Nvidia’s GameWorks program usurps power from developers, end-users, and AMD

Martini1991 · 15 Mar 2014 at 10:16

People would be happier to get less FPS if the Nvidia was getting less FPS too (Inline with the hierarchy)

I disagree and have stated how much better Origins runs than City for myself, so I see it as a none point (Also, it's FXAA, it's crap).
But you're not comparing like for like, both should have MSAA 8X

LtMatt · 15 Mar 2014 at 10:20

I just can't understand how a 770 is faster than a 290X.

Martini1991 · 15 Mar 2014 at 10:31

LtMatt said:
I just can't understand how a 770 is faster than a 290X.

FXAA (At least from what I recall) is an Nvidia tech, it could be down to their architecture that FXAA doesn't run so well on the GCN (Or it could be Nvidia crippling, but I think that's jumping the gun, hence the performance favour at the highest settings).

Dirt Showdown advanced effects are slower on Nvidia 6XX etc (Titan's fine, but the 680 gets trounced by a 7970), and I don't think sleeping dogs max AA is exactly great on 6XX either

?

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6774/53358.png

LtMatt · 15 Mar 2014 at 10:34

Martini1991 said:
FXAA (At least from what I recall) is an Nvidia tech, it could be down to their architecture that FXAA doesn't run so well on the GCN (Or it could be Nvidia crippling, but I think that's jumping the gun, hence the performance favour at the highest settings).

Dirt Showdown advanced effects are slower on Nvidia 6XX etc (Titan's fine, but the 680 gets trounced by a 7970), and I don't think sleeping dogs max AA is exactly great on 6XX either ?

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6774/53358.png

FXAA costs 1 fps.

Dirt Showdown uses compute, 680 has gimped compute, titan does not. Can't be compared to this. Sleeping dogs also uses compute. Compute is part of dx11, GameWorks gimping is not.

Martini1991 · 15 Mar 2014 at 10:37

If Nvidia were gimping, they'd give their cards the performance edge at the highest of settings, I'm happy I'm getting far better frames than the prior game (Which wasn't gameworks) whereas you're not happy on the basis of your own performance, you want it to be inline with Nvidia hierarchy (I can understand, but given City, don't agree with, I'm happy I'm getting better performance)

FXAA is crap anyway.

tommybhoy · 15 Mar 2014 at 10:39

Gregster said:
What are you on about?

3D Gaming

Is that clear enough?

Gregster said:
What am I missing?

tommybhoy said:
Please, no point replying btw unless it's to directly address closed AMD driver optimization with the end result being reduced performance in 3D.

You can't run MSAA/AA in 3D-it's incompatible, therefore your deflecting the specifics of the discussion by banging the drum with MSAA performance being good enough.

What part of a 7950 running the same fps as a 650ti boost is acceptable running 3D?

Martini1991 said:
Dirt Showdown advanced effects are slower on Nvidia 6XX etc (Titan's fine, but the 680 gets trounced by a 7970), and I don't think sleeping dogs max AA is exactly great on 6XX either ?

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6774/53358.png

Difference being, nvidia don't have compute performance in the 6 series, the 78/Titans do so performance is fine, that's the fundamental difference-hardware capable, v's software lockout.

Gregster · 15 Mar 2014 at 10:53

Martini1991 said:
People would be happier to get less FPS if the Nvidia was getting less FPS too (Inline with the hierarchy)

I disagree and have stated how much better Origins runs than City for myself, so I see it as a none point (Also, it's FXAA, it's crap).
But you're not comparing like for like, both should have MSAA 8X

Yer, I realised that I had got the wrong bench and not the full spec bench but couldn't be bothered to change it and the principal is the same.

@ Tommy, I don't see why you are so upset? Can't you play B:AO in 3D then? And no need to be childish and post in big letters.

LtMatt · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:02

Martini1991 said:
If Nvidia were gimping, they'd give their cards the performance edge at the highest of settings, I'm happy I'm getting far better frames than the prior game (Which wasn't gameworks) whereas you're not happy on the basis of your own performance, you want it to be inline with Nvidia hierarchy (I can understand, but given City, don't agree with, I'm happy I'm getting better performance)

FXAA is crap anyway.

The majority don't have hardware capable of X8AA to overcome gimping though. The majority have low to mid range gpus where only FXAA is possible. Now if that's you you're at a serious disadvantage there, facing a huge performance penalty when in actual fact FXAA should cost 1 fps. Its not an issue for me or you obviously, but sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture rather than just the hardware you own. If this happened in more games, it would be a concern. If that's what you can expect from GameWorks title when you have an AMD card, its worrying. Those are my thoughts anyway.

Rusty0611 · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:20

Gregster said:
Yer, I realised that I had got the wrong bench and not the full spec bench but couldn't be bothered to change it and the principal is the same.

@ Tommy, I don't see why you are so upset? Can't you play B:AO in 3D then? And no need to be childish and post in big letters.

Martini1991 · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:22

LtMatt said:
The majority don't have hardware capable of X8AA to overcome gimping though. The majority have low to mid range gpus where only FXAA is possible. Now if that's you you're at a serious disadvantage there, facing a huge performance penalty when in actual fact FXAA should cost 1 fps. Its not an issue for me or you obviously, but sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture rather than just the hardware you own. If this happened in more games, it would be a concern. If that's what you can expect from GameWorks title when you have an AMD card, its worrying. Those are my thoughts anyway.

But the performance across the board is still better than the none gameworks Batman Arkham City, regardless of Nvidia's performance, as an AMD GPU owner, regardless where you are on the hierarchy, you're getting better performance than Arkham City.

There's a 7770 giving playable performance at high details 1080p, that's a low range GPU.

Which to me makes it a none point currently.

Silent_Scone · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:24

Isn't 3D on AMD a crock anyway?

Genuine question

Martini1991 · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:25

MjFrosty said:
Isn't 3D on AMD a crock anyway?

Genuine question

Not at all.
Not that AMD have anything to do with the 3D, as it's Tridef we use (Which I found 3D on Batman AO pretty good...)

tommybhoy · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:27

Gregster said:
Can't you play B:AO in 3D then?

Optimally, no, I would have to reduce settings for a steady 60fps, 290X users aren't the issue in regards to 3D gaming(another deflection), it's the lesser AMD gpu's that are really going to struggle in 3D because it's gimped.

Gregster said:
And no need to be childish

Oh the irony.

Stop deflecting at every turn and answer what was asked or not at all and move on then, I can't make it any clearer.

If you can't be bothered replying to gimped 3D gaming in BAO, fine, just refrain from insulting peoples intelligence taking it down a different route every single time while ignoring the impact on the big picture-Gamers hardware-READ:NOT TOMMY'S HARDWARE-

Gregster · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:27

If you are not happy with the performance you are getting and want more fps, buy an nVid..... Wait what? AMD are faster you say?

Confused big time

Silent_Scone · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:30

Martini1991 said:
Not at all.
Not that AMD have anything to do with the 3D, as it's Tridef we use (Which I found 3D on Batman AO pretty good...)

Fair enough, was a while ago I looked into it.

There does always seem to be some excuse for the performance issues in these things. If everyone owned AMD cards maybe we wouldn't see these types of scenarios. But unfortunately, they don't lol.

tommybhoy · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:31

Gregster said:
If you are not happy with the performance you are getting and want more fps, buy an nVid..... Wait what? AMD are faster you say?

Confused big time

Your reluctance to engage on the specifics=admission.

/conversation.

LtMatt · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:33

Martini1991 said:
But the performance across the board is still better than the none gameworks Batman Arkham City, regardless of Nvidia's performance, as an AMD GPU owner, regardless where you are on the hierarchy, you're getting better performance than Arkham City.

There's a 7770 giving playable performance at high details 1080p, that's a low range GPU.

Which to me makes it a none point currently.

Makes no difference. Why is performance gimped for AMD cards only when using FXAA, the least demanding form of AA? I do not consider 38 fps playable personally. Without the gimping the fps would be much higher than that. A 560 TI is averaging over 60 at 1200P and a 7770 is a t 38 fps yet the HD 7770 is a much faster card.

Silent_Scone · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:40

Because almost every U3 Engine game favours Nvidia cards? Doesn't matter which or how-which way it's always been that way. GameWorks is nothing but a convenient excuse. If it has propriatary features within it, then AMD will just use their own extensions anyway.

Maybe, if you're sooo convinced it's an issue, you should take it up with the developers willing to use these libraries in the first instance?

I can play the game just fine. Seemingly, so can Kaap. With everything enabled bar PhysX too. What a crying shame.

Gregster · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:45

tommybhoy said:
Your reluctance to engage on the specifics=admission.

/conversation.

You have a 290 and you don't get enough performance to run 3D. Just turn some more settings down then or buy another GPU? I don't know what you want me to say to be honest, Tommy and you are just coming across as all hostile.

Dirt Showdown owns for AMD but I don't moan at Codematers, as I feel i have enough performance and I don't moan at Crytek (Crysis 3) for giving me a game that brings my system to its knees.

The bottom line is GameWorks libraries are made by nVidia and going by past nVidia exploits, you are lucky to get the benefits of these libraries at all (PhysX being a 'closed for nVidia' only tech) but instead you want nVidia to give AMD access to the libraries so they can optimise for the game??? Come off it, AMD have Mantle which is closed libraries but that is acceptable to some. Double standards much

LtMatt · 15 Mar 2014 at 11:54

MjFrosty said:
Because almost every U3 Engine game favours Nvidia cards? Doesn't matter which or how-which way it's always been that way. GameWorks is nothing but a convenient excuse. If it has propriatary features within it, then AMD will just use their own extensions anyway.

Maybe, if you're sooo convinced it's an issue, you should take it up with the developers willing to use these libraries in the first instance?

I can play the game just fine. Seemingly, so can Kaap. With everything enabled bar PhysX too. What a crying shame.

You have to look past your own hardware. 38 fps is not really acceptable on a 7770 which is one of the most common used gpu's for typical gamers. I have one in another pc and it can run bf4 1080P at high settings around 60 fps, so i know its a capable card.

The engine has nothing to do with it either, if that was the case then x8AA would not shift the results so dramatically.

No point taking it up with the devs, just raising a valid point. No one can argue against it other than 'it works fine for me with my high end gpu'.