-
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.
Poll: Do you think AMD will be able to compete with Nvidia again during the next few years?
- Thread starter CAT-THE-FIFTH
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2018
- Posts
- 2,827
That's async compute for you. It's probably using parallel execution of compute and graphics tasks and not concurrent.
This was why Dx12 was intro'd to begin with. For that parallel execution of compute and graphics tasks. So no surprise here.
What is surprising is that AMD hasn't got more developers on board with it since it's release.
This was why Dx12 was intro'd to begin with. For that parallel execution of compute and graphics tasks. So no surprise here.
What is surprising is that AMD hasn't got more developers on board with it since it's release.
Simply because AMD and Nvidia DX11 drivers contain lots of optimizations. You see all those release notes that claim "30% performance improvement in game X". With DX12 there are less optimizations thst can be down and there is a greater emphasis on the game developers. But game developers don't know the intracies of the micro architecture so they have a big handicap.
The whole performance gains of DX 12 need some big caveats. DX 11 does have poor draw call scaling, doesn't exploit multithreading fully, and had a lot of overhead. However, AMD and Nvidia both do their best to reduce overhead. Game developers do their best to minimize draw calls b batching calls and minimising state changes.
Nvidia's hardware has also been heavily optimized for DX11 so it's pitfalls are not felt.
The end result is DX12 I'd only an advantage with a high end GPU and a slower CPU, and only when the game devs take the time to optimize DX12.
I think DX12 days are numbered. There is just no interest in developers having to increase resources just to get the same performance as DX11.
DX12 with full support of game devs is great. DX 11 has major weaknesses, but they are resolved through drivers and hardware designs. Not the most elegant setup, but at the same time it makes sense thatvthe engineers that know the hardware in the smallest detail are responsible for maximize performance. Software devs never want to know the hardware details, they want abstraction
The funniest statement. Are you saying we will go back in time and Microsoft will start using DirectX 11, then DirectX 10...?
I mean really - just be honest and say nvidia has no native DirectX 12 capable architecture yet and once they release it, things will improve for them
Why would they? their DX11 is so effective most of the time it overshadows the DX12 of AMD.I mean really - just be honest and say nvidia has no native DirectX 12 capable architecture yet and once they release it, things will improve for them
Here is WoW @DX12, NVIDIA GPUs @DX11 are 23% faster than AMD GPUs @DX12 @1080p
https://www.computerbase.de/2018-07...agramm-wow-directx-11-vs-directx-12-1920-1080
I will stop reading here. DirectX 12 is a global Direct3D feature set used by ARM Mali, Qualcomm Adreno, AMD Radeon and Intel Graphics.
Associate
Indeed, DirectX 12 has been very exciting so far. I've enjoyed all the reviews of all the games in which it's made a massive difference. I'm so glad they got it together for this round of cards.
Was looking at that review of WoW DX12 performance and I was intrigued by the DX12 and DX11 frametimes with midrange graphics cards.
Even though the RX580 is registering less FPS,look at the frametime plots - the GTX1060 graph if magnified for DX11 seems to show it see-sawing,whereas the RX580 seems to be somewhat flatter,however Computerbase.de have used different scales for both graphs even though they are the same physical size. So 70 vs 30(factor of 2.33) on the y axis and 1.813 and 1.432(factor of 1.27) on the x axis.
If you equate the scales together.
Also something else even more intriguing. It seems WoW looks very CPU limited on the GTX1080 under DX11(Core i7 8700K is 19% faster than a G4560),whereas the Vega64 under DX12 looks mostly GPU limited(Core i7 8700K is 5% faster than a G4560).
I would love to see some additional testing during raids which is where the game is mostly CPU limited.
Even though the RX580 is registering less FPS,look at the frametime plots - the GTX1060 graph if magnified for DX11 seems to show it see-sawing,whereas the RX580 seems to be somewhat flatter,however Computerbase.de have used different scales for both graphs even though they are the same physical size. So 70 vs 30(factor of 2.33) on the y axis and 1.813 and 1.432(factor of 1.27) on the x axis.
If you equate the scales together.
Also something else even more intriguing. It seems WoW looks very CPU limited on the GTX1080 under DX11(Core i7 8700K is 19% faster than a G4560),whereas the Vega64 under DX12 looks mostly GPU limited(Core i7 8700K is 5% faster than a G4560).
I would love to see some additional testing during raids which is where the game is mostly CPU limited.
Last edited:
The funniest statement. Are you saying we will go back in time and Microsoft will start using DirectX 11, then DirectX 10...?
I mean really - just be honest and say nvidia has no native DirectX 12 capable architecture yet and once they release it, things will improve for them
No,I think a new a new DX version will come all t to replace the failed DX12.
in 2016 there were 10 DX12 games released,in 2017 there were only 5 and 2 of them updates to the previous games (e.g total warhammer). In almost all cases the DX12 engine show s no performance enhancement.
DX12 has failed. Developers that said they were going to use it have dropped support. It simply isn't what developers want
As to nvidi a having no DX12 architecture, that is just absolute nonsense.
Media incompetency added to wishful thinking of hardcore nvidia followers is a recipe for misinformation disaster.
Forget it, there won't be a new version. Have you heard of work on DX13? I haven't.
TBH, I wouldn't expect performance improvements with new versions - marketing and sales will never be happy and it has never worked like this.
New versions almost always decrease performance.
Except the Radeons in titles like Ashes of the Singularity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX
Ashes of the Singularity was the first publicly available game to utilize DirectX 12. Testing by Ars Technica in August 2015 revealed slight performance regressions in DirectX 12 over DirectX 11 mode for the Nvidia GeForce 980 Ti, whereas the AMD Radeon R9 290x achieved consistent performance improvements of up to 70% under DirectX 12, in some scenarios the AMD outperformed the more powerful Nvidia under DirectX 12. The performance discrepancies may be due to poor Nvidia driver optimizations for DirectX 12, or even hardware limitations of the card which was optimized for DirectX 11 serial execution...
nvidia has no native DirectX 12 architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_levels_in_Direct3D
Where are the DirectX 12 games?
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/wheres-all-the-direct-x-12-games.219302/
Caporegime
DX12 had me super excited when first hearing about it back in 2015 but sadly, nothing has come to pass with it. It is all well and good quoting posters on forums who say this and that but the sad truth is there really isn't any DX12 specific titles. Vulkan is the same and whilst I respect the fact that these things take time, I am quite happy running DX11 on my GPU and will see what the future brings. Maybe the next round of consoles will see us PC gamers pushing forward but til then meh at DX12.
Caporegime
NVidia is against it? I wouldn't mind reading where you read that. I also think AMD pumped money into Mantle (Vulkan), so doubt they will be pouring money into DX12. The games I have with both DX11 and DX12 just run better on the whole for me in DX11 (might have changed recently but not bothered switching to see), so unless there is a worthwhile performance difference, I just don't see the point.nvidia is against, so it means developers wait for AMD to pour more cash
And now look where NVIDIA vs AMD stands in that title?
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11987/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-ti-founders-edition-review/5
Incorrect, In fact per that table you shared, Maxwell and Pascal have more visual DX12 features than Polaris and GCN3 and GCN4. Because these AMD generations lack Conservative Rasterization and Raster Ordered View, these effects are used for advanced shadows and smoke techniques among others, meaning if a game was to use these features. Polaris and GCN4 cards wouldn't be able to render them.
We are now 3 years (or 4) after DX12 was revealed, no game has shown any significant improvements using DX12. It's actually the opposite, most games are released with DX11 performing better and more reliably than DX12.
nvidia is against, so it means developers wait for AMD to pour more cash
+1
Associate
I would imagine its just more anti Nvidia rhetoric, this time without any merit, Yawn.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct3D
Although Nvidia has announced broad support for Direct3D 12, they were also somewhat reserved about the universal appeal of the new API, noting that while game engine developers may be enthusiastic about directly managing GPU resources from their application code, "a lot of [other] folks wouldn't" be happy to have to do that."
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,857
Not surprised, Pascal is still essentially a DX11-focused architecture. Once Volta (or whatever the **** they're calling it now) with proper DX12/Vulkan improvements hits then I'm even surprised these updates are out!! The nVidia way is to just bribe the **** out of devs to wait until their new cards are ready before releasing. Shady bunch of ****s as usual.
Associate
That does not state that they are against it, just that they have doubts about its usefulness.