• 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.

Possible Radeon 390X / 390 and 380X Spec / Benchmark (do not hotlink images!!!!!!)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Only a few days till launch and everyone will settle down. :)

As for GameWorks, Mtom - AMD don't need the source code to get performance up on their hardware and historically this has never been needed. If you look at how well GameWorks runs on AMD after it has been out a spell, you can see it runs "as it should" for the hardware. So why do AMD need the source code? Why are they not working with devs from the games early development to get enhancements? As for TressFX, that ran like dog poo for NVidia users for around 2 days till NVidia got it right and the only other game that uses TressFX is Lichdom and NVidia users are blocked from running it, so can't really comment on that. Seems strange that a company would block an open source feature for two thirds of the market don't you think?
 
Silent_Scone said:
OpenGL is not Vulkan, they're not the same thing Mtom :)

OpenGL development will still continue past 4.5 - it's a higher level API than Vulkan. You might get away with saying it would become Vulkan loosely by the face it's still a sucessor to the project GLNext.

Seeing as Mantle and OpenGL 4.5 are both entirely different, doesn't make sense to say Vulkan is the same as OpenGL, does it. See this is what happens with open standards. Things get very confusing :p
Click to expand...

I'm not confused, just edited it and some words are missing thanks for pointing it out. :)
Vulkan is the same as mantle, it is just released by khronos group just as opengl

This doesn't change the subject that EA has a working cross platform low level API code which is working on all hardware, so for me it seems a waste of time to use another (DX12). If they use DX 12 for W10 they can still leave the code in, and use Vulkan instead of DX11 for other OS versions.

But thats too off topic here.
 
Last edited:
AMD have their hardware in the consoles but still fail to get some sort of standard set for their hardware.
If they could get TressFX or whatever onto PS4/Xbox then they would essentially have an alternative to Hairworks for their hardware. Sadly they don't seem to be actively involved in console development at all.
 
Gregster said:
As for GameWorks, Mtom - AMD don't need the source code to get performance up on their hardware and historically this has never been needed. If you look at how well GameWorks runs on AMD after it has been out a spell, you can see it runs "as it should" for the hardware. So why do AMD need the source code? Why are they not working with devs from the games early development to get enhancements? As for TressFX, that ran like dog poo for NVidia users for around 2 days till NVidia got it right and the only other game that uses TressFX is Lichdom and NVidia users are blocked from running it, so can't really comment on that. Seems strange that a company would block an open source feature for two thirds of the market don't you think?
Click to expand...

How can you even compare optimising between open source TressFX and closed blackbox gameworks. In tressfx you know which parameters you are aiming for, so basic optimisation can already be done in simulator. AMD has no idea what parameters they are aiming for, which means they can't use simulators. They basicly have to try one driver version at a time to see if they're getting better performance or not. That is very slow progress. And worst is that if you find that optimal solution, is that you can't know it's optimal solution, and you can still be wasting resources in finding one that works better, even if it doesn't exist.

So in theory, you can optimise 100% blindly, but in real world finding optimal settings are as close than winning in lottery. I think it's good effort from AMD if they can hit even 80% optimised code when adjusting blindly.

Note , all of this doesn't mean that AMD performance even at 100% would be able to match nvidia's. As there is tesselation performance difference in there aswell. But it's all about getting everything out of your architecture.
 
Mtom said:
Well Vulkan is basicly tha same as mantle and openGL in the naming only.
Click to expand...

I have heard this mentioned a few times on the internet, it's false.

Vulkan has been in development since early 2014 (It was originally called OpenGL Next before the name change to OpenGL Vulkan then just Vulkan). It has been developed with "Valve, Apple, AMD, Intel, Nvidia, and others" so no it isn't just going to be Mantle.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps the reason it takes so long for AMD to get acceptable performance in gameworks titles is because they don't have access to the source code... didn't the witcher 3 developers say that they can't do anything for AMD users when it comes to gameworks features?

AMD can get a day 1 patch out for GTA 5 and the majority of other non-nvidia sponsored games, it is only really the nvidia sponsored games where we have delays in drivers so I imagine that it isn't as easy as what Tom said the other night. And it isn't surprising that nvidia got a driver out quickly to improve tressfx performance considering it is open :p

As for Lichdom, didn't someone say that this is easily enabled via the config file? It was usable on tomb raider and it would go against all of AMD's PR about being open so I think the developers are to blame here more than AMD, it doesn't make much sense why AMD would lock out an open feature....

As much as I hate closed source tech etc. things will never change with nvidia so AMD should just start doing the same, crap for the gaming community but what other choice do they have? I'm sure if AMD did start doing similar practices and got most of the big games that a lot of nvidia users would be just as annoyed as some of the AMD users when it comes to gameworks games, if not more.

With AMD GPU's being in both consoles, I'm sure that there must be a way for AMD to sabotage performance on nvidia systems if they really wanted to although I imagine nvidia would take legal action if they were to do such a thing, which wouldn't end well for AMD...
 
Last edited:
ubersonic said:
I have heard this mentioned a few times on the internet, it's false.

Vulkan has been in development since early 2014 (It was originally called OpenGL Next before the name change to OpenGL Vulkan then just Vulkan). It has been developed with "Valve, Apple, AMD, Intel, Nvidia, and others" so no it isn't just going to be Mantle.
Click to expand...

Yes OpenGL Next was developed for a long time...so long that Khronos group decided to take mantle (AMD gave them basicly) modify it with some features from OpenGL Next, then release Vulkan. It is 90-95% mantle.

Well let me rephrase, it is not as straightforward to read as i wanted. Khronos got the mantle source code from AMD, and that speeded up OpenGL Next finalization and thus changed the name
 
Last edited:
Dygaza said:
How can you even compare optimising between open source TressFX and closed blackbox gameworks. In tressfx you know which parameters you are aiming for, so basic optimisation can already be done in simulator. AMD has no idea what parameters they are aiming for, which means they can't use simulators. They basicly have to try one driver version at a time to see if they're getting better performance or not. That is very slow progress. And worst is that if you find that optimal solution, is that you can't know it's optimal solution, and you can still be wasting resources in finding one that works better, even if it doesn't exist.

So in theory, you can optimise 100% blindly, but in real world finding optimal settings are as close than winning in lottery. I think it's good effort from AMD if they can hit even 80% optimised code when adjusting blindly.

Note , all of this doesn't mean that AMD performance even at 100% would be able to match nvidia's. As there is tesselation performance difference in there aswell. But it's all about getting everything out of your architecture.
Click to expand...

My last word on this and I promise i will let the thread get back on topic :)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...ut-gameworks-amd-optimization-and-watch-dogs/

Just have a read :)

@Nexus - Try running Elite Dangerous in Crossfire. Works perfectly for NVidia in SLI and users have been hounding Matt for ages to get a crossfire profile. NVidia's fault? :p
 
Gregster said:
My last word on this and I promise i will let the thread get back on topic :)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...ut-gameworks-amd-optimization-and-watch-dogs/

Just have a read :)

@Nexus - Try running Elite Dangerous in Crossfire. Works perfectly for NVidia in SLI and users have been hounding Matt for ages to get a crossfire profile. NVidia's fault? :p
Click to expand...


ahh that old chestnut, you should also post the same guys artical a year later as well

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...eveloping-own-proprietary-graphics-libraries/
 
Gregster said:
@Nexus - Try running Elite Dangerous in Crossfire. Works perfectly for NVidia in SLI and users have been hounding Matt for ages to get a crossfire profile. NVidia's fault? :p
Click to expand...

AMD can get a day 1 patch out for GTA 5 and the majority of other non-nvidia sponsored games
Click to expand...

:p

Of course we can't blame nvidia here, the fault either lies with AMD or/and the developer.

It isn't down to just the GPU vendor to get 2+ gpu's working well.

I'm sure that there must be at least 1 game that doesn't work well with SLI, I cba to go searching so someone else feel free to :p
 
KillBoY_UK said:
ahh that old chestnut, you should also post the same guys artical a year later as well

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...eveloping-own-proprietary-graphics-libraries/
Click to expand...

Good article and some good points in there :)

Just to add, I am more than happy to discuss it in a different thread (I do enjoy these discussions) but feel we should stop here, so if someone wants to make a new thread, I will happily talk all day about it :)

Nexus18 said:
:p

Of course we can't blame nvidia here, the fault either lies with AMD or/and the developer.

It isn't down to just the GPU vendor to get 2+ gpu's working well.

I'm sure that there must be at least 1 game that doesn't work well with SLI, I cba to go searching so someone else feel free to :p
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the last Bethesda game (wolfenstein) doesn't run in SLI, so not every game works.
 
Last edited:
Silent_Scone said:
Your point?

[EDIT] That will learn me. Not looked there in awhile, the licence allows for access to source. The previous SDK didn't lol. Stand corrected. Have to appreciate though this is one technology. It's not like protecting the intellectual property for tens of in house technologies.
Click to expand...

No point. Its easier to optimize if you know the inner workings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom