• 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.

Private equity to buy 20 per cent of AMD

You mean oxide?
All I've seen from devs is that the nvidia drivers seem to expose async as a feature but it runs worse than not using it so it appears the drivers don't currently support it... They've also said nvidia are working on it, and nvidia's own documentations seems to suggest they do support albeit to a lesser extent than AMD, 31 compute streams vs 128?
 
Last edited:
Oh for gods sake all of you just 'STOP'

My dads bigger than yours, yeah but my dads harder, yeah but my dads richer, yeah but my dads got a nicer car, yeah but my dads car is faster, yeah but my dads car is red... :(
 
bru said:
Oh for gods sake all of you just 'STOP'

My dads bigger than yours, yeah but my dads harder, yeah but my dads richer, yeah but my dads got a nicer car, yeah but my dads car is faster, yeah but my dads car is red... :(
Click to expand...

It's all about

msxFSRO.jpg
 
Have to say what Nvidia does or doesnt support has no real input on Private equity to buy 20 per cent of AMD.

I'd like someone to buy/invest in AMD as they seem to often have good idea but lack the funds to fully implement it all
 
I can see where you are confused, but context switching isn't the same thing as async compute, its what happens when you cant do something asynchronously, so they are two separate issues, both of which we don't have solid info on and have months before anything is released that needs either

In the case of async, the one app we can test with, nvidia actually have much better performance not using async than AMD have using async, so...

If nvidia improve their context switching performance, whether or not they support async could become completely irrelevant to them... AMD need async because they've released a card with too many stream processors and not enough ROPs
 
Last edited:
fs123 said:
You claimed that Nvidia provides 'solid' information regarding their products and AMD is just rumours. That's why I asked do you know if Async Shaders are fully supported in hardware? Fairly simple question which you and all the Nvidia fans sidestepped. I don't want to know if any games support it, or whether it matters just yet.

I know AMD supports the feature in hardware right NOW but do you know if Nvidia does? After all you have solid information right NOW ;)
Click to expand...

Nope I said MORE solid information, you found 1 thing that's not solid information, as I already mentioned the 970 vram do you have any more other than those 2?

Now where do we even start with Amd information!

If amd have a cash injection then hopefully they spend it on making the next set of cards a bit cheaper to make, so they pass the savings onto the gamers.
 
Last edited:
andybird123 said:
I can see where you are confused, but context switching isn't the same thing as async compute, its what happens when you cant do something asynchronously, so they are two separate issues, both of which we don't have solid info on and have months before anything is released that needs either

In the case of async, the one app we can test with, nvidia actually have much better performance not using async than AMD have using async, so...
Click to expand...

There is no confusion, take it up the the threads i linked and i'll debate it with you later.
 
Ian Evey said:
Nope I said MORE solid information, you found 1 thing that's not solid information, as I already mentioned the 970 vram do you have any more other than those 2?

Now where do we even start with Amd information!

If amd have a cash injection then hopefully they spend it on making the next set of cards a bit cheaper to make, so they pass the savings onto the gamers.
Click to expand...

What AMD info confuses you? Care to share with us?
Any current card info is available and confirmed. Any future AMD card is certain to have hardware support for various DX12 features which cannot be said for Nvidia's Pascal. We are still not sure if it will have hardware Async Shaders/context switching since it's already been taped out apparently.

With regards to the pricing, couldn't that apply to Nvidia too? Since Nvidia will definitely be making the Maxwell cards cheap shouldn't they pass on the savings to the consumers? Sadly they don't and the maxwell 1 cards have been around the same price since launch but no one is complaining.
 
Last edited:
fs123 said:
What AMD info confuses you? Care to share with us?
Any current card info is available and confirmed. Any future AMD card is certain to have hardware support for various DX12 features which cannot be said for Nvidia's Pascal. We are still not sure if it will have hardware Async Shaders/context switching since it's already been taped out apparently.

With regards to the pricing, couldn't that apply to Nvidia too? Since Nvidia will definitely be making the Maxwell cards cheap shouldn't they pass on the savings to the consumers? Sadly they don't and the maxwell 1 cards have been around the same price since launch but no one is complaining.
Click to expand...

Nothing confuses me, I look at the rumours and wait until there are a few reviews or evidence. The same with both brands tbh.

Every time I think hmmm maybe amd is my next buy because of what's coming in the future and then they dissapoint me personally.

If async makes a big difference in next years dx12 games and amd is ahead of nvidia in games then I will buy amd.

If my 780 died tomorrow I would buy a 980ti currently.

If the furyx was a bit cheaper and performed as well at my 1920x1200 resolution and 'overclocked like a dream' I would buy that, Something ain't right with the furyx below 1440 res.

Also I was dissapointed at the 970 vram issue with the lack of information that came from nvidia.
 
Ian Evey said:
Nothing confuses me, I look at the rumours and wait until there are a few reviews or evidence. The same with both brands tbh.

Every time I think hmmm maybe amd is my next buy because of what's coming in the future and then they dissapoint me personally.

If async makes a big difference in next years dx12 games and amd is ahead of nvidia in games then I will buy amd.

If my 780 died tomorrow I would buy a 980ti currently.

If the furyx was a bit cheaper and performed as well at my 1920x1200 resolution and 'overclocked like a dream' I would buy that, Something ain't right with the furyx below 1440 res.

Also I was dissapointed at the 970 vram issue with the lack of information that came from nvidia.
Click to expand...

Any info that comes out for both companies is just rumours and speculation unless it's official. It's pointless to accuse AMD of rumours and not put Nvidia in the same category when we don't know solid info for their upcoming cards either.

At the moment both Greenland and Pascal are almost identical specwise and we will not know the performance until they are released. I find any news/rumors interesting though since it keeps these boards alive and something to look forward to.
 
fs123 said:
Any info that comes out for both companies is just rumours and speculation unless it's official. It's pointless to accuse AMD of rumours and not put Nvidia in the same category when we don't know solid info for their upcoming cards either.

At the moment both Greenland and Pascal are almost identical specwise and we will not know the performance until they are released. I find any news/rumors interesting though since it keeps these boards alive and something to look forward to.
Click to expand...

You don't get the same rumours being said from amd or review sites taken as fact ( later proved to be incorrect ) than nvidia rumours.
Maybe that's down to the user base believing any rumour amd has.

As an example, Not 4 years ago 3 and 4gb was needed according to the amd rumour mill 7970 and 290, Now 4 years later it's still 4gb on hbm cards, I had a 670 and have a 780 and I have not run out of vram at playable frame rates.

That stopped no amd users telling people to buy amd because of the vram even though at the time nvidia performed better like for like.

The perception is amd is the best for dx12, Then a benchmark starts and it shows nvidia slightly ahead, But to some that does not matter as amd are the best for dx12.


Maybe the amd users are to blame or the review sites or amd, but I am always dissapointed about 1 thing or another when it comes to an amd release, And the 970 release.
 
^ AMD even did a huge piece about 4GB not being enough when they released the 290X 8GB, now they are saying 4GB is fine because they are doing colour compression (which nvidia have been doing since Kepler)
 
^ agreed.

If amd ( or is it ati again now ) spend their cash wisely they could do great things, they could evem listen to AmdMatt as I am sure he knows what we all want in a card.
 
andybird123 said:
^ AMD even did a huge piece about 4GB not being enough when they released the 290X 8GB, now they are saying 4GB is fine because they are doing colour compression (which nvidia have been doing since Kepler)
Click to expand...

It does seem to use a hell of a lot less vRAM. I've seen comparisons where it uses less than half of the amount of vRAM a GDDR5 card uses. So that compression seems to be amazing. I do wonder if it affects the raw performance of the card mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom