• 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.

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

Don't get me wrong, my last few cards have been AMD. I am rocking a 7990, so it will effect me. Nvidia will be legally obliged to make it playable for AMD cards though and should they find it isn't they put themselves in a very dangerous position.

This is why I am not overly worried about the GameWorks program. They can't hamstring the cards beyond playability. The graphs are showing that there are some fairly decent results for certain lower level cards. Whist it is sad that AMD are blocked from it, the game is not running very badly at all it seems. The real challenge to this will come when AMD cards are not performing to an acceptable standard.

I will say though, Nvidia doing this, doesn't make me want to rush out and buy an Nvidia card any more than normal. I will pick a card which I think offers a good deal for me as a person, as and when I need it. All these things do is annoy me. I know some people will go Nvidia for it, but they have acquired a rather unsavoury reputation for these silly things now. Which may sour people from every going to the green side. They have to measure the damage caused along with the gains and I am sure in the long run, all this does precious little for increased sales.

I will always take many various things into account when I purchase hardware and I generally don't take into account the odd hamstrung game that doesn't work amazingly well, because more often than not, they are an anomaly.

So yeah, it is a slippery slope and one Nvidia definitely don't need to take anyone down, as long as games are made playable for AMD then there is no serious problem, regardless of how annoying it is that they feel the need to do so in the first place.

I am not at all worried about the GameWorks program. it will have even less impact than Nvidia's other proprietary crap, and probably have a bunch of neutral Developers now seeing Red, pun intended.

To me this is madness, this will do far more to alienate Nvidia from developers than anything, its not just a two fingers at AMD, this is almost a spoilt brats reaction to a sibling getting more attention.

It stinks of a last ditch desperate attempt to force ones will, its the mark of a company loosing control.

And yes, i am serious.
 
Last edited:
So do nVidia actually work actively to deny AMD the ability to optimise*, or does GameWorks work like every other API library used in game design where the developer often doesn't have the source and forgoes low level access as a trade off for convenience or the ability to implement a feature they lack the resources to build from scratch for themselves? i.e. enlighten, rad and miles game tools, many physics APIs, media handling/loading utilities i.e. freeimage, lua, etc. and so on.

Theres so much utter rubbish talked about this by people who just want to hate on nVidia its hard to know if theres a real issue underneath that needs to be highlighted or not.


* Also was it WB or nVidia who turned AMD away and for that matter what was the enhancements AMD brought to the table, I can't even work out if there was an issue with that or whether they were outright denied.
 
Last edited:
So do nVidia actually work actively to deny AMD the ability to optimise*, or does GameWorks work like every other API library used in game design where the developer often doesn't have the source and forgoes low level access as a trade off for convenience or the ability to implement a feature they lack the resources to build from scratch for themselves? i.e. enlighten, rad and miles game tools, many physics APIs, media handling/loading utilities i.e. freeimage, lua, etc. and so on.

Theres so much utter rubbish talked about this by people who just want to hate on nVidia its hard to know if theres a real issue underneath that needs to be highlighted or not.


* Also was it WB or nVidia who turned AMD away and for that matter what was the enhancements AMD brought to the table, I can't even work out if there was an issue with that or whether they were outright denied.

The architecture extension implementations are locked, the Developer cannot set AMD's extensions, if you cannot set feature extensions then the architecture does not work efficiently which results in low performance.
Its quiet deliberate, key extensions like that are for the developers to tie and optimize to a given architecture, like VLIW, Fermi, GCN, Kepler ecte...

This is the a similar thing Intel did with With their development tools. ( if AuthAMD set extension X =0 ) and Intel got hammered for it.
The difference here is the developer nor anyone can see what the extension instructions are, everything is completely locked out.
 
None of those are Gameworks.

Batman AO is up there?

Gameworks is a collective name for a bunch of SDK tools written by nvidia, these tools include PhysX, Optix, VisualFX, GI Works, Flame Works and probably some other stuff like engine enhancement tools.

Those games ARE 'Gameworks' titles which ever way you look at it. Granted not many may have used all of the same SDK tools as BMAO.
 
The architecture extension implementations are locked, the Developer cannot set AMD's extensions, if you cannot set feature extensions then the architecture does not work efficiently which results in low performance.
Its quiet deliberate, key extensions like that are for the developers to tie and optimize to a given architecture, like VLIW, Fermi, GCN, Kepler ecte...

This is the a similar thing Intel did with With their development tools. ( if AuthAMD set extension X =0 ) and Intel got hammered for it.
The difference here is the developer nor anyone can see what the extension instructions are, everything is completely locked out.

My point is this doesn't sound like its any different from any other 3rd party binary only support library thats not optimised for a specific architecture and/or has limited optimisations which is quite common for game development - what I can't make out due to the amount of hysteria is whether they are actually locked into inefficent, non-generic optimisations on non-nvidia hardware and/or at what level nVidia aren't being cooperative (whether this is actually any different to what you get with any other 3rd party tool) and/or whether AMD actually had a feasible/reasonable set of enhancements.

If you look in the binary or support folders of a typical game installation you will see half a dozen plus dll files for what is usually closed libraries that neither the developer or other hardware vendors will necessarily be able to do direct low level optimsation for - or atleast not without some code hooks/memory injections and a ton of debugging.
 
I am not at all worried about the GameWorks program. it will have even less impact than Nvidia's other proprietary crap, and probably have a bunch of neutral Developers now seeing Red, pun intended.

To me this is madness, this will do far more to alienate Nvidia from developers than anything, its not just a two fingers at AMD, this is almost a spoilt brats reaction to a sibling getting more attention.

It stinks of a last ditch desperate attempt to force ones will, its the mark of a company loosing control.

And yes, i am serious.

I think you're being a bit over-dramatic here, Nvidia are hardly in trouble.
 
Batman AO is up there?

Gameworks is a collective name for a bunch of SDK tools written by nvidia, these tools include PhysX, Optix, VisualFX, GI Works, Flame Works and probably some other stuff like engine enhancement tools.

Those games ARE 'Gameworks' titles which ever way you look at it. Granted not many may have used all of the same SDK tools as BMAO.

I think thats Bantman Arkham city.

All of those games are pre Nov 2013, unless Batman AO is there.
Gameworks was introduced in November this year. Batman AO is the first game to use the Gameworks libraries, and the performance on AMD GPU's is below par, by a good chunk.

My point is this doesn't sound like its any different from any other 3rd party binary only support library thats not optimised for a specific architecture and/or has limited optimisations which is quite common for game development - what I can't make out due to the amount of hysteria is whether they are actually locked into inefficent, non-generic optimisations on non-nvidia hardware and/or at what level nVidia aren't being cooperative (whether this is actually any different to what you get with any other 3rd party tool) and/or whether AMD actually had a feasible/reasonable set of enhancements.

If you look in the binary or support folders of a typical game installation you will see half a dozen plus dll files for what is usually closed libraries that neither the developer or other hardware vendors will necessarily be able to do direct low level optimsation for - or atleast not without some code hooks/memory injections and a ton of debugging.

If your putting this in the same category as Nvidia PhysX then your right.

Thats not what this is, this has been explained so many times. this is an API library Nvidia want developers to implement into their games with it serving no apparent function, unlike PhysX or TXAA it adds nothing to the game.

All it does is allocate instructions and re-optimises in (Nvidia only knows) what way.

Its an addon, whose only function appears to be to gimp performance on AMD GPU's.

The Whole thing is a fallacy in more ways than one, almost no one is going to use it, not only is it an inconvenience to developers, it also takes away their control. only those who feel a loyalty to Nvidia are going to use this.
Warner Brothers, and possibly A4Games.
Its just something Nvidia will try to use "in being more competitive"
 
Last edited:
I think thats Bantman Arkham city.

All of those games are pre Nov 2013, unless Batman AO is there.
Gameworks was introduced in November this year. Batman AO is the first game to use the Gameworks libraries, and the performance on AMD GPU's is below par, by a good chunk.



If your putting this in the same category as Nvidia PhysX then your right.

Thats not what this is, this has been explained so many times. this is an API library Nvidia want developers to implement into their games with it serving no apparent function, unlike PhysX or TXAA it adds nothing to the game.

All it does is allocate instructions and re-optimises in (Nvidia only knows) what way.

Its an addon, whose only function appears to be to gimp performance on AMD GPU's.

The gameworks tools set is not just some libraries to gimp performance on AMD cards

Flameworks, physx flex and GI works are all part of gameworks, the aim is to provide increased fidelity on nvidia hardware, is it optimised for AMD? No of course not, but is Mantle optimised for nvidia cards?
 
The gameworks tools set is not just some libraries to gimp performance on AMD cards

Flameworks, physx flex and GI works are all part of gameworks, the aim is to provide increased fidelity on nvidia hardware, is it optimised for AMD? No of course not, but is Mantle optimised for nvidia cards?

Does Mantle block Nvidia from providing performance optimizations on DX?
 
Fearing they can't sell their "should be £400-£450 graphic card" at £550-£600? :p

Have you noticed how the Titan price has not budged an inch?

Its as if Nvidia just flat-out refuse to make any gesture that even remotely suggest it was never worth anywhere near £800+
This despite a faster card now in their own range being £150+ less, which was forced by the 290X existence.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom