• 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.

Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

On or off the hype train?

  • (off) Train has derailed

    Votes: 207 39.2%
  • (on) Overcrowding, standing room only

    Votes: 100 18.9%
  • (never ever got on) Chinese escalator

    Votes: 221 41.9%

  • Total voters
    528
Status
Not open for further replies.
Or the fact that these technologies aren't as useful on the pc. I would struggle to believe that a developer would go through their code removing technologies because Nvidia have asked them to. That would be a ridiculous waste of time
 
Isn't that doing to be the issue with some of the Vega features that need to be coded for each game?
Vega initially at least will only be a tiny proportion of the gaming cards in use so to expect Devs and publishers to spend a lot of time and money supporting niche features is asking a lot.

That's where the new Radeon profiler comes in. Speeds up development time and also allowing Devs closer access to the GPU. Watch amd video on it if you not already some very interesting stuff.
 
Or the fact that these technologies aren't as useful on the pc. I would struggle to believe that a developer would go through their code removing technologies because Nvidia have asked them to. That would be a ridiculous waste of time

Removing? No. Being paid to not code for AMD features in the first place? Yes.
 
That's where the new Radeon profiler comes in. Speeds up development time and also allowing Devs closer access to the GPU. Watch amd video on it if you not already some very interesting stuff.
It's still time and money for a tiny segment of the market.

AMD should concentrate on performance and add the odd innovation to gain back market share.
 
It's still time and money for a tiny segment of the market.

AMD should concentrate on performance and add the odd innovation to gain back market share.

They is more to this though, the biggest Player is console "AMD" DirectX 12 titles will speed up dev time and cost by using these tools.. AMD is creating a ecosystem between Console and PC and this takes time. Like I said before the New Xbox will be the biggest step "I believe" in making this a possibility.
 
They is some really big difference in how these both are added into games though. TrueAudio has to be coded par game more time and cost just wasn't worth it.
Physx the work is there and done for devs to use with Nvidia Gameworks files ready to be used.

I would really love a hardware Physx that both amd and nvidia can use.
Agreed Shankly. My beef is with new techs that get made but never used. AMD do a great job in fairness but then leave it to the devs and we never see it again. TressFX looks sweet but rarely used is another I would like to see more of.
 
Low FPS with a mouse is not a good experience though :p Controller works because of the dead zones and latency differences.

True, 30fps with a mouse :D :p

giphy.gif
 
Same thing has been said for Dx11 nowadays every game uses that api. Pc Developers are simply lazy as ..... which isn't Amds problem tbh. They created perfect api which has proven to be much more efficient compared to OpenGl and it is up to developers to take advantage ...


I was sure that dx12 will pick pace upwith being used in xbone and bext xbox soon but... Well does not seem like it its ****..
 
Agreed Shankly. My beef is with new techs that get made but never used. AMD do a great job in fairness but then leave it to the devs and we never see it again. TressFX looks sweet but rarely used is another I would like to see more of.

Tbh it should be up to the devs. AMD are not a game developer. Game Dev's should be jumping on new tech to improve there games and if they need support then AMD should offer it up. There has got to be a balance and AMD should not have to offer up any Financial incentives for them to use good features. Gpu Open is there and free for Devs to do with as they please. These features were developed through AMD who have already poured cash into designing them. The tech is also there on there new gpu's which i think we would all like to see used. If Devs did then Nvidia would make sure to have it in there own gpu's and we would all win.
 
I was sure that dx12 will pick pace upwith being used in xbone and bext xbox soon but... Well does not seem like it its ****..

Takes time to kick in, DX12 was launched in 2015, so it's only been 2 years. Assume a 3 year development cycle for a game, should expect to start seeing more and more built for DX12 games over the next year.
 
Is there something missing from a console that stops people from dual booting?

You can't run unsigned code on consoles....and you would need drivers for all the hardware. Not happening.

That said, MS clearly sees a future where the boundaries between Xbox and PC gaming get increasingly blurred.
 
They is some really big difference in how these both are added into games though. TrueAudio has to be coded par game more time and cost just wasn't worth it.
Physx the work is there and done for devs to use with Nvidia Gameworks files ready to be used.

I would really love a hardware Physx that both amd and nvidia can use.

Actually it's there as Nvidia ported most of the physx stuff to DX12, which they presented at this years gdc. Just the newest Voxel stuff and older libraries are still in DX11/CUDA. And you can also get the source code on github, so now people can't even complain about that. Nvidia even talked about the big boost thanks to async compute for physx. But it seems no one was interested and still people talk about nvidia not interested in DX12.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom