First DirectX 12 game benchmarked *Update 2 More benchmarks

[Biggerisbetter]

Here is a bit more DATA on Dx12. This time the fury-x vs 980ti. Enjoy Extremetech

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

yeah skyrim can be a pain at times. For some reason the depth of field has just given up on me in skyrim not sure why but the game looks significantly worse without it even with my array of mods

 

Skyrim is a pain every time. I'll need to do more research before buying and weigh the performance of DX12...

[Dabombinable]

Lmao, all of those who thought DirectX 12 would save the 4 year old FX series, you got rekt.

 

Also, me and several others called the fact that with the the 900 series being the first DirectX 12 graphics card generation, performance wouldn't be that good. I might have a reason for 2x GTX 970 at 1080p now.

[typographie]

Nvidia being slower on high on dx12 while being faster on dx11 on high, looks like they may need to do some optimizations.

 

Well that's not really what's happening in the data. Nvidia gains less from DX11 to DX12, but that's with high performance in either API. The R9 390X is quite far behind under DX11 and finally catches the 980 by finding massive performance gains in DirectX 12. They end up in most cases within a few FPS of each other in DirectX 12.

 

What this suggests isn't that there's a "problem" with the Nvidia implementation of DX12; rather, it looks like AMD's driver had some serious CPU usage issues under DirectX 11 (a claim that has been thrown around a lot). DirectX 12 seems to alleviate that issue, allowing AMD's hardware to catch up. Nvidia just has less to gain because it was already performing well.

[Curufinwe_wins]

Here is a bit more DATA on Dx12. This time the fury-x vs 980ti. Enjoy Extremetech

Well that's not half bad. I really thought the furyx would wreck the 980ti given how relatively poorly the 980 does in dx12. We will see how optimizations show up later, but at least dx12 doesn't invalidate buying either of the top two cards....

Also note that nvidia's dx11 drivers are full of actual bug fixes from lazy developers and actual post compiled optimizations. That's why their drivers are so freaking massive and also why they make so many releases and do so well on dx11. They just put insane amounts of effort into drivers knowing that amd can't or won't compete in the same fashion.

[Curufinwe_wins]

Well that's not really what's happening in the data. Nvidia gains less from DX11 to DX12, but that's with high performance in either API. The R9 390X is quite far behind under DX11 and finally catches the 980 by finding massive performance gains in DirectX 12. They end up in most cases within a few FPS of each other in DirectX 12.

What this suggests isn't that there's a "problem" with the Nvidia implementation of DX12; rather, it looks like AMD's driver had some serious CPU usage issues under DirectX 11 (a claim that has been thrown around a lot). DirectX 12 seems to alleviate that issue, allowing AMD's hardware to catch up. Nvidia just has less to gain because it was already performing well.

There are numerous cases there with the 5960x and 6700k where dx12 does worse than dx11 so clearly nvidia has work to do.

[Dabombinable]

There are numerous cases there with the 5960x and 6700k where dx12 does worse than dx11 so clearly nvidia has work to do.

They have to get their drivers working properly before they can start going for performance. That's one thing I'll give AMD, they have very stable drivers.

[Biggerisbetter]

Well that's not half bad. I really thought the furyx would wreck the 980ti given how relatively poorly the 980 does in dx12. We will see how optimizations show up later, but at least dx12 doesn't invalidate buying either of the top two cards....

Also note that nvidia's dx11 drivers are full of actual bug fixes from lazy developers and actual post compiled optimizations. That's why their drivers are so freaking massive and also why they make so many releases and do so well on dx11. They just put insane amounts of effort into drivers knowing that amd can't or won't compete in the same fashion.

 I don't know. 

[Curufinwe_wins]

I don't know. The 980Ti actually loses some performance in Dx12.

Sure but even in that worst case situation its on par (give or take 3%) with the fury x stock to stock. I'd take that bet atm even if I didn't think nvidia has a crap load of improvements left in the tank (which clearly they do if dx12 is sometimes worse than dx11).

[Curufinwe_wins]

They have to get their drivers working properly before they can start going for performance. That's one thing I'll give AMD, they have very stable drivers.

That's a funny joke... Have you heard of the 300 series black screen issues?

Neither one is great atm, but nvidia has more work left to do with Windows 10 than amd does atm.

[Dabombinable]

That's a funny joke... Have you heard of the 300 series black screen issues?

Neither one is great atm, but nvidia has more work left to do with Windows 10 than amd does atm.

The 300 series is just a rebrand-so I go off the 200 series.

[Curufinwe_wins]

The 300 series is just a rebrand-so I go off the 200 series.

Yea but the 300 series has "improved power delivery and tesselation updates" which amoung the other issues they have seen to be causing a lot of crashes randomly.

Nvidia's bad drivers just kill your fps.

Although some people may consider that worse.

[Dabombinable]

Yea but the 300 series has "improved power delivery and tesselation updates" which amoung the other issues they have seen to be causing a lot of crashes randomly.

Nvidia's bad drivers just kill your fps.

Although some people may consider that worse.

Newsflash, its only bios tweaks and slight improvements to the drivers that allow those "improvements", check out what happens when R9 290X are flashed to R9 390X.

[Albatross]

I don't understand how the 980 can be so far behind the 390, but whatever, surprising results.

[Biggerisbetter]

Sure but even in that worst case situation its on par (give or take 3%) with the fury x stock to stock. I'd take that bet atm even if I didn't think nvidia has a crap load of improvements left in the tank (which clearly they do if dx12 is sometimes worse than dx11).

With this new info. Multi threaded workloads are not giving a boost to nvida. I dont think drives would make any improvement, since maxwell was built on single threaded performance. DX11 is a single threaded api. Pascal better be jaw dropping. Nvida doesn't have the advantage currently in dx12

[Dabombinable]

I don't understand how the 980 can be so far behind the 390, but whatever, surprising results.

AMD's GPU have a lot more raw computational power than Nvidia's, however the drivers have always been holding them back.

[Curufinwe_wins]

Newsflash, its only bios tweaks and slight improvements to the drivers that allow those "improvements", check out what happens when R9 290X are flashed to R9 390X.

I already knew all of that thank you. Duh. Why do you think I put the improvements in quotes in the first place?

[Curufinwe_wins]

With this new info. Multi threaded workloads are not giving a boost to nvida. I dont think drives would make any improvement, since maxwell was built on single threaded performance. DX11 is a single threaded api. Pascal better be jaw dropping. Nvida doesn't have the advantage currently in dx12

Really? Sigh. Maxwell is a massively SP card not a single threaded card.

They will both have massive optimizations as we go along.

This game shows absolutely terrible multicore scaling as it is (with both gpus)

Your comment just isn't correct in any fashion.

[niofalpha]

"AMD CPU's will perform better than Intel in DX12"...

 

And wasn't it common knowledge AMD's DX11 Drivers have a low CPU overhead? This appears to have been fixed in DX12.

[zMeul]

tesselation updates

what are you talking about?

the ASIC is the same: http://techgage.com/article/amd-radeon-300-fury-series-preview/

[dragosudeki]

Looks pretty nice, but I still want to see SLI/Crossfire configurations and the boost it would get. DX12 features sounded more enticing for that kind of situations where perhaps the true potential of multi GPU configurations could be unlocked. Maybe drivers are not ready yet?

[Curufinwe_wins]

what are you talking about?

the ASIC is the same: http://techgage.com/article/amd-radeon-300-fury-series-preview/

Asic has nothing to do with it.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1561100/pcgh-de-radeon-r9-390x-in-the-test-mainly-because-drivers-work-faster-update-enormous-tessellation-improvements

15.5 is the old set. 15.15 is new.

Basically long story short SOFTWARE optimizations make up a massive majority of the difference between good 290x versions (because reference and some cheapys just sucked) and good 390x versions.

Search 290x bios flash to 390x lots of guides are available.

[zMeul]

Asic has nothing to do with it.

you don't get it ..

ASIC = application-specific integrated circuit

and has absolutely everything to do with it since that means the 2xx series has an identical counterpart in 3xx

if AMD has released 3xx series specific optimization and not for 2xx counterparts, that means AMD wants 2xx to fail - just like nVidia was accused of hindering 7xx series performance with newer driver updates

[Notional]

Here is a bit more DATA on Dx12. This time the fury-x vs 980ti. Enjoy Extremetech

 

Thank you, updated the post.

 

That article is pretty damning for NVidia: Not only does the Fury X beat the 980ti, especially in MSAA, but official Oxide Game statements, debunks NVidia's claim of bugged AA, as false.

[Curufinwe_wins]

you don't get it ..

ASIC = application-specific integrated circuit

and has absolutely everything to do with it since that means the 2xx series has an identical counterpart in 3xx

if AMD has released 3xx series specific optimization and not for 2xx counterparts, that means AMD wans 2xx to fail - just like nVidia was accused of hindering 7xx series performance with newer driver updates

Duh? You are saying this like it's news? When the 390x came out this forum spent a good two weeks of raging over this.

Technically though they aren't hindering 200 series they just aren't giving them the full support that they gave the 300 series. Also a lot of these adjustments are bios locked and no gpu maker has you download new bioses after two years on the market. It just isn't done.