I quoted him out of context as I said because that part of his post is worth taking note of - people are rushing to hysteria before we've even had long enough to see how things are going to play out once drivers have matured, etc.
-
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.
3D Mark Time Spy not using true A-Sync, Maxwell A-Sync switched off!
- Thread starter SiDeards73
- Start date
I quoted him out of context as I said because that part of his post is worth taking note of - people are rushing to hysteria before we've even had long enough to see how things are going to play out once drivers have matured, etc.
Yes there is proof in Doom. Check out this video from 10:46
Doom only uses Async when AA mode is set to no AA or TSAA8X according to the devs.
Well that doesn't prove the difference is that small at all. Using TSSAAx8, he's still getting some really good framerates and he even reckons that async compute alone is giving him about 4-5% overall performance improvement.
You're also using Doom, an OpenGL game, where we know AMD are particularly behind in. This will certainly not be the norm for DX11->DX12 titles.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
First off you're very clearly an Nvidia guy, but in the past 18-24 months every Nvidia guy on the forum spends his whole day saying "I had an AMD card, thus I can't possibly be biased", while constantly posting misinformation clearly aimed at discrediting AMD in every way possible.
Second, this whole
Is the classic attempt to twist you're talking about. You're quoting me then making this statement worded in a way as to imply that I was claiming the opposite. I specifically called you out on claiming AMDs gain was purely async and there is nothing else that would boost AMDs hardware in DX12.
As you will see from Doom, when async isn't used AMD still gains significantly more in DX12 than Nvidia does. You are painting async as the be all and end all of AMDs gains which goes against all proof, and hilariously, goes against this benchmark which is precisely what I said would be funny. Those who claim async is the only 'win' AMD has in DX12 would have a hard time explaining this benchmark with Nvidia supposedly gaining more with async enabled.
There is more to DX12, I stated that to you, not the other way around, and there are multiple games and instances in which the gains from DX12 are miles beyond just async compute. As most devs state, the gains from async compute alone are being massively overstated by everyone. For instance everyone was screaming about how Ashes only did better on AMD because of async and the claims that not all games would use it that much. Ashes devs came out and said they use it minimally, it's not the main reason for AMD gains and many other titles will begin using it much more heavily.
Async helps AMD because AMD made a fundamentally better architecture for using it, async still isn't what most people portray it as, async isn't the only reason AMD is faster in DX12, devs, common sense and multiple games which show a bigger gain in DX12 for AMD with async disabled all prove this.
Yea, you have no idea what you're talking about. I suppose you've been a 'GPU manufacturer fan' for so long that you no longer understand what it's like to not be one, or to actually think that somebody else might *actually* not want to take part in being a 'fan' of billion dollar corporations. I find that quite sad, really.
Again, dont confuse me arguing against certain anti-Nvidia sentiment to mean I'm a fan of Nvidia, or that it somehow inherently makes me anti-AMD, as if I had to be one or the other. As I said, says more about you than it does me that you need to think like this.
I wasn't the one twisting anything around at all, that was you. Saying that there is more to DX12 than async compute and saying that AMD's advantage in DX12 is down to its async compute are not mutually exclusive statements, yet you tried to portray them this way.
It is becoming really obvious that having a genuine, honest discussion with you is very difficult.
AMD may get gains from loosening the driver overhead from OpenGL/DX11, but that does not make AMD hardware inherently 'better' for DX12 outside its async compute abilities. It just means that the drivers were bottlenecking it before and the hardware is being utilized better now.
But what AMD cards do better than Nvidia cards in DX12 is down to its async compute capabilities. Actual driver overhead issues are 'equal' in this situation, just one had more to gain from before.
You were saying Async gives much more than 10% boost but in Doom the non-async mode is only giving around 5-8% lower fps than the Async mode.
In fact the TAA mode (non-async) is 1fps faster than the TSAA8x(async mode). This proves than Async is not the major reason for the gains in Doom.
The majority of the boost is coming from simply moving from an old API (Opengl) to Vulkan. As more games come out for DX12/Vulkan I would expect AMD to match or beat Nvidia performance with or without Async Compute.
Nvidia fans like to argue for arguments sake it seems.
Again, not an 'Nvidia fan'. But like drunkenmaster, I see you are unable to understand what it must be like to be objective.You were saying Async gives much more than 10% boost but in Doom the non-async mode is only giving around 5-8% lower fps than the Async mode.
In fact the TAA mode (non-async) is 1fps faster than the TSAA8x(async mode). This proves than Async is not the major reason for the gains in Doom.
The majority of the boost is coming from simply moving from an old API (Opengl) to Vulkan. As more games come out for DX12/Vulkan I would expect AMD to match or beat Nvidia performance with or without Async Compute.
Nvidia fans like to argue for arguments sake it seems.
I'm also not sure you're understanding that graph with the AA solutions. TSSAAx8 is a much more demanding AA solution than TAA. The fact that TSSAAx8 using async compute is essentially matching the TAA solution specifically shows that it's certainly gaining a lot from its use.
Either way, as I said, Doom is but one example, and its an example of an OpenGL game. It is not 'proof' that this is what async compute advantages provide on an overall basis whatsoever. 10% of the actual gain seen is miniscule and if that's all that async compute can do, then what it brings to the table is damn near worthless.
Thankfully that isn't the case.
Soldato
So async is switched off, yet my ti is ahead of all but one amd card in the only non Amd 'helped with' DX12 benchmark out there, Timespy
Permabanned
Fixed
Caporegime
The problem with that is it doesn't represent the true performance of AMD GPU's.
Its certainly not wrong to argue its gimped to avoid embarrassment for Nvidia.
Associate
You might get more people to listen when you have facts. This embarrassment you're talking about will be apparent when AMD can actually show something amazing. Unfortunately we're not even close.
Less talk and more action that's what people listen to, not fictional statements with no grounds in reality.
Soldato
Honestly, does it really matter if it is or isn't? All that really matters is how a card performs for the price, and if it still performs well without using true async.... so what?
I thought that this might have been a story when it was reported that 3DMark wasn't using Async, but it turns out it does, for AMD cards. So what's the big deal?
I thought that this might have been a story when it was reported that 3DMark wasn't using Async, but it turns out it does, for AMD cards. So what's the big deal?
Mainly because it's showing very little gains in DX12 with or without ASync while in actual games there is a far bigger performance gain for AMD.
How come here, there's so little, despite also being able to use A-Sync?
Why is NVIDIA's driver specifically disabling A-Sync despite them claiming it is supported; and then we have the FutureMark dev saying it's done to avoid a performance hit.
Just seems odd to me.
Caporegime
Caporegime
Good grief Si, you seem to be butthurt about NVidia not giving you performance on your NVidia cards.... Oh, that's right, you don't own NVidia cards. Why are you so worried and annoyed about something you have absolutely no proof about (NVidia will render Maxwell GPUs obsolete via driver updates). I read things like this often and shake my head in disbelief that someone genuinely thinks that NVidia purposefully gimp performance on older cards and they have no proof or anything to back it up.
I remember AMD getting some nice gains via driver updates and bringing performance to where it should be from the off and people look at the graphs and see these nice gains and immediately it is "NVidia have gimped performance coz look at dat Titan now performing like a 390X"
As for Async, not sure what is what but I did a run with ASync off and on and for me, performance was better with it on.
Async off
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13350573
Async on
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/11356
Soldato
You mean the games where AMD have 'helped' with the development?
Caporegime
He's actually talking about Maxwell card's ^^^^ not pascal in your benchmarks but nvm
Caporegime
He's actually talking about Maxwell card's ^^^^ not pascal in your benchmarks but nvm
I wasn't talking to him about Pascal and was showing what gains there were with my Pascal GPU but never mind.
So what, like all of them bar Tomb Raider and Gears of War then? The latter not even being designed to be DX12, never mind 11.
Do you also have an issue with games that are Gameworks titles where NVIDIA 'helped" the devs then?
Or do you find also find it acceptable that NVIDIA list Maxwell as supporting A-Sync, but here we have a developer stating that NVIDIA purposely disable it via drivers to avoid a performance hit.
Soldato
The only thing that would be bad about this whole situation, is that Nvidia may seek to not use Async and therefore try to kill it off, thereby harming AMD's market share, because AMD has dedicated hardware for Async. That would be the kinda smart thing to do, although pretty poor form. But they are a business, not a charity.
So, as I don't really know that much about Async, what is the benefit? If AMD had used thos transistors for normal processing rather than Async, so they could use the whole die even in DX11, would they be better off now?
So, as I don't really know that much about Async, what is the benefit? If AMD had used thos transistors for normal processing rather than Async, so they could use the whole die even in DX11, would they be better off now?