Bethesda, Edios, Dice. Probably some more as well. How many recent games have deeper integration with Gameworks nowadays? It seems it was more of a 2014/15 thing.
-
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.
AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1
- Thread starter Doom112
- Start date
- Status
Bethesda, Edios, Dice. Probably some more as well. How many recent games have deeper integration with Gameworks nowadays? It seems it was more of a 2014/15 thing.
AMD has the option to cap the FPS either globally or per game, so the Adaptive Vsync argument could go out of the window.
Gameworks is the only thing you could consider, but look at how many games are using it on the total of games that are coming out. And what is the impact of those effects.
PhysX, and over 11 years, had 55 games made for it, of which less than 8 were "top titles" and worth to play a handful? (ofc which 3 were from the Batman series).
With my NV cards over 10 years played only two, (XCOM Bureau and Planerside 2) and the latter removed the support because it was reducing the performance.
So I wouldn't make my choice on that either. What I would make my choice is if you want Freesync/Gsync monitor and that is the main reason to go either way.
For me this is the year of new monitor, so waiting for Vega perf. If it works as is rumoured, very well at at least the 1080 perf, and even more so attached to a Ryzen 7 ecosystem would operate better, then I will buy one to go with my current freesync monitor.
Otherwise I will wait until the end of summer and see what monitors are coming out to make my decision.
?
I do this, does not stop tearing. What am I doing wrong? Tried it with Dead Space a few days ago, no luck.
I think you are getting adaptive v-sync mixed up with something else - that doesn't cover the functionality at all.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
I think times are changing and providing Vega offers several well positioned gpu's we'll see AMD's market share continue to grow and Nvidia's continue to shrink, They've survived the lean years so now things should be getting better which is good for everyone except Nvidia shareholders and I don't need to explain what they can go and do.
I made a decision to support AMD by going with Fiji instead of Maxwell and even waited for 6 months for that, Now I'm doing the same with Vega and Pascal, as have you so we'd be made to not wait that little bit longer and see what Vega has to offer.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
Possibly but I was hoping there would be too many versions to do that.
They got 3 different cards from one Fiji chip so potentialy they could get 6 different cards out of 2 Vega chips.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
A 390x is a 290x with more ram, obviously there's a little more to it but not much as proven by AMD feeling the need to release the 390x with performance enhancing driver updates while keeping those same updates from the 290x until after all the release review were done, Is a 480x as fast as a 390x? I thought it very much depended on the game being tested, We seem to get very big discrepancies between the older GCN cards and the newer ones, One game gives GCN 1.2 the advantage while another gives it to GCN 1.3 or however they're numbered, The point I was making was that the 480 chip will probably age with the new generation about as much as the Hawaii chip did when it aged into Grenada. Basically I don't think there will be much in it and the obvious performance improvement is what'll come from the improved clockability, Maybe it'll do a 7970 and become the 480 GHZ edition?
Which ever turns out to be true it's still not going to be a 1070 competitor is it?
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,132
- Location
- Scotland
I think the 580 will end up around the same speed as the Fury, maybe up to nano speeds. I am hoping it will hit Fury X speeds but I have my doubts there.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,093
- Location
- London
If AMD's Frame Rate Target control can do for me what Nvidia adaptive vsync can then Vega is an option.
It cannot.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,093
- Location
- London
Why? If I cap the fps to 59 or 60 then theoretically they wont go over my monitors 60hz refresh rate.
Don't know really. My guess would be that is not it's primary function or it's function at all?
The original comment was about adaptive vsync which is not the same as capping the frame rate.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,093
- Location
- London
But it essentially achieves the same thing? Variable fps (based on conditions) capped to 60 (if I set 60)? Which in essence is exactly what Adaptive vysnc does. Remember I'm talking about driver side adaptive vysnch not Gsync!
Depends what you are trying to do - if you want vsync to be enabled except when the framerate drops below 60 then framerate capping doesn't achieve that. If you just want to cap framerate there are dozens of ways to do that for both AMD and nVidia.
You'll get similar results.
VSync = 60FPS cap, if it drops 30FPS cap
Adaptive VSync = 60FPS cap, but no lower cap, can run 1-59
AMD Frame Cap set to 60 = 60FPS cap, but no lower cap, can run 1-59
People might be confusing Adaptive V-Sync; with Adaptive Sync here.
Adaptive VSync is just a driver feature that caps the FPS when it gets to the monitor's refresh rate; in @opethdisciple case that's 60Hz, but turns off VSync if the FPS dips below 60, to avoid the standard cap at 30hz.
Adaptive Sync = FreeSync, or G-Sync.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,093
- Location
- London
Wooo! So what your saying is that AMD does indeed have the same feature that Nvidia has in the drivers which they call Adaptive vsynch.
That makes Vega an option then!
It generally works across all games if I set it globally?
AMD frame rate control does not manipulate vsync - if vsync is enabled with a frame rate target it will still drop in multiples of the refresh rate and result in significant latency. Adaptive vsync does not have this problem.
If you just want to cap framerates then there is loads of 3rd party software that can do it.
AMD was working on dynamic vsync but seem to have abandoned it, it is possible they will roll out something like that or a fastsync alternative with Vega drivers as there is a bunch of new software features coming but that is an unknown at this time.
If you just want to cap framerates then there is loads of 3rd party software that can do it.
AMD was working on dynamic vsync but seem to have abandoned it, it is possible they will roll out something like that or a fastsync alternative with Vega drivers as there is a bunch of new software features coming but that is an unknown at this time.
Last edited:
- Status