• 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!

Jono8 said:
So neither is Hitman or AOTS then as the 390x is very close/if not matching the Fury Pro and Nano in those as well ? :confused:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_rx_480_8gb_review,11.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_rx_480_8gb_review,13.html

if you read this

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/futuremark-3dmark-timespy-benchmark-review,1.html

You will see it is doing a lot for AMD as well as Pascal. You have 10-15% gains on the AMD cards. For Maxwell.. not so much.
Click to expand...

The 390X obviously has more in it, what help the Fury-X is getting to overcome its bottleneck still isn't enough to push past the 390X

It explains why the 390X is so powerful in Hitman.
 
humbug said:
The 390X obviously has more in it, what help the Fury-X is getting to overcome its bottleneck still isn't enough to push past the 390X

It explains why the 390X is so powerful in Hitman.
Click to expand...

Ok...

That still doesn't lend any credence to the fact that Timespy's A Sync isn't doing anything. It clearly is. As Guru3d shows the 480 catches up with the 980 when A sync is on gaining about 12% performance. the 980 score goes nowhere.
 
Jono8 said:
Ok...

That still doesn't lend any credence to the fact that Timespy's A Sync isn't doing anything. It clearly is. As Guru3d shows the 480 catches up with the 980 when A sync is on gaining about 12% performance. the 980 score goes nowhere.
Click to expand...

Its having some effect yes, but you need to know the difference between what Nvidia and FM call A-Sync and what AMD call A-Sync, the two are different, what Nvidia calls A-Sync is more commonly known as Pre-Emption, its like a kind of A-Sync light while AMD is in rearguards to that is full on full fat A-Sync.

AMD themselves explain the difference quite well.


Time Spy has what Nvidia call A-Sync, Hitman has what AMD call A-Sync.
 
humbug said:
I guess i should make that more clear, in Time Spy AMD are using Pre-Emption in the same way Pascal is.

Maxwell can also use Pre-Emption but for whatever reason its not enabled, Kepler probably can too.
Click to expand...

Not calling you out, but can it be proved that AMD are using (or FM coded it that way) pre-emption rather than proper Async?
 
Jono8 said:
What in Hitman?

You can't just judge it one game. Better to look at the bigger picture.

Also, our own thread here has loads of very heavily overclocked 980Ti's which skew things somewhat

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/futuremark-3dmark-timespy-benchmark-review,1.html

^ Those are stock scores and the 390x is pretty close to the 980Ti - in fact getting pretty much the same score ( or at least very close) as the Fury's so very much like Hitman in that regard...http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_rx_480_8gb_review,11.html - just like in Timespy, not much between the 390x and the Fury's/nano's
Click to expand...

So what, the card was expertly designed, an 'overclockers dream' if you will :p

It's a non budget card that can sit happily all day at 1400+ without breaking a sweat, if AMD cant, tough.

Isn't the point of bechmarking to push the cards, or so I am lead to believe.
 
hyperseven said:
So what, the card was expertly designed, an 'overclockers dream' if you will :p

It's a non budget card that can sit happily all day at 1400+ without breaking a sweat, if AMD cant, tough.

Isn't the point of bechmarking to push the cards, or so I am lead to believe.
Click to expand...

Oh i know. I was just saying that this generally why even with ghe dx12 benches the titan xs and 980tis still sit above the fury's simply because their overclocking is so good.

I wasnt critisising the 980ti fir that, i was just pointing out why all the bench threads dx12 or not, are flooded with green at the top.
 
Harlequin said:
just wondering where the DX12 drivers are for the GTX 580 that NVidia promised last august....
Click to expand...

According to reddit you already have it, and you need to shush.

I got so much darn salt thrown my way when I pointed out Fermi still hasn't got DX12 drivers, and that they scrapped Vulkan support.

The GTX 580 is still a nice card, I managed to play Witcher 3 on Medium settings at 1920x1200, still has life left in it still.
 
N19h7m4r3 said:
Yup, here's the FM dev himself saying that. Also the whole point of DX12 being so low level is to allow for separate code paths which are Needed to get the best out of the hardware, but instead FutureMark opted for a "neutral" path.

EX18iLV.png

http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1023128/Advanced-Graphics-Techniques-Tutorial-Day


http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=38363396&postcount=82


Also the following.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2480259&page=2
Click to expand...

So basically it won't actually mirror any DX12 or Vulkan game out there - LOL.
 
whyscotty said:
We will have an official clarification and will most likely update the technical guide with more in-depth explanation of internal workings of Time Spy, hopefully tomorrow."
Click to expand...


"Every Futuremark benchmark is accompanied by a detailed technical guide that explains how the test works,
what it measures, and how the scores are calculated.
We create these guides to provide transparency to hardware press who use our benchmarks for reviews, to our industry customers,
and for technically-minded gamers and overclockers."

http://www.futuremark.com/pressreleases/a-closer-look-at-asynchronous-compute-in-3dmark-time-spy
 
whyscotty said:
"Every Futuremark benchmark is accompanied by a detailed technical guide that explains how the test works,
what it measures, and how the scores are calculated.
We create these guides to provide transparency to hardware press who use our benchmarks for reviews, to our industry customers,
and for technically-minded gamers and overclockers."

http://www.futuremark.com/pressreleases/a-closer-look-at-asynchronous-compute-in-3dmark-time-spy
Click to expand...

Well I am sure that will be investigated and the people who was claiming foul play will respond.
 
chaparral said:
3D Mark is only a benchmark app so who really cares..:confused:

The FPS performance you get in real games is where it counts..;)
Click to expand...

Developers would be crazy to use a-sync in games given nvidia's market share.

Unless of course they're AMD sponsored so don't care about profit or good reviews.
 
ebilcake said:
Developers would be crazy to use a-sync in games given nvidia's market share.

Unless of course they're AMD sponsored so don't care about profit or good reviews.
Click to expand...

The press release linked above clears things up quite nicely. While there might be additional gains fine tuning, something devs are likely to do is split the work and make it available for async running and let the graphics drivers/OS decide whether to do that or not. Akin to multiple threads for CPU. There's no hit on nVidia cards for doing so, unless the driver/OS is incorrectly configured.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom