• 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.

Codemasters builds DX12 support into its EGO Engine 4.0

Gregster said:
Only played 2013 and 2014 and both ran well for me. 2015 was on the new engine but that passed me by with so many other games released roughly the same time.
Click to expand...

2014 was pretty decent the co op was good & online was more functional , however that being said the game had its fair share of bugs and still does to this day.

when i say bugs i mean like in both 2014 and 2015 if you incurred a penalty in qualifying when playing online once you then enter the race quit then restart you will find your penalty has gone. Loads of silly bugs like this in both games that just never got fixed they spend about 2 / 3 months using us as beta testers upon release then drop support.
 
tommybhoy said:
Apparently back in October DX12 drivers weren't good enough.

As the GW's partnered Ark: Survival Evolved DX12 release build got pulled due to DX12 driver support not very good, as it's mid January and still no show then, support is still not good enough.

I'm surprised being a Nvidia GW's title the DX 12 drivers are still rubbish considering Nvidia's close partner involvement.
Click to expand...

The telling part is "we'll wait until DX12 performance is better than DX11"... I'm still periodically checking in on Ashes, and although the 980ti's performance is still well ahead of the FuryX on DX12, Nvidia's DX11 performance is still ahead of Nvidia's DX12 performance (for single card)... which is a testament to Nvidia's DX11 driver overhead improvements they made... multi-GPU on DX12 will be the real test as clearly CPU is the limiting factor in most DX11 games now at 980ti-like levels of GPU performance, just being able to get decent scaling would be a big improvement
 
andybird123 said:
The telling part is "we'll wait until DX12 performance is better than DX11"... I'm still periodically checking in on Ashes, and although the 980ti's performance is still well ahead of the FuryX on DX12, Nvidia's DX11 performance is still ahead of Nvidia's DX12 performance (for single card)... which is a testament to Nvidia's DX11 driver overhead improvements they made... multi-GPU on DX12 will be the real test as clearly CPU is the limiting factor in most DX11 games now at 980ti-like levels of GPU performance, just being able to get decent scaling would be a big improvement
Click to expand...

such delusion.
 
flopper said:
delusion.
Click to expand...

Delusion sounds about right as to some live in a halo bubble that the only Nvidia cards available are halo cards, they are better because they have less stripped out over their lower brethren and are superior to AMD halo as it's a faster product than fiji, anything else DX12 Nvidia gets pumped rotten:290 v 970 same processor, the 290 is an incredible 54% faster on the same processor.

Kaapstad said:
  • Average FR 33.6, GPU 290P @1285/1500, Normal FR 41.0, Medium FR 33.9, Heavy FR 28.3, CPU FX-9590 @5.0, Streetlight Link
  • Average FR 33.2, GPU 290P @1190/1300, Normal FR 41.7, Medium FR 33.3, Heavy FR 27.6, CPU 4790k @4.7, thebennyboy Link
  • Average FR 21.7, GPU 970 @1450/1900, Normal FR 27.2, Medium FR 20.8, Heavy FR 18.7, CPU FX-9590 @4.6, humbug Link
Click to expand...
 
AMD have already done the majority of the heavy lifting for Vulkan. If they had not offered mantle as a basis for it then I believe it would still be stuck in dev limbo as it has been for the past so many years.

What khronos also need to do is release a fresh version of OpenGL with modern features that strips out all legacy code and fully standardises OpenGL. the latest iteration is still a huge ****ing mess with multiple methods of doing the same thing and each working differently between IHV's and even operating systems.

They need a fresh start with OpenGL 5 and give it full documentation and means testing.
 
tommybhoy said:
Delusion sounds about right as to some live in a halo bubble that the only Nvidia cards available are halo cards, they are better because they have less stripped out over their lower brethren and are superior to AMD halo as it's a faster product than fiji, anything else DX12 Nvidia gets pumped rotten:290 v 970 same processor, the 290 is an incredible 54% faster on the same processor.
Click to expand...

Humbug was running a different version to us for some reason. Mine needed updating when I tried to run the latest version but somehow Humbug was able to run his on the older version? ;)
 
Gregster said:
Humbug was running a different version to us for some reason. Mine needed updating when I tried to run the latest version but somehow Humbug was able to run his on the older version? ;)
Click to expand...

The older version was slower on all cards compared to the later one at least when it first launched. Some were running a cracked version which was an earlier build. Nvidia top end was faster on all builds but below this the Hawaii cards were dominating. Is this a sign of what will happen in dx12? For me it's too early to say but i think the current range of AMD cards while most are older than Maxwell are looking good at this moment . The top end Nvidia cards are still going to be faster imo due to there overclocking.
 
Last edited:
Oh right, must explain why some Fiji are on top of TX.

If the bm here isn't worth any basis, then all we have to go on is the bm articles which showed the 290X giving the 970 the ride of it's life on DX12, are they wrong?

Perhaps they used different builds between bm's?

My whole point is about Nvidia DX12 not being much kop, as Nvidia's optimised DX11 performs better than their DX12, it enforces the point, it's the exact same scenario as AMD's DX11 not being much kop but their DX12 is optimised, perhaps it's time to get on it Nvidia instead of running the clock down until the next cards come.

Disclaimer-I'm capable of holding my own opinion, not what someone else wants me to see, feel free to disagree, I'm calm, I'm happy in life, I didn't use any humour or had a poke at anything or any one, no animals were harmed while typing this post.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
Oh right, must explain why some Fiji are on top of TX.

If the bm here isn't worth any basis, then all we have to go on is the bm articles which showed the 290X giving the 970 the ride of it's life on DX12, are they wrong?
.
Click to expand...

Well, is it more a case that we cant rely on anything at the moment - the game is in Alpha, we know performance changes patch to patch and the last we heard from NV was "drivers need work"... I agree though that by the time DX12 games are actually available they should have drivers up in a better state (if that is the current problem for the 970)
 
Idk, did Nvidia say they need work on their end with DX12 too?

I'm basing off the ark dev saying they need work, can't help but feel there is a problem somewhere being either a hardware/software/api(or any combination of) problem on Nvidia's end-

With game developers now armed with DirectX 12, a new era of gaming is on the horizon and GeForce owners are Game Ready and waiting.
Click to expand...

aka

overclockers dream
Click to expand...
 
By the time DX12 is in full flow, most will have moved on to newer GPUs, so it is all rather moot anyways, and those who want to keep their current cards will have a better idea of how their GPUs cope. I see no point in arguing over this in this thread when we have had thread after thread discussing the in's and out's of DX12 and pretty much all of it based on speculation with only a small input from AMD and Nvidia.
 
Surely Pascal/Polaris DX12 performance is more the issue than the current drop of cards?

By the time we really have enough DX12 games for it to be an issue we should hopefully have the next gen of GPUs.

The people that are really worried about performance will probably upgrade, especially given this next gen is expected to be a big leap forward. The people that don't shouldn't expect to be getting cutting edge high-end performance. I'm sure we all know and accept that if you're using an older GPU you have to be prepared to sacrifice fps or image quality.
I don't expect to be able to max out DX12 games on my 7950 (not that I'm using it currently). In the same way I don't expect my 290Xs, 980s or Fury Xs to perfectly support every capability of DX12 either.

Pascal/Polaris having issues is a different matter as I'd expect both parties to have gone into designing them with DX12 being much more of a known factor.
 
Gregster said:
By the time DX12 is in full flow, most will have moved on to newer GPUs, so it is all rather moot anyways, and those who want to keep their current cards will have a better idea of how their GPUs cope. I see no point in arguing over this in this thread when we have had thread after thread discussing the in's and out's of DX12 and pretty much all of it based on speculation with only a small input from AMD and Nvidia.
Click to expand...

Agreed, If any games were finished and released and one side had poor performance then we could jump to our own conclusions with facts to back it up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom