Now he had promise.
OMG Kaapstad is Ming!
-
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.
I predict we're going to see dramatic improvements from AMD
- Thread starter Havana_UK
- Start date
OMG Kaapstad is Ming!
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 10,857
- Location
- Nottingham
Most of AMD's poor performance in the past has had nothing to do with their cards, but the fact Nvidia either paid for devs to favour their cards, or did the programming themselves for features and had them added to games.
This guy should be very good for dev relations and help AMD.
Precisely.
There's little difference in the raw capability between nvidia and AMD, and the real differences com from how well the games developers implement the capabilities of the respective hardware & drivers.
This is where Roy will deliver massive benefits for AMD.
As an England fan I find it hard to believe someone called Roy can delivery success
At least we can understand him, sort of...
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Potentially, but not really, for the past few years, (well a lot longer than that) companies have seemingly been moving away from Nvidia, there are still plenty of games but, MS refused to work with them again, Sony are refusing for the next gen with craploads of rumours of Nvidia just being terrible to work with on projects like those.
Gaming wise AMD Evolved has gone from non existant to very prominant in the past couple years, and considering AMD's complete domination of all consoles from late 2013/early 2014 onwards... that is only going to improve drastically anyway.
Basically, AMD's dev relations have been improving dramatically for the past 3-4 years, and it shows in games, the amount of games in the past couple years that have gone AMD over Nvidia, that not every review is 9 Nvidia games out of 10 these days. So can he improve them, maybe, but complete console domination meant AMD evolved, and amd's involvement with all the major titles in the next few years was always going to be massive.
What they need is a guy who can sell to Joe Public, and cash on in the "you've got AMD stuff in your awesome console, go buy an AMD powered tablet/laptop/desktop......." .
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2011
- Posts
- 36
- Location
- workington
amd=best bang for £££££
Not quite sure if theres an insinuation of underhand stuff there or not but most of the games where nVidia have been involved has involved using an nvapi render path for nVidia hardware that better supports nVidia hardware with alternative routines that are better optimised for nVidia hardware and have had no impact on the IHV render paths. Games performing worse on AMD/ATI hardware due to nVidia involvement is very much more the exception than the rule (and vice versa). I know its not the popular viewpoint around here but at a technical level its very much fact whether people like it or not.
Did you just say that when nVidia is involved, games use a pathway that is optimised for nvidia hardware, but those games - which are designed to use a better optimised path for nvidia hardware - dont perform worse on AMD hardware?
Logically, that doesn't make a lot of sense.
Logically, that doesn't make a lot of sense.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,215
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Meh, the metaphor of rearraging the deck chairs on the titanic seems fitting for this story.
AMD needs Jesus on its board of directors if it wants to turn things around. The fact is the market for discreate video cards is getting smler and smaller each year with the big box shifters (Dell, Levono, HP etc) using the onboard rubbish you get from Intel.
It doesn't help matters when you consider the market place discreate video cards operate is getting smaer at the same time.
AMD needs Jesus on its board of directors if it wants to turn things around. The fact is the market for discreate video cards is getting smler and smaller each year with the big box shifters (Dell, Levono, HP etc) using the onboard rubbish you get from Intel.
It doesn't help matters when you consider the market place discreate video cards operate is getting smaer at the same time.
I would think at the top end i.e. where we are all buying the market won't change or may grow. Developing countries now have populations with money to burn China, India, Russia and Brazil. People that buy high end PC gear will always fund the cash as it's a hobby. I would question though whether the lower end volume sales can support the development of the high end.
Companies always like a power product to showcase the rest of their line but maybe they'll decide the money is in mobile?
Depending on the game often when nVidia is involved they will use 2 or more render paths - normal stock D3D or Open GL functions when non-nvidia hardware is detected and then for certain functions if nVidia hardware is found some features will use nVidia API calls for those functions that will work in a way the suits the nVidia hardware better - it has no impact on how the normal method works on other hardware.
This isn't always the case but the games where nVidia's involvement has meant they run worse (than they would have done without nVidia's involvement) on non-nVidia hardware is pretty small.
Tell that to what they did on Batman AA, now that was underhanded.
They pretended what you've said above was the case, but when looked at the AA code was as generic as can be.
Trolling?
Theres no way to prove if they did anything underhand or not with regards to Batman. As AMD made absolutely no effort to provide support for it, even when prompted, theres no way to know if nVidia would have attempted to block their efforts or not.
What nVidia did code wise is widely mis-understood - not helped by misleading reports from people who were in the know.
Factually however:
The AA code nVidia implemented was when looked at based heavily on a generic AA + HDR implementation.
This AA code is running regardless of what GPU you use.
The "final" ~10% of the code only has an nVidia specific resolve target and no generic or AMD/ATI specific resolve is called which means that on all non-nVidia hardware its doing ~90% of the work of providing AA but without displaying the final output.
The developer should have provided the final stage for generic hardware - they were too lazy (some confusion over the legality of them touching that part of the code but they were later given the all clear and still did nothing).
AMD should/could have provided the final stage for their GPUs and were "apparently" given the all clear to do so but as they made no effort to do so and instead said the nVidia based solution should be enabled in its entirety untested on their GPUs and hid behind insinuations that nVidia were blocking them access - however as they made no effort to actually provide their own code theres no way to verify that.
Personally in hindsight once more facts have come out I'm inclinded to equally blame everyone for that one.
Trolling? 
The fact that Rocksteady and nVidia couldn't blame each other any quicker strongly implies something underhanded was going on.
As for saying you blame everyone equally, well that's not true. The first part of your posts shows that. You're saying there isn't much evidence of anything to make a claim, yet you acknowledge that you know AMD claim they did try to provide support, but nVidia blocked them.
How is that equal blame? nVidia said they didn't block them, AMD said they did. If you believe there's equal blame then you shouldn't pick one of the the other then claim you're being fair and blaming everyone equally.
The fact that Rocksteady and nVidia couldn't blame each other any quicker strongly implies something underhanded was going on.
As for saying you blame everyone equally, well that's not true. The first part of your posts shows that. You're saying there isn't much evidence of anything to make a claim, yet you acknowledge that you know AMD claim they did try to provide support, but nVidia blocked them.
How is that equal blame? nVidia said they didn't block them, AMD said they did. If you believe there's equal blame then you shouldn't pick one of the the other then claim you're being fair and blaming everyone equally.
Trolling?
The fact that Rocksteady and nVidia couldn't blame each other any quicker strongly implies something underhanded was going on.
As for saying you blame everyone equally, well that's not true. The first part of your posts shows that. You're saying there isn't much evidence of anything to make a claim, yet you acknowledge that you know AMD claim they did try to provide support, but nVidia blocked them.
How is that equal blame? nVidia said they didn't block them, AMD said they did. If you believe there's equal blame then you shouldn't pick one of the the other then claim you're being fair and blaming everyone equally.
+1
At least in Game AA is enabled for AMD in the GOTY version.
Theres nothing wrong with AMD GPU's, they just had a carp team of programers. The new team solved the lack of performance with the latest 7000 GPU drivers, the drivers can only get better. Yes Nvidia do pay certain game developers to favor their GPU's, among other things. 
I've been a "nvidia fanboy" for years I think I only owned one or two amd/ati gpus in my entire history as a gamer but really, to be honest now you have to be a goddamn mentally challenged orangutan to get crashes. I remember when I bought my current gpu (7850) I immediately thought about how bad people say amd's drivers are. And surprise, when I installed them, they worked perfectly. Card's cool as ice, no crashes (apart from unstable overclocks)... NOTHING. I'd really wish people will stop perpetuating lies like this. Sure, if you're a 0 at computers and like to install all kinds of crap just because a popup on the internet tells you and your computer runs like ****, I think your midas touch of "****" would affect an amd gpu as well, but if you know how to clean traces of uninstalled drivers and install it properly, you'll have no problems. To be honest I've had way more troubles with nvidia gpus. Overheating, bad OC capabilities, crap price/performance ratio (hence the reason why I bought an AMD gpu, I was tired of seeing a card 25% faster that costed less than what I owned, and what I owned was same gen as that certain amd card), and DRIVER ISSUES. "Display stopped responding and has recovered successfully" while watching a flash video on YOUTUBE, that NEVER happens with an amd card, GPU throttling while overclocking, not being to uninstall some drivers (for example physx) because they install themselves again after next restart, and other headaches. Stop saying lies people, amd drivers are fine. Sure, they get large perfomance increases as they release newer versions, but isn't that great? Why would that be a sign of "bad drivers"? Nividia releases drivers that increase performance as well, why aren't you calling their drivers "bad"? Why does everyone have double standards here and everywhere on the internet? FFS, even greek/roman philosophers 2000 years ago studied these kinds of logical fallacies and tried to avoid making mistakes like that, but you obviously aren't nowhere as smart as a man who lived 2000 years ago, who was part of a barbaric society who still enjoyed watching people get killed in arenas or executed in public.