Yeh it is odd. There have been articles showing dx11 vs dx12 in this game using a preview dx12 build so i don't know what guru 3d are doing.
-
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.
Warhammer DX12
- Thread starter SiDeards73
- Start date
Yeh it is odd. There have been articles showing dx11 vs dx12 in this game using a preview dx12 build so i don't know what guru 3d are doing.
It's going to rock? It's not even out yet, and we haven't even seen any results.
They just haven't mentioned its the dx12 preview build. Current release has no dx12 capability.
pretty weak for nvidia to not have fully dx12 compliment cards I would have thought? despite their assurances over the last year or so.
What's wrong with it at 1440p? Haven't had any issues there.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,207
This makes some sense. Everything i have read states the same as Jono8 that a Dx12 patch will come shorty after release.
UI too small for many, not all, at 1440p (check the total war forums). At 4k it's a joke
What modern game doesn't have UI scaling these days?
Damn nvidia getting smashed in dx12 once again.
£450 on release gtx 980 getting a whooping from a £200~ r9 290 basically, Fury competing with the 1070. 960 is unplayable while 380 is up there with the 970.
In the conclusion he blames the somewhat bad nvidia performance/good amd performance on MLAA which is like a 5fps hit, lol what?
£450 on release gtx 980 getting a whooping from a £200~ r9 290 basically, Fury competing with the 1070. 960 is unplayable while 380 is up there with the 970.
In the conclusion he blames the somewhat bad nvidia performance/good amd performance on MLAA which is like a 5fps hit, lol what?
Yeah the benchmark isn't even in the retail game yet either
To be fair Kepler only supports up to feature level 11_0, GCN 1 supports up to 11_1, while Maxwell/Pascal and GCN 1.1/1.2 supports 12_0 and above.
Actually the Fury X and 1070 are pretty much neck and neck. The 1070 consistently beats the Fury pro.
I enjoy longevity in older cards.
PC Gamer had DX12 benchmarks last week also, from an early build..
http://www.pcgamer.com/total-war-warhammer-benchmarks-strike-fear-into-cpus/
http://www.pcgamer.com/total-war-warhammer-benchmarks-strike-fear-into-cpus/
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,278
- Location
- London
If you read to the end of the article it says the DX12 patch is scheduled for sometime in June.
Yep, and it states in the article is from an early unoptimised DX12 build
a) Because GTX980 was sold for £450 doesn't mean it's value is for that performance. The same applies to the 1080 and all NV cards. Shows how overpriced they are.
b) Is simple. AMD has better DX12 support, even on cards that came out before DX12 was even announced.
Because the R9 290/X came out with Mantle in mind and Microsoft then decided that they will make DX12. c) Do you remember the GTX970 coming with the stickers "DX12 support" and most in here, boasting that the NV truly supports DX12 and AMD is talking ******** when they announce it will only take a driver update to support DX12 on their cards that came out year ago?
Humble pie........
(I can point to their very known names here and from "reviewers" also. I have the links to their posts)
Associate
- Joined
- 5 May 2011
- Posts
- 127
I might consider getting one of the new ATI cards after seeing this. I'll wait and see for more benchmarks.