Nvidia, stop being a **** please

[Orangey]

I'm sure fool.com and seekingalpha will do their best to keep the price down so plenty time to get those shares in.

 

[humbug]

390 is probably the card in that sort of price bracket id reccomend theese days. The 970 is pretty decent as ive used a friends system with one installed. However i think going forward the 4gb of ram will be an issue even at 1080p. On the 390 with 8gb you will likely run out of gpu grunt before you max the ram, but still at least you have the extra ram in the tank and can get by on a few lowered settings. I actually considered a pair of 970's to replace 780 sli, (heat issues). But i had a fair idea that the 980ti was coming along so held out for it.

You don't play Star Citizen do you?

Going over 3.5GB of V-Ram @ 1080P is easy in that, and with plenty of GPU Grunt to spare.

The thing is its not quite as simple as GPU Grunt, these days Developers tend to use higher resolution Textures because engines now are capable of rendering 4 and even 8K Textures, that has a nominal impact on performance but will fill up 4GB of V-Ram pretty quickly.

Some of the textures i make for my own project in Photoshop are easily over 50MB, multiply that if i also use Bump, Specular, Hight and Dirt Map Textures.

The 8GB on the 390 is a selling point to some people because they think its good future proofing or even that its useful now, often they ain't wrong.

So you are right, even at 1080P V-Ram is going to become and increasing issue, and not before to long.

 

[setter]

Dont play it mate tbh. Still mainly on bf3/4 and a bit of crysis 3. Vram usage will indeed only get higher, hence i got off 780 sli whilst the cards were still worth something. I was on 1920x1200 and i knew that the ram would become an issue at some point. Moreso now im on 1440p.

 

[humbug]

Dont play it mate tbh. Still mainly on bf3/4 and a bit of crysis 3. Vram usage will indeed only get higher, hence i got off 780 sli whilst the cards were still worth something. I was on 1920x1200 and i knew that the ram would become an issue at some point. Moreso now im on 1440p.

PU 2 and PTU 2.1 Crusader is much better than Arena Commander, there is actually a station and missions to do....

But more than that is if you have the chat open and just say stuff in it you soon find others to have a laugh and game with.

Often on the station people do immature things, once i tried to scoop up a guy messing about on the lading pad with the nose of my ship, very delicate manoeuvring.....

There is always someone mulling around the pads wanting to play silly, trying to climb on your ship and surf it while you fly, its all good fun, a very different kind of fun than shooting at each other all the time.

 

[D.P.]

staunch NVidia supporters ^^^^ are not votes anyone but other staunch NVidia supporters are interested in.



I don't think you understand what he is saying.

Mantle did exactly what it was meant to, for MS to do DX12 and then evolve into Open Source.

MS was developing DX12 before Mantle was publicly announced, and a low-level properly multi-threaded API was on the drawing board since 2006.

Mantle was never originally intended to be Open source, it was supposedly going to be offered through free licensing but it never left beta. If AMD wanted to contribute to an open source low-level multithreaded API they could have supported the OpenGLNext project earlier like a nvidia did, forgot the entire Mantle PR stunt and got on with GLNext. But of course AMD wanted their own standard that they controlled that was optimized for their architecture, when that daydream failed duet he entirely predictable lack of developer support they had to scarp the project and turn it into another PR piece.

But then AMD have never supported cross-platform open source openGL to the extent nvidia has, which is why they wanted their own standard. Otherwise we would have never even heard of Mantle, we would have just got news of OpenGLNext/Vulcan and the collaborations between Intel, Nvidia, AMD, ImgTech, google etc.

 

[uksoldierboy]

I think both companies need a kick up the arse tbh.

 

[D.P.]

I hope your right, have you got a link to the 390 sales, how much are they outselling The Nvidia equivalents by?

Don't know about the 390 sales but in Q3 AMD clawed back 0.8% of the market share from Nvidia, so Nvidia now sit at 81.1% market share


http://jonpeddie.com/press-releases...sed-in-q315-amd-gained-market-share-nvidia-lo

Those results will be showing the first impact of Fury and 300 series. Q4 might see AMD getting a little more, Nvidia might slip under 80%.
However, given the recent thread about demand outstripping supply for Nvidia GPUs due to the large Chinese market AMD's GPUs might be selling relatively better than market share indicates if the absolute market is increasing.

 

[humbug]

MS was developing DX12 before Mantle was publicly announced, and a low-level properly multi-threaded API was on the drawing board since 2006.

Mantle was never originally intended to be Open source, it was supposedly going to be offered through free licensing but it never left beta. If AMD wanted to contribute to an open source low-level multithreaded API they could have supported the OpenGLNext project earlier like a nvidia did, forgot the entire Mantle PR stunt and got on with GLNext. But of course AMD wanted their own standard that they controlled that was optimized for their architecture, when that daydream failed duet he entirely predictable lack of developer support they had to scarp the project and turn it into another PR piece.

But then AMD have never supported cross-platform open source openGL to the extent nvidia has, which is why they wanted their own standard. Otherwise we would have never even heard of Mantle, we would have just got news of OpenGLNext/Vulcan and the collaborations between Intel, Nvidia, AMD, ImgTech, google etc.

You're making the same arguments you have been for the past year, over and over and over again. do you have them on a script or something?

That's what MS said after Mantle was released, before then they said there will be no DX12 for Desktop, only for console. MS reacted to Mantle in exactly the way AMD wanted them to.
I think Mantle was originally the API AMD bundled with the Console Hardware but with the condition that MS also release it as DX12 for desktop, MS refused as there is a conflict of interest with them between Desktop Gaming and the much more profitable console gaming.
AMD released it as Mantle for the Dektop to force MS to concede how bad DX11 is and react, which they did.

AMD stated Mantle would be Open Source, during Mantles existence you argued AMD went back on their word because it was not Open Source, now that it is your arguing it was never intended to be Open Source.

GL-Next was canned in favour of Mantle, RE now Vulkan. The Khronos group themselves said Mantle was given to them by AMD and its now Vulkan, that GL-Next wasn't working out.
The name Vulkan by the way is German for Volcano, a reference to Mantle.

You know what else, a lot of DX12 code is identical to Mantle, not just similar, identical, even written guidelines for DX12 are 80% word for word a copy of Mantles guidelines.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

You're making the same arguments you have been for the past year, over and over and over again. do you have them on a script or something?

That's what MS said after Mantle was released, before then they said there will be no DX12 for Desktop, only for console. MS reacted to Mantle in exactly the way AMD wanted them to.
I think Mantle was originally the API AMD bundled with the Console Hardware but with the condition that MS also release it as DX12 for desktop, MS refused as there is a conflict of interest with them between Desktop Gaming and the much more profitable console gaming.
AMD released it as Mantle for the Dektop to force MS to concede how bad DX11 is and react, which they did.

AMD stated Mantle would be Open Source, during Mantles existence you argued AMD went back on their word because it was not Open Source, now that it is your arguing it was never intended to be Open Source.

GL-Next was canned in favour of Mantle, RE now Vulkan. The Khronos group themselves said Mantle was given to them by AMD and its now Vulkan, that GL-Next wasn't working out.
The name Vulkan by the way is German for Volcano, a reference to Mantle.

You know what else, a lot of DX12 code is identical to Mantle, not just similar, identical, even written guidelines for DX12 are 80% word for word a copy of Mantles guidelines.

How do we know that DX12 is a copy of Mantle and not Mantle is a copy of DX12. Just because AMD only had to finish up a really rough draft of the AMD part of the code before they could release something. If AMD were working with Microsoft on DX12 they'd have had access to everything they needed (at least as easily as if Microsoft had copied Mantle).

Also let's remember that AMD didn't ever plan for Mantle to start up, go into pre-alpha and then after 18 months get dropped as a standalone API (and re-used in Liquid VR). AMD never planned to hand over control to a 3rd party (according to Richard Huddy). Mantle, as a graphics API, is dead. It's been re-purposed for LiquidVR and Vulkan, but Mantle is dead. I doubt this is what AMD had planned.

 

[andybird123]

AMD stated Mantle would be Open Source, during Mantles existence you argued AMD went back on their word because it was not Open Source, now that it is your arguing it was never intended to be Open Source.

.

No they didn't. This is your complete lack of understanding all over again. AMD said Mantle would be an open standard, they never said it would be open source. (of course it never even made it as far as being an open standard either)

Mantle still isn't open source either, its been given to chronos but they are still a closed group, you cant download the source code

People even pooh poohed the idea of it being given to chronos, saying that mantle would continue and be opened by AMD, despite some of us pointing out before they said it that the likes of NVIDIA and Intel wouldn't adopt something controlled by AMD

 

[D.P.]

No they didn't. This is your complete lack of understanding all over again. AMD said Mantle would be an open standard, they never said it would be open source. (of course it never even made it as far as being an open standard either)

Mantle still isn't open source either, its been given to chronos but they are still a closed group, you cant download the source code

People even pooh poohed the idea of it being given to chronos, saying that mantle would continue and be opened by AMD, despite some of us pointing out before they said it that the likes of NVIDIA and Intel wouldn't adopt something controlled by AMD

Spot on

 

[David Bisset]

long answer ........no

short answer.......no

g-sync replaces the scaler in the monitor.....adaptive-sync runs of normal scaler

Intel has said they will be using adaptive-sync- just when is the true case; once Intel releases cpus with igpus that can use it.......I think we'll see Nvidia magically be able to use it; but until then they will milk g-sync for as long as they can.

They already have them, their mGPUs are already capable, they've just elected to not do it on desktop GPUs. It'll be interesting to see if that remains the case for Pascal.

 

[andybird123]

They already have them, their mGPUs are already capable, they've just elected to not do it on desktop GPUs. It'll be interesting to see if that remains the case for Pascal.

Laptop gsync uses eDP which has had variable refresh (for power saving) for years, its not that they've "elected" not to do something

AMD even did their first freesync demo on a laptop, yet somehow NVIDIA still beat them to having variable refresh gaming laptops as well

 

[Dave2150]

You're making the same arguments you have been for the past year, over and over and over again. do you have them on a script or something?

That's what MS said after Mantle was released, before then they said there will be no DX12 for Desktop, only for console. MS reacted to Mantle in exactly the way AMD wanted them to.
I think Mantle was originally the API AMD bundled with the Console Hardware but with the condition that MS also release it as DX12 for desktop, MS refused as there is a conflict of interest with them between Desktop Gaming and the much more profitable console gaming.
AMD released it as Mantle for the Dektop to force MS to concede how bad DX11 is and react, which they did.

AMD stated Mantle would be Open Source, during Mantles existence you argued AMD went back on their word because it was not Open Source, now that it is your arguing it was never intended to be Open Source.

GL-Next was canned in favour of Mantle, RE now Vulkan. The Khronos group themselves said Mantle was given to them by AMD and its now Vulkan, that GL-Next wasn't working out.
The name Vulkan by the way is German for Volcano, a reference to Mantle.

You know what else, a lot of DX12 code is identical to Mantle, not just similar, identical, even written guidelines for DX12 are 80% word for word a copy of Mantles guidelines.

+1, absolutely spot on.

 

[bru]

I think both companies need a kick up the arse tbh.

+1 and then some.

 

[JediFragger]

The 390's are flying off the shelves lately for example.

I'm sure the major price cuts aren't helping at all with this

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Laptop gsync uses eDP which has had variable refresh (for power saving) for years, its not that they've "elected" not to do something

AMD even did their first freesync demo on a laptop, yet somehow NVIDIA still beat them to having variable refresh gaming laptops as well

The Lenovo Y700 has a FreeSync validated panel.

 

[Mauller]

How do we know that DX12 is a copy of Mantle and not Mantle is a copy of DX12. Just because AMD only had to finish up a really rough draft of the AMD part of the code before they could release something. If AMD were working with Microsoft on DX12 they'd have had access to everything they needed (at least as easily as if Microsoft had copied Mantle).

AMD is a IHV, not just a software company like microsoft. IHV's know their hardware and produce the API's on their own or in conjunction with Software companies. AMD own the compute hardware in the Xbox One and PS4, thus they would know what is needed to make it work.

Mantle was always designed from the start to be able to support different hardware, as long as the hardware met the base requirements for supporting the features mantle required to work. No different to current and older DX and OpenGL support. It just happened to be that AMD used their GCN features as the base feature set for Mantle to work, which none of their older hardware could support due to too much fixed function hardware still.

 

[Mauller]

They already have them, their mGPUs are already capable, they've just elected to not do it on desktop GPUs. It'll be interesting to see if that remains the case for Pascal.

This has been stated multiple times before, the reason Nvidia need the gsync controller is because the display controllers in the current crop of Nvidia cards do not support adaptive-refresh. Although they can still send some custom commands to allow gsync to work with certain hardware. it was never designed to work with the original VESA eDP standard for adaptive-refresh.

But AMD has supported VESA eDP on the majority of its chips sine the 5000 series, just not in the way required for the current iteration of freesync to work. This is why some older card support Freesync but only under certain conditions and why it was demonstrated earlier on using laptop hardware.

 

[tommybhoy]

The Lenovo Y700 has a FreeSync validated panel.

So is it AMD powered with FreeSync, or is it just using the panel for Nvidia?

Are Nvidia ignoring it and hoping no one asks them a hard question?

They should write an Adaptive Sync driver for the panel and offer their customers a FreeSync alternative, the could add more features than FS and call it G-sync Lite and rip the pish.