• 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.

Nvidia DX12 driver holding back Ryzen

Lots of vids showing the same results now, any vids available that say otherwise yet as NV users looking to upgrade that are aware of the poor NV performance aren't going to be keen going Ryzen?

But I don't think it's a Ryzen specific issue. It's a DX12 specific issue. It's just the multicore architecture of Ryzen maybe shows the DX12 deficiencies more in the Nvidia implementation.

Nvidia will fix it... but when the 1100 series launch.

---

I wish they would come out and make a statement saying it's fixable xyz.... because before Ryzen launched I was set on a Green card.

Now since buying a 1700, it looks like I'm going to go Red when Vega launches.
 
The fact Nvidia released a 'special' DX12 driver a few weeks back.... is of no coincidence now.

But you cant fix in software what you lack in hardware. It was always Nvidia's plan to bring to market a proper DX12 card after the current 1000 series.

Depends what the actual core of the issue is - which seems to be the requirement for very fast clock tick and low latency, fast inter-thread memory transfers - in which case it might be possible to optimise it for a CPU architecture that isn't as suited to that maybe depending on how threadable, etc. the main part of the code is and whether its possible to optimise around cache usage and dodging slow transfers/context switches, etc.

End of the day I'd agree though that nVidia haven't really been looking at bringing on full DX12 type support before the Pascal replacement.
 
Depends what the actual core of the issue is - which seems to be the requirement for very fast clock tick and low latency, fast inter-thread memory transfers - in which case it might be possible to optimise it for a CPU architecture that isn't as suited to that maybe depending on how threadable, etc. the main part of the code is and whether its possible to optimise around cache usage and dodging slow transfers/context switches, etc.

End of the day I'd agree though that nVidia haven't really been looking at bringing on full DX12 type support before the Pascal replacement.

The problem appears to be the Nvidia driver using the cpu to help the gpu process some of the features of DX12 which are not supported in hardware. As shown in a video explaining the driver overhead issue, it is likely that the cpu cores are being flooded with requests from the driver thus leaving less cycles for the game processes.

Nvidia optimized for Intel so there is a chance that they could fix some of the problem if they add optimization for Ryzen but it's all speculation until they actually issue a statement.
From past history, I suspect that they will remain silent though ;)
 
The problem appears to be the Nvidia driver using the cpu to help the gpu process some of the features of DX12 which are not supported in hardware. As shown in a video explaining the driver overhead issue, it is likely that the cpu cores are being flooded with requests from the driver thus leaving less cycles for the game processes.

Which is basically what I'm describing - although you aren't understanding some of the subtleties with how it works. The question is what about that is the root of the issue and whether it is something that can be optimised for a different approach or not.
 
As is typical Adored seems to be speaking nonsense, his arguments destroyed over at beyond3D.

Is that the same Beyond3D that said that the maxwell line can do Async compute as well?
Then preceded to do a program that proved that it can only to discover that it cant ?

:rolleyes:
 
Just d.p speaking his opinions again as factual info per usual. Anything negative nvidia is nonsense. Anything negative amd and he will add to it. Purley from a observation. I think adored tv is a lot more clued up than d.p
 
D.P Lool you always have something to say even when you wrong!! They is loads of Youtube Raw footage out there showing Nvidia DX12 Driver is trash! Not just DX12 Vulkan Also!!
 
Is that the same Beyond3D that said that the maxwell line can do Async compute as well?
Then preceded to do a program that proved that it can only to discover that it cant ?

:rolleyes:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...feature-level-11_1-on-gcn-1-0-featur.18674807

To be fair on Beyond3D, plenty in here that ran with assumption as fact who were screaming from the rooftops that Nv was the only arch to fully support DX12 and was adamant ASync was working when it wasn't even enabled at driver level, anyone who dared said otherwise was drowned out by the usual lot and labeled a fool.

Fast forward almost 2yrs from just one example of many AMD Nv DX12 threads on OcUK and here we are, comparatively AMD are where they are and NV(while still improving) is still strugling to get non regressive DX12 performance.
 
Chips is inbound again I see ;)


:D

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...feature-level-11_1-on-gcn-1-0-featur.18674807

To be fair on Beyond3D, plenty in here that ran with assumption as fact who were screaming from the rooftops that Nv was the only arch to fully support DX12 and was adamant ASync was working when it wasn't even enabled at driver level, anyone who dared said otherwise was drowned out by the usual lot and labeled a fool.

Fast forward almost 2yrs from just one example of many AMD Nv DX12 threads on OcUK and here we are, comparatively AMD are where they are and NV(while still improving) is still strugling to get non regressive DX12 performance.
Amusing re-reading that thread :D
 
and was adamant ASync was working when it wasn't even enabled at driver level

There is a lot of confusion when it comes to async, async compute and the actual functionality of parallel command queues and implications of context switching - truth is 9 out of 10 people posting on the subject from both sides of the fence are either dead wrong or misunderstanding what they are talking about.
 
Techspots take on the issue.

Seems they couldn't find any conclusive evidence.

Seems pretty indiciative to me from their numbers that nVidia has a CPU thread in play that relies on very fast tickover and fast memory bandwidth/latency which its whole DX12 performance is built on - and nothing wrong with that aslong as you pair the appropriate GPU with the appropriate hardware and simply either Ryzen lacks the single threaded performance or has other penalties or some other issue that is conflicting with it. Those numbers also demonstrate the strength's of nVidia's approach when the hardware is fully supporting it.

It would probably be insightful to test the games with an Intel CPU with 4 cores 4 thread enabled, 4 cores 8 thread, 5 and 6 cores and 6 cores with 12 threads.
 
There is a lot of confusion when it comes to async, async compute and the actual functionality of parallel command queues and implications of context switching - truth is 9 out of 10 people posting on the subject from both sides of the fence are either dead wrong or misunderstanding what they are talking about.

Here's what Futuremark had to say about NVIDIA and ASync in relation to Time Spy. Only Pascal has some Async support, although it's all done via the driver and software scheduler.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/223850/discussions/0/366298942110944664/
The reason Maxwell doesn't take a hit is because NVIDIA has explictly disabled async compute in Maxwell drivers. So no matter how much we pile things to the queues, they cannot be set to run asynchronously because the driver says "no, I can't do that".

NV driver runs asynchronous tasks in one queue on Maxwell, similar to if they were submitted in one queue ("async off" in Time Spy). If NVIDIA enables Async Compute in the drivers on Maxwell, Time Spy will start using it. Performance gain or loss depends on the hardware & drivers.


Ultimately some AMD cards gain quite a bit (ie. they have a lot of shader units idling while rendering and they are very good at using them for the available paraller loads). Some AMD cards gain less or not at all (either less capable at paralleriziing, less idle shader units or no idle shader units at all - for example a HD 7970 is hard pressed to have any to "spare")

Some NVIDIA cards cannot do this at all. The driver simply says "hold your horses, we'll do this nicely in order". Some NVIDIA cards can do some of it. They might use another way than AMD (more driver/software based), but the end result is the same - the card hardware is capable of doing more through some intelligent juggling of the work.
 
Back
Top Bottom