Looks like AMD have been on the money all along regarding Devs not being able to optimise Game Works for AMD..
Last edited:
-
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.
CPR W3 on Hairworks(Nvidia Game Works)-'the code of this feature cannot be optimized for AMD'
- Thread starter tommybhoy
- Start date
FOR CLARITY-AMD have said NOTHING about W3 Hairworks optimisations on AMD, afaik, AMD have yet to comment at all on W3 GW's implementation on their tech.
Must have been Obtuse Friday, a non issue thread with denial, deflection, ignorance, bliss.
Last edited:
Since new rules kicked in?
It's called cba getting into pointless discussions these days but you want an opinion, here you go:
You linked a corporate response a few posts ago, had zero issues with it, nothing to 'add' out with AMD Roy's public **** up and PCars apparently contains royalty free in game advertising.
GW's bottom line=Shady as **** artificial performance advantage over your competitor with a huge carrot encouraging them to switch vendors and at the same time a subtle push to ensure your own customers upgrade-yet another absolute genius tactic from Nividia-the company that doesn't do apologies to it's customers, simply explanations when they get caught out.
All we need now is for AMD to shake itself down, claw some business back with competition, loose the good guy image and lock out Nvidia optimisations on their features, sorted, the console ecosystem on PC-happy days.
Tesselation reduction at driver level aint optimising.
Using Booms post as an example:
'The Witcher 3 Will Get GW's Improvements for AMD in Upcoming Patch', it's a journo Jedi mind trick.
Think pgi worded it perfectly humbug, more a case of 'that's your lot', although I think Nvidia will monitor it and if there's a big enough ruffle of discontent, they'll address it.
It's more like kicking your mate out your car and making him walk to work in the ****ing rain because it's your car, totally justifiable as he doesn't have one but it's ok because you'll both get there in the end and it's a **** take anyway
'GameWorks source code is available to licensees. We provide source code, under license, to developers who request it'-CDR have access to the code, fine.
'Licensees can’t redistribute our source code to anyone who does not have a license'-CDR can't share the code.
'the code of this feature cannot be optimized for AMD products'-but the line is it's for devs to code in effects easily, if it's to make it easier for devs, why can't the devs help AMD getting a game feature optimised?
The 'giving away something for free' and the 'turn it off' lines are deflecting the issue.
In direct comparison, Nixxes worked hand in hand alongside Nvidia to enable fully functional TFX code and modified TFX code to work as it should-in an early patching/fix attempt, Nixxes even broke AMD TFX to the point that they gave BOTH AMD AND Nvidia two different versions to use, with working TFX on BOTH at the same time-and AMD didn't so much as blink an eye.
All TR TFX gamers regardless the gpu were winners.
Which ultimately gets a win win situation for Nvidia, it pushed me to the dark side.
It's more like kicking your mate out your car and making him walk to work in the ****ing rain because it's your car, totally justifiable as he doesn't have one but it's ok because you'll both get there in the end and it's a **** take anyway
'GameWorks source code is available to licensees. We provide source code, under license, to developers who request it'-CDR have access to the code, fine.
'Licensees can’t redistribute our source code to anyone who does not have a license'-CDR can't share the code.
'the code of this feature cannot be optimized for AMD products'-but the line is it's for devs to code in effects easily, if it's to make it easier for devs, why can't the devs help AMD getting a game feature optimised?
The 'giving away something for free' and the 'turn it off' lines are deflecting the issue.
In direct comparison, Nixxes worked hand in hand alongside Nvidia to enable fully functional TFX code and modified TFX code to work as it should-in an early patching/fix attempt, Nixxes even broke AMD TFX to the point that they gave BOTH AMD AND Nvidia two different versions to use, with working TFX on BOTH at the same time-and AMD didn't so much as blink an eye.
All TR TFX gamers regardless the gpu were winners.
Which ultimately gets a win win situation for Nvidia, it pushed me to the dark side.
Last edited:
Sick to death of hearing about it being a 'blame game', it's **** for the PC gaming community.
Taking vendor preference out the equation, if you had the choice of the Nixxes approach or the black box approach, which one benefits the PC gaming community?
It's the only example needed on how it should be played-above board with zero obfuscation involved from anyone.
lol gameworks added in the last few months.
Well here is a video from last August. (that is 9 months ago for those who cannot be bothered to work it out)
And here is one from June 2013 ( that's a lot of months because I cannot be bothered to work it out.
So that pretty much shuts up any talk that Gameworks was only implemented in the last few months.
No it doesn't, that was the optimised Keplar build version, it got scrapped with updated GW's to favour Maxwell...
joke.
Last edited:
Anyone's thoughts on whether or not to start dedicated Nvidia W3 tweaking thread and another for AMD???
Np, won't get a good shot until late tonight.
Good stuff cheers
let me know how much better it is! i cant play right now
i think the biggest change on the last update i liked was the keyboard response stuff
Np, won't get a good shot until late tonight.
Relevant because if AMD released a driver level override without any user input, the place would erupt.
Same applies, very much doubt it's as simple as a straight reduce tess performance by 75% without user input, fine 'tweaking' and outright performance advantage is two different entities.