NEED AMD, if not AMD then another party needs to take their place. Either way, I wouldn't like nVidia to have monopoly and I doubt you would either.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2014
- Posts
- 3,648
- Location
- Scotland
And why should AMD or Nvidia have to optimise games themselves? It would be a whole lot easier for developers to do it themselves. They are the ones who have direct access to the source code for the games, with low overhead APIs like DX12 and Mantle, they have more control over low level GPU functions and resources. The developers should be the ones ensuring that games run well on the platforms they release it for. If they don't and we end up with crap like AK, then it is entirely their fault and pure laziness.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
I love it. So Nvidia manage to double their own performance on the same process and same die size, beating AMD on both performance and price in the process, AMD have to increase their die size by 40% as well as switch to hbm to even vaguely attempt to draw level, and that makes nvidia incompetent or dirty?
Just because something adheres to a specification, does not mean that every implementation to that specification is identical. This goes for hardware and software.
And because no two game engines behave the same, that is why they need to perform optimisations within drivers.
There are more factors than the shader code being standardised, there are also workload patterns and how memory is used which cause the issues between engine and drivers. And because the engine and drivers cannot directly interact, we have the problems of bloated drivers needing to be optimised to predict the game engines behaviour.
Where as with Low abstraction API's, the engine controls everything so none of the prediction is required. Which is where the majority of the slow downs occur within DX11 and bellow.
Last edited:
2-5% increment performance next generation for years and pay double.
That what happens when its no competition to change the landscape.
+1, this is exactly what will happen, unless AMD release a new generation that has significantly more performance, significantly more performance per watt, significantly more VRAM.
Even then, the diehard NVIDIA lovers will want to still keep their NVIDIA cards, as Shadowplay 'changed their lives' etc, or they like the colour green, or any of the silly reasoning such people use.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,618
- Location
- Cornwall
That's the thing though, AMD need to release hardware that people want to buy. And actually produce enough stock so that those that want to buy it can. People shouldn't HAVE to buy AMD to keep them afloat because they're too incompetent to run their own business and turn a profit. They're not a charity, they're a business.
I agree entirely that we need more than one vendor, but it's AMD's responsibility to see there is competition not our to buy whatever rubbish they release just so Nvidia don't dominate. I really can't see a lot of the AMD fanboys buying Nvidia cards to keep them going if the roles were reversed.
All these people that won't buy Nvidia because they dislike them as a company. Are they really that much worse than Intel or Microsoft or the other big companies? Haven't both of them had issues with anti-competition type lawsuits? Do people avoid Intel CPUs and Microsoft software? Any of the people complaining about Nvidia as a business happen to use Intel CPUs or run Windows? Is this stance so strong that it only works until you want to play a computer game that only runs on Windows and then any ethical issues just get forgotten about?
Can you be sure that every item you own or product you use are from companies that got where they are without any moral compromises or 'underhand' tactics?
It feels sometimes that the decision to hate Nvidia was already made and the reasons were thought up later.
Because optimizing a rendering engine requires intricate knowledge of the GPU hardware and the driver, which is proprietary and largely unknown to the developers.
Good developers,do try to optimize these things but it takes a lot of resources and means that they have to spend time optimizing for different hardware. That is really the job of the GPU developer to make drivers that optimize the draw calls so developers can create vendor- and GPU-agnostic software without intricate knowledge of the underlying hardware. Graphics APIs are abstracted from the hardware for a reason.
DX12 will allow developers with the resources to,do more optimization without the driver abstraction layer interfering but for a majority of independent developers they are going to look increasingly at middleware platforms like gamer oaks in order reduce development costs.
just wow. ignorance is such a bliss