• 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.

Wolfenstien 2 Vulkan benchmarks:

shankly1985 said:
Interesting seeing the Vega GPU is only clocked at 1500 in this video.

Click to expand...

That's because he is using the balanced profile which knocks around 20% off the core clock speed to lower power draw. If you want maximum Vega 64 performance you want to enable either Turbo Mode (1752/945 @25% power Limit), or for full performance Custom mode and +50% Power Limit.
 
AMDMatt said:
That's because he is using the balanced profile which knocks around 20% off the core clock speed to lower power draw. If you want maximum Vega 64 performance you want to enable either Turbo Mode (1752/945 @25% power Limit), or for full performance Custom mode and +50% Power Limit.
Click to expand...

Good to know, I like how he has done his benchmark, very easy to follow. Subbed
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Apparently someone forgot to tell him that you can't compare the Vega 64 and the 1080Ti, you have to compare the Vega 64 with the 1080!

You should get on that Shanks...
Click to expand...

It's more a showcase for how good Vulkan API is rather than the GPUs used. If Vulkan becomes more available what a top quality GPU vega 64 will become.

And for the record. Amd only showcased Vega against the 1080. Ti wasn't vega competition, now that prices have settled its back to business.

So vega doing well against higher priced GPUs isn't a bad showing.

Ignore AMD vs Nvidia.. Vulkan API needs to be used more full stop. It's proven already to be much better than other API's so this only helps showcase the API better by having both AMD and Nvidia showing strong numbers.

End of the day we all win
 
Last edited:
shankly1985 said:
It's more a showcase for how good Vulkan API is rather than the GPUs used. If Vulkan becomes more available what a top quality GPU vega 64 will become.
Click to expand...
Maybe, depends what the next gen GPUs bring on that front. Nothing much to compare it to as most GPUs probably weren't built for DX12/Vulkan they were built around DX11 (or Mantle, which didn't seem to help the Fury X much, was beaten by the 980Ti in DX11 and is beaten by the 1080 in DX12/Vulkan it seems).

As for showcasing the API, it's sort of hard to tell what difference it makes without there being DX11 results (but of course having a game run on 2 API may well mean compromises for one of them). It could just be a really well optimised game, regardless of API. Also to show how good the API is wouldn't you want to run it on something like the 1060 and 580 (which are likely to be more common) rather than the top end cards that will hopefully run everything well?
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Maybe, depends what the next gen GPUs bring on that front. Nothing much to compare it to as most GPUs probably weren't built for DX12/Vulkan they were built around DX11 (or Mantle, which didn't seem to help the Fury X much, was beaten by the 980Ti in DX11 and is beaten by the 1080 in DX12/Vulkan it seems).

As for showcasing the API, it's sort of hard to tell what difference it makes without there being DX11 results (but of course having a game run on 2 API may well mean compromises for one of them). It could just be a really well optimised game, regardless of API. Also to show how good the API is wouldn't you want to run it on something like the 1060 and 580 (which are likely to be more common) rather than the top end cards that will hopefully run everything well?
Click to expand...

I can tell just how good the API is by playing the game. Maxed out 1440p getting way over 100fps with excellent graphics and GPU effects speaks for itself.. Not to mention it's so smooth it's a complete game changer..
I would like to see FuryX benched with Texture details and other high demanding memory settings reduce to keep vram incheck vs 980ti can also have same settings. I can bet Frame rates will be much better for the FuryX

4GB vs 6GB in Wolfenstein will be massive.
You only after look at other Amd GPUs to see this is the case. RX580 vs 1060 for example.
 
shankly1985 said:
I can tell just how good the API is by playing the game. Maxed out 1440p getting way over 100fps with excellent graphics and GPU effects speaks for itself.. Not to mention it's so smooth it's a complete game changer..
I would like to see FuryX benched with Texture details and other high demanding memory settings reduce to keep vram incheck vs 980ti can also have same settings. I can bet Frame rates will be much better for the FuryX

4GB vs 6GB in Wolfenstein will be massive.
You only after look at other Amd GPUs to see this is the case. RX580 vs 1060 for example.
Click to expand...
How much of that is the API and how much is the game though, you can't know as you've not played it with any other API. I know you want to love Vulkan but you have a sample size of 1 API. Don't get me wrong, Vulkan is looking very promising and the Khronos Group seems to have done a good job, but we can only make apples to oranges comparisons for Vulkan unless a game has DX12 and DX11 implementations as well that have all been done specifically for the API and optimised equally.

I'm sure the 980Ti and Fury X were compared in games with the same settings back when they were the new cards.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
How much of that is the API and how much is the game though, you can't know as you've not played it with any other API. I know you want to love Vulkan but you have a sample size of 1 API. Don't get me wrong, Vulkan is looking very promising and the Khronos Group seems to have done a good job, but we can only make apples to oranges comparisons for Vulkan unless a game has DX12 and DX11 implementations as well that have all been done specifically for the API and optimised equally.

I'm sure the 980Ti and Fury X were compared in games with the same settings back when they were the new cards.
Click to expand...

Like I said I know how much the API is working you can see it yourself by enabling the Full system information within game settings.
It uses every single bit of system..
I know how good this API is you only after run around wolfenstein or Doom to feel how smooth it is.. Only Mantle and windows store games like Forza come close.
DirectX 11 wouldn't get anywhere near the same performance out of Wolfenstein. It would bottleneck.

I don't believe we have had a FuryX wolfenstein bench that keeps vram in check?
 
shankly1985 said:
Like I said I know how much the API is working you can see it yourself by enabling the Full system information within game settings.
It uses every single bit of system..
I know how good this API is you only after run around wolfenstein or Doom to feel how smooth it is.. Only Mantle and windows store games like Forza come close.
DirectX 11 wouldn't get anywhere near the same performance out of Wolfenstein. It would bottleneck.

I don't believe we have had a FuryX wolfenstein bench that keeps vram in check?
Click to expand...
I didn't mean in Wolfenstien, I meant in general.

It just feels to me if you're making a video to highlight how good an API is you should compare it to something. When we look at graphics card reviews or CPU reviews if they didn't compare it to anything it makes it harder to judge how good something is. If Vega 64 reviews only had graphs for the Vega 64 with settings run specifically for that review that didn't easily compare to other reviews most people would probably think it's less useful. The only thing this video seems to compare is the Vega 64 and the 1080Ti, which it's been said on many occasions you're not allowed to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom