Which site, can you post the 290X one you are talking about?
-
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.
Ashes of the Singularity Coming, with DX12 Benchmark in thread.
- Thread starter humbug
- Start date
Which site, can you post the 290X one you are talking about?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,746
- Location
- Planet Earth
I think it's more the case the consoles benefit the most from this,more than anything else so hence devs are trying to extract as much performance as they can out of them,and as a side effect its helping the AMD GCN cards.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
I am wondering if those ExtremeTech results are viable. I would have thought going from 0xmsaa to 4xmsaa would have weilded a bigger hit. According to there results the hit is only 4 fps which to me does not add up. It's only around a 10% hit to fps which is way lower than i have ever seen. Maybe it's just this Bench but to me that's strange.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2015
- Posts
- 206
- Location
- Warwickshire
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
don't worry, Kaap will be on it over the weekend
obviously people will be able to keep submitting results as the game progresses
the review sites are all "correct", the problem is each of the sites used different settings and different hardware and we don't have enough samples to come to a real conclusion, and then there have been new drivers from both sides since the reviews were done as well
most sites, when they do a proper benchmark game review will run say 5 cards from each vendor, and they'll test every setting to see how they scale... most of these Ashes DX12 reviews have done one card from each vendor and one maybe two settings in the benchmark, so it's nowhere near as comprehensive as it should be
Why is it when people disagree with findings and try to demonstrate this it is deemed to be angry?
If you look through the thread the angry people seem to be the ones accusing others of been angry or offended
Because this is the ocuk gpu sub forum, all sense or reason gets blinded in a haze of fan boy bickering and one upmanship.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
I've run extremetech's settings and I get the same results
even increasing three settings (msaa, taa and shadow details), the drop is still only 15fps... TAA has a bigger impact than MSAA in this game, likewise changing resolution doesn't have as big an impact as it does in most games
the graphics / models / textures actually look quite simple, they seem to have sacrificed everything else for sheer volume of units and then crammed as many lighting and shadow effects as they can in... it does look slightly better than the star swarm demo, so you would hope they would keep trying to improve it as they go
Last edited:
don't worry, Kaap will be on it over the weekend
obviously people will be able to keep submitting results as the game progresses
the review sites are all "correct", the problem is each of the sites used different settings and different hardware and we don't have enough samples to come to a real conclusion, and then there have been new drivers from both sides since the reviews were done as well
most sites, when they do a proper benchmark game review will run say 5 cards from each vendor, and they'll test every setting to see how they scale... most of these Ashes DX12 reviews have done one card from each vendor and one maybe two settings in the benchmark, so it's nowhere near as comprehensive as it should be
I think that's the wisest post Iv seen you post.
I concurr.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Actually Nvidia and AMD have 0% of the marketshare... because I'm talking about tv rights for the premier league and neither company has any market share.
See what I did was apply the market share of one market to a completely different one and pretended there was some relevance.
82% is the marketshare Nvidia had solely in the past quarter. Game dev's do not, have not and never will use this as a useful metric for making games. If AMD had only sold only 18% of cards generally used for gaming in the past 4-5 years you would have a point but that isn't an accurate reflection.
Market share for gpus used for gaming SOLD in the past quarter is different to the market for all gpus sold in the past quarter which is different from proportion of all gpus used by gamers in the past 4-5 years that game devs actually target for games is another metric entirely.
One isn't replaceable for another unless Nvidia had sold 82% of all DX12 compatible gpus in the past 4 years... which they haven't come close to.
But it's not surprising that there are 4-5 very specific people who keep trying to use this gpu sales number in an inappropriate way in these threads... and they have a tendency to run around congratulating each other for such a well made point over and over.
Fact, AMD owns 100% of all now current gen consoles, fact, game devs focus HEAVILY on consoles and the hardware capabilities that is in them, fact, a LOT of devs are saying they will be heavily using async shading because it's available for them on the consoles and it will provide a significant performance boost doing so with their games/engines for the consoles. Fact, this will have a bleed through effect for PC gaming.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2015
- Posts
- 206
- Location
- Warwickshire
He totally does, however never discount Nvidia to get down and dirty.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,881
- Location
- Surrey
Did you just make a sarcastic point about comparable markets and then mention consoles?
Summary.
Summary.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
You believe consoles have no bearing on PC gaming... okay, welcome to delusional Nvidia land where game devs use entirely different game engines for both markets, where games aren't designed to work on consoles at a basic level. You get more res, higher textures and sometimes extra post processing modes but the base game HAS to run on a console, everything extra on a PC is basically just that, extra, added on to the base game which is designed to work on console hardware.
Even games that are PC only in release are mostly built upon an engine designed to run on the consoles.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,881
- Location
- Surrey
What's the bearing have to do with the marketshare?
You're a fine one to talk about delusional. What will it take I wonder...
Your perception of the market is nothing but your own.
You're a fine one to talk about delusional. What will it take I wonder...
Your perception of the market is nothing but your own.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
Fact, ashes uses async compute and NVIDIA hardware still beats AMD
Fact, dx12 also has nvidia only features that NVIDIA are using in gameworks
Fact, several dx12 games coming from console to PC have already signed up to use gameworks
.
Fact, dx12 also has nvidia only features that NVIDIA are using in gameworks
Fact, several dx12 games coming from console to PC have already signed up to use gameworks
. Fact, ashes uses async compute and NVIDIA hardware still beats AMD
No, as far as i can tell an AMD GPU with half the Power is capable of surpassing Nvidia with ASync. BTW. ASync isn't just compute, you're missing the point of it.
------
Anyway.....
Most Game Engines these days are the same for Console and PC or even other platforms, they simply use different setting or porting options of the same work.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,182
edit - Best not...
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
Last edited: