well compute wise the 390x is about the same as 980ti
-
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
well compute wise the 390x is about the same as 980ti
why are the green team fans getting knickers in a twist about this - the hardware spec shows the pipeline limitations under DX12 - its a DX11 card and a good one , but AMD have caught them with the tech this time AND they couldn't pay off MS to change the spec as AMD have the console market.
Still - Tomb raider shows - whereas its DX12 on console with async (fog and smoke effects amoungst others) - Nv threw enough money at them to make it DX11 on PC to make their cards look the best.
Still - Tomb raider shows - whereas its DX12 on console with async (fog and smoke effects amoungst others) - Nv threw enough money at them to make it DX11 on PC to make their cards look the best.
Not sure who all these 'Green team fans' are and looking back quickly, I can only see one person. I can totally understand why the AMD users are happy though and rightly so, it is good for them to be ahead in this game and judging by the last Beta 1 (0.85), they were ahead then as well. I am impressed with how the 390X is so close to the 980Ti in truth and great to see the Fury X quite a chunk ahead. I hope a few users who own both AMD and NVidia post their results up for this game (I know I will) and good for the AMD guys to have some bragging rights.
As for Rise of the Tomb Raider - That sounds quite interesting about NVidia throwing money at the devs and I wouldn't mind reading the article you got that info from
I dont think anyones knickers are in a twist, but when benchmarks are ran with different versions of game used, an updated driver for the game from AMD and it being an AMD sponsored game with Nvidia disabling async then its not a like for like comparison. It's not even a close comparison, its miles away.
Anandtechs results were not run on latest beta but 16.1.1 and AMD are still ahead. Even with the async disabled tests AMD are still ahead.
The game might be AMD sponsored but Nvidia are submiting code improvements to help their own hardware and the developers are persuing code that has no detriment to any hardware.
NVIDIA also appears to lack certain effects as well when running. But some people noted that it was an older version so someone might need to make a video of latest benchmark to check.
Seriously stop using that video as comparision. They are not the same game version.
Is the benchmark available to download ? I want to run it on my 980's (I'll disable one) and see what scores I get compared to anan etc
Nvidia asked them to disable some settings I believe. Of course Oxide refused then had a little rant themselves about it.
you did read the results were the same on the previous WHQL amd driver didn't you? the 16.1? and ofc Nvidia have never told devs how to benchmark games for their advantage :roll:
gregster:
http://gearnuke.com/rise-of-the-tom...breathtaking-volumetric-lighting-on-xbox-one/
why would a feature be removed from the game which is on console but removed for the pc release - and a feature set added which can only be run by 1 IHV
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Rise-Tomb-Raider-AMD-and-NVIDIA-Performance-Results
without money changing hands....
yes because quite rightly it is THEIR game and the settings NVidia wanted to disable was not core to THEIR game and only benefitted NVidia.
You need to buy the game to get it. And this new version of the benchmark hasn't been given to public yet. Rumor was that it would come today, but nothing has been confirmed.
ROFL - a constructed argument with support is proving you wrong lol
you said the devs had a rant - no they put a professional rebuttall as to why they were making a DX12 game with as many of the features of the api as they could - also note its the first title with multi vendor gpu support that doesn`t need sli/cf to work.
but I'm sure they are ranting about that as well huh
I'm confused a little here, exactly what is it I'm trying to be right about and what according to you am I wrong about ?
Lots of reasons really. When coding for DX12 on the XBONe, you are coding for a single system where it is the same across the whole board but coding for DX12 on PC is a complete different kettle of fish. You have to accomodate endless different components and I imagine that it will get a DX12 boot at some point when and if the devs have time. I don't think for one minute that NVidia paid the devs to remove DX12 and seems a silly notion that they did to me.
I don't really understand why people are crying over tombraider not having async compute. For starters the game needs to have dx12 to have async compute as it doesn't work on dx11. So let's see if we get that Tombraider dx12 version out, if it has async. Clearly they have problems with DX12 path as it wasn't released on release.
I don't believe for a second either nvidia paid to have it removed.
I don't believe for a second either nvidia paid to have it removed.
so now you are trying the straw man - ggwp
DX12 is coded for the game not for the gpu - so whth it working on Xbone and later direct2metal on PS4 (with similar features as xbox) there is 0 reason to not have the option from day 1. look at ashes - turn off async and run the DX11 code path.
but they didn't and they removed it entirely AND they have added to the pc version , Nv only options.
a dev doesn't do anything without funding - and the company funding them , depending on the size of the pay , asks for and get the options they want.
same in retail - those promo`s? they are all paid for by the companies doing them