-
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.
Doom Vulkan vs Open GL performance
- Thread starter Doom112
- Start date
27% advantage to FuryX and people think recomend the 1070 is a good idea?
Called AMD Powa with dx12/Vulkan isnt it?
27% advantage to FuryX and people think recomend the 1070 is a good idea?
Called AMD Powa with dx12/Vulkan isnt it?
Well only if you're going to buy a Fury X at a reduced price like OcUK recently did €485. Some big places in the EU are still charging over €650-750+ which makes the 1070 look damn decent despite it's price gouging.
I like that he had a good balanced take on the end towards the various cards and how it is early days yet - commenting on the vsync thing, etc.
EDIT: He might be on the money there for why Kepler isn't doing well - the numbers suspiciously match up with vsync multiples - it is like the game is constantly bouncing off 2 down vsync multipliers for the potential FPS even with vsync disabled.
Last edited:
Soldato
Looking at the numbers it seems like DX12 / Vulkan lets the AMD cards get much closer to their peak theoretical performance. That's a really good thing for the Red team. Nvidia's drivers are already pretty damn good on the whole. That guy has definitely picked up on something with the 1070 having VSync stuck on. Maybe that's really hobbling Nvidia? Could something so simple have been overlooked?
Sticking my neck out I think there are another 15 - 20% of gains to be had which ought to take the RX480 up to and perhaps past the 980 GTX in DX12 and Vulkan.
This kind of competition is great for consumers. Which is all that matters for us lot.
Sticking my neck out I think there are another 15 - 20% of gains to be had which ought to take the RX480 up to and perhaps past the 980 GTX in DX12 and Vulkan.
This kind of competition is great for consumers. Which is all that matters for us lot.
As mentioned in the DF video it is early days - they even found some fairly basic issues with V-Sync not sorted in the drivers for both sides - so we will probably see a fair bit of optimisation and improvements yet.
I find they're always rather well balanced, and I like their recording and measuring systems. Which I could just build a second powerhouse with 4K 60fps capture card myself to test things and use FCAT. Looks like a lot of fun.
Also in regards to Kepler, I wonder if NV's upcoming driver will help there as it's apparently for Doom and Vulkan performance.
It's odd that they're late on such a driver though.
Permabanned
Wow the Fury X hold a 20%+ advantage over the 1070 at 4k with Vulcan.
It's such a shame AMD's DX11 performance isn't better.
So from those numbers a Fury pro will out perform the 1070 in Doom.
If we really do get more and more future titles noticeably leaning towards AMD's GCN, Because of it's advantages in 3 or 4 years time owners of older Grenada, Polaris and Fiji cards could be sitting pretty when compared to gamers with Maxwell and the small Pascal chipped cards.
In 3-4 years time most of the current GPUs regardless of how well they do with Vulkan, etc. or not will be pretty irrelevant unless you like playing with low to medium settings :S
You say that but i'm still using my 290x 3 years on, although it struggles in the main for 4k, its still an awesome performing card for 1080 and 1440.
I'm still mostly using my 780 3 years on but that is largely due to how long we've been stuck on 28nm and pace of API development :s
Vulkan Vsync is broken on Nvidia.
Associate
I don't see a 1080 being irrelevant any time soon, even in 3-4 years from now. 4k is not really a wide spread thing and the card is pretty decent in it anyway. 1080 is a safe buy for 3-4 years.
Also on AMD, they explain it all in the video.
Look at the history of game development - the cards that are relevant in the early days of an API rarely hold up well in the long run when there is a new API shift, new hardware architecture, etc. (Will somewhat depend on the timing of 10nm and/or whatever happens there with graphic cards).
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,158
While I agree it's not really like back years ago. Gpu development has slowed to a crawl so cards are lasting longer. I think because of this Graphical improvements have gone the same way. Even the consoles are weaker in comparison
A lot of that is down to the length of time stuck on 28nm and slow ramp upto finfets - pace will likely pick up again now new APIs are finally gathering momentum and sub 19nm planar development is picking up pace.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,158
I hope you are right. It would be nice to get more leaps in performance like we used to.