• 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.

DirectX 12 Requires Different Optimization on Nvidia and AMD Cards, Lots of Details Shared

Gregster said:
I would expect that to be the case for some time, or at least as far as any platform other than Windows Store. Publishers want to see maximum profit and there is many many users who are still rocking non DX12 capable cards.
Click to expand...

I hear you. ROTTR as an example offers a choice now, but for how long? Having followed the benchmark thread I'd opt for DX11 right now.
 
shankly1985 said:
This will change things a lot for amd and developers.
Click to expand...

I truly hope they go for it shanks, AMD really need to push hard to get GPUO into titles, it takes more than just a gpu to compete now, AMD needs to counter GW's.

Nv's Gpu Exclusive GW's feature set is running riot right now with almost every AAA title out there is Nv branded and it's had next to zero competition from AMD since launch.
 
I like AMDs true hair, it's called I believe? I like GW but it's a resource hog whereas AMDs hair solution not only looks better but also comes at a lower cost. If they can continue this trend across their package I have high hopes not only for them, but also to maybe force Nvidia to rework there's which will benefit everyone regardless of what company they run. What AMD does need to do alright is pour more resources into GPUO, since they've been shaving off in that research department lately.

tommybhoy said:
970 DX11 BM is way better for me running G-Sync

DX12 BM is terrible, it's a stutter fest-but don't know if G-Sync is DX12 enabled yet??
Click to expand...

BM?
 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
I truly hope they go for it shanks, AMD really need to push hard to get GPUO into titles, it takes more than just a gpu to compete now, AMD needs to counter GW's.

Nv's Gpu Exclusive GW's feature set is running riot right now with almost every AAA title out there is Nv branded and it's had next to zero competition from AMD since launch.
Click to expand...

It didn't really help in The Division did it though which is probably the biggest Gameworks game released this year?? :p

For anybody spending under £200,Nvidia has no real advantage in the game. The R9 380 and R9 380X without Gameworks come within 15% to 20% of a GTX970 and utterly destroys my GTX960.

With Gameworks effects the AMD cards are really not any slower,and the sub £200 Nvidia cards look meh.

Then above that even the GTX970 is looking meh in it.

Plus,quite a few Gaming Evolved titles have emerged from well known studios,without dat' Gameworks effect.

Then add the fact Ashes is still waiting for dat' async driver,it looks like MEH performance all the way for my card and probably for any sub £300 Nvidia card compared to AMD.

Plus,now the R9 380 thrashes the GTX960 in GOW:

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/...erformance_retest_-_the_game_has_been_fixed/3

Seems,dat' Gameworks effect is kind of going south in the last two months or so!

Looks like Nvidia is preparing for Pascal! :D
 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
I truly hope they go for it shanks, AMD really need to push hard to get GPUO into titles, it takes more than just a gpu to compete now, AMD needs to counter GW's.

Nv's Gpu Exclusive GW's feature set is running riot right now with almost every AAA title out there is Nv branded and it's had next to zero competition from AMD since launch.
Click to expand...
Tbh I don't even think it's fair to compare GpuOpen to Gameworks..

Open source vs black boxes.
 
Last edited:
Finners said:
As an AMD owner I don't like the sound of that, Cant see them having the resources to help out all the different developers to optimize games for their hardware.

So hopefully AMD regain market share with the next round of cards so the onus shifts onto the developer to not upset a large proportion of their audience.
Click to expand...

i think it's less of a problem for AMD than it is for Nvidia, AMD have unified arch GCN, so Devs who work on consoles wont have much of an issue, working on desktop also, Nvidia on the other hand have a lot of different archs, and even if they have a lot of ppl working on it, doesnt mean it's gonna be easy.
beside lower level API is for big AAA projects with demanding graphic, common indie stuff wont really matter unless it's for VR
 
This is looking very much like its going the way of AMD games and Nvidia games. AMD will have their evolved and thats pretty much what AMD will play well, and Nvidia will have their GW titles and thats what Nvidia users will play.

I'm probably on the outside with this view, but this is exactly what I would like to happen.
 
LambChop said:
This is looking very much like its going the way of AMD games and Nvidia games. AMD will have their evolved and thats pretty much what AMD will play well, and Nvidia will have their GW titles and thats what Nvidia users will play.

I'm probably on the outside with this view, but this is exactly what I would like to happen.
Click to expand...

Then consoles win out since devs are not stupid as MS and Sony have far more money than AMD and Nvidia and the PC will be dead as a platform. It even takes Intel to make an actual effort in graphics and they could actually bankrupt AMD and Nvidia,especially as they could easily outspend both companies in game sponsorships and R and D.

People in the end like convenience and if the PC cannot offer that just easier to go console and the PC will become even more of an afterthought then.

Expect more cinematic consolised PC ports using a £500 graphics card.
 
Last edited:
LambChop said:
This is looking very much like its going the way of AMD games and Nvidia games. AMD will have their evolved and thats pretty much what AMD will play well, and Nvidia will have their GW titles and thats what Nvidia users will play.

I'm probably on the outside with this view, but this is exactly what I would like to happen.
Click to expand...

Out of interest, why? A fragmented market can't be a good thing imo. I can see what you're saying though and that is a real possibility.
 
Last edited:
It depends on just how disasterous a game is running an Nvidia card is on an AMD-optimized title or vice versa. Right now, there can be pretty notable differences at times, but if it gets to the point where a game is getting like HALF the performance as somebody else with an opposite vendor 'equivalent', then we're in trouble.

I would hope that sensible developers will just forego this sort of thing if that's the route it will go down. It's not in their interest to severely hobble half(or more) of their potential market just to help the other half. In other words, we'd be looking at DX11 sticking around for quite a while.
 
You only have to look at Croteam who ended up making the first Vulkan game.
Click to expand...


Any eveytime I enble it atm it crashes the game and the graphics driver atm but its only a beta feature atm.

Anyway it was a interesting read (I will try and look at the proper slides later) and I think people are slowly realising DX12 not quite the silver bullet and can be a double edge sword.
 
KillBoY_UK said:
Any eveytime I enble it atm it crashes the game and the graphics driver atm but its only a beta feature atm.

Anyway it was a interesting read (I will try and look at the proper slides later) and I think people are slowly realising DX12 not quite the silver bullet and can be a double edge sword.
Click to expand...

Mate was running it OK on his old HD7870XT- maybe disable SLI?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom