Vega finally beats RTX? Vulkan strikes again!

[Stefan Payne]

7 hours ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

Which makes me wonder where the adoption of Vulkan is and how easy it is to work with.

From what I heard from real Developers that worked with that stuff, they said its not too complicated.

It is just completely different and you have to forget a ton of what you learned about DX11 and before.

For example the Memory Allocation is something that's now on YOU, while under DX11 it was more automatic.

 

 

7 hours ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

Looking online about DX11 vs DX12 programming tells me unless you really know what you're doing or you really need the extra performance, start with DX11.

No, don't!

The reason is, as I stated above, that its different and you have to "unlearn" certain things if you switch from DX11 to DX12/Vulkan, wich is the main Problem, that the Develpers 

Start with DX12 or Vulkan if you really are interested in it.

 

The thing is that if you mess up somethings, the consequences on LL APIs are a bit more severe.

 

7 hours ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

If Vulkan is like DX12, then to me it should follow that it should have a similar level of "difficulty."

I wouldn't say it that way. I'd say they are just two different ways to archive a goal.

Developers don't really call DX12/Vulkan Low Level, just giving you a bit more control in certain situations.

[Stefan Payne]

1 hour ago, xAcid9 said:

- it is optimized for Radeon and have Shader Intrinsic, Rapid Packed Math and Async Compute. 

- Nvidia haven't release a game ready driver for it. 

Rapid Packed Math -> FP16 rendering, wich some VEGA (not sure if VEGA10 can do it).

(I really hate Marketing Names)...

 

You wanna know the funny thing??

Guess the first Card to support that.

 

Hint: Hairdryer FX X-D.

No, NOT Joking. That is dead searios. Its some shit that came bac from the grave around 15 years after it was layed to rest (DX10 Cards IIRC don't support FP16 no more and only nV supported it for rendering...

 

[NumLock21]

6 hours ago, BobbyPdue said:

I don't think that's fair.  NVIDIA priced them to what the market could handle, just like AMD priced the Radeon VII to what the market would tolerate.  If AMD made a 2080ti equivalent card it too would be priced well over €1000.  AMD needs to make a lot of money if they are going to keep production up on it's new GPUs.  Whenever they've come out with a good video card at a good price they wouldn't keep up with demand. 
 

No, Nvidia price them because there is no competition from the red team, so they can charge as much as they want and people have no choice, but to get it, all because of wanting the better gpu. If AMD does make a 2080Ti like card, then price from both teams will drop which is what everyone wants. $400+ for a mid range 2060, this is getting way out of hand.

[mr moose]

24 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

No, Nvidia price them because there is no competition from the red team, so they can charge as much as they want and people have no choice, but to get it, all because of wanting the better gpu. If AMD does make a 2080Ti like card, then price from both teams will drop which is what everyone wants. $400+ for a mid range 2060, this is getting way out of hand.

People always have a choice because GPU's are not essential items for majority of consumers,   you basically said the same this as the user you quoted.

 

When you have limited supply and no competition the price naturally goes as high as the market will pay.  This is true for every market and every commodity.

 

 

[leadeater]

Just now, mr moose said:

People always have a choice because GPU's are not essential items for majority of consumers,   you basically said the same this as the user you quoted.

 

When you have limited supply and no competition the price naturally goes as high as the market will pay.  This is true for every market and every commodity.

 

 

We also have the power to just not buy RTX 2080 Ti's. The GTX 1070 Ti/Vega 56 market segment does extremely well performance wise and what those can't run few can actually visually notice. The only problem area is those that jumped on to 4k too quickly and can't run native resolution and to those I say "lol".

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

We also have the power to just not buy RTX 2080 Ti's. The GTX 1070 Ti/Vega 56 market segment does extremely well performance wise and what those can't run few can actually visually notice. The only problem area is those that jumped on to 4k too quickly and can't run native resolution and to those I say "lol".

As they say, if you buy bleeding edge tech you're bound to get cut. 

 

Mind you, around here everyone likes to blame the company for that too. 

[PlayStation 2]

One game means that Vega > Turing?

[xAcid9]

Also sensationalist article, Nvidia GPUs perform better on DX11 compare to Vulkan and they didn't show any comparison between both API. Didn't surpass AMD equivalent but much lesser gap. 

 

I'm all down for AMD optimized game but do it when both released proper driver for the game. I'm still waiting AMD driver for Anno 1800. 

[leadeater]

45 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

Anno 1800

What, how did I not know that was released? Let me guess not on steam?

[xAcid9]

27 minutes ago, leadeater said:

What, how did I not know that was released? Let me guess not on steam?

I was on Steam, only pre-order. 

 

Good game, mostly positive review on Steam even with ,,l,, epic store comment. 

[JustWantTech]

I m not suprised since AMD GPU favours Vulkan API more than DX12

 

Honestly, a game dev can have both DX12 and Vulkan API applied. I am pretty sure Vulkan can run on Windows.

 

I don't really see the point of API battlewar, it's all depend on the game dev intention. Honestly, if I am a game dev and only want to make games only for Windows, I rather use DX 12.

 

I don't know if integrating Vulkan into  a game is easier than DX12.

[leadeater]

28 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

I was on Steam, only pre-order. 

 

Good game, mostly positive review on Steam even with ,,l,, epic store comment. 

So it was but then later removed and pre-orders were honored? Explains why I can't see it. How good is it? I mean I really like those games but...

[xAcid9]

2 hours ago, leadeater said:

So it was but then later removed and pre-orders were honored? Explains why I can't see it. How good is it? I mean I really like those games but...

Yes, they did mentioned that since pre-order started so no shitstorm. 
I don't play a lot of Anno, i enjoyed 2070 and hate 2205. This one is better than 2070. I read a lot of people claim Anno 1404 is the best Anno but i didn't play that one so i can't compare.

[Humbug]

2 hours ago, JustWantTech said:

I m not suprised since AMD GPU favours Vulkan API more than DX12

 

Honestly, a game dev can have both DX12 and Vulkan API applied. I am pretty sure Vulkan can run on Windows.

 

I don't really see the point of API battlewar, it's all depend on the game dev intention. Honestly, if I am a game dev and only want to make games only for Windows, I rather use DX 12.

 

I don't know if integrating Vulkan into  a game is easier than DX12.

Vulkan doesn't favour AMD any more than DX12 does. Vulkan is just available across more platforms. DX12 got a bad name because Microsoft tried to push it hard on devs partly using the windpws store and as a result some devs just implemented it very poorly.

 

Having said that I Hope DX12 firmly loses the battle to Vulkan. Vulkan has seen good adoption in the Linux ecosystem, hopefully we will see more on windows and of course google stadia means that more devs will get familiar with it.

 

 

[Bouzoo]

10 minutes ago, Humbug said:

Having said that I Hope DX12 firmly loses the battle to Vulkan.

Sadly we both know that is not gonna happen. It has been, what, 3 years after in launched and we have seen 30-ish games or so that support it.

[cj09beira]

2 hours ago, Bouzoo said:

Sadly we both know that is not gonna happen. It has been, what, 3 years after in launched and we have seen 30-ish games or so that support it.

well it took a long time because game engines had to be almost made from the ground up to support it meaningfully, now with most engines finally having support, more games should start to support it, though it probably wont surpass DX tittles

[Humbug]

3 hours ago, Bouzoo said:

Sadly we both know that is not gonna happen. It has been, what, 3 years after in launched and we have seen 30-ish games or so that support it.

Ya but it's been even longer since DX12 launched and it hasn't got many games either on PC. Anyway I don't think either one will win, they will co-exist.

 

But in general devs are just sticking to DX11. I think a major reason is that Unreal Engine 4 and Unity both have much more mature support and performance via DX11 than via the new modern APIs.

[Stefan Payne]

30 minutes ago, Humbug said:

Ya but it's been even longer since DX12 launched and it hasn't got many games either on PC. Anyway I don't think either one will win, they will co-exist.

Right now Vulkan is heavily favored.

For a simple Reason:

It works on Windows 7.

[BobbyPdue]

12 hours ago, NumLock21 said:

No, Nvidia price them because there is no competition from the red team, so they can charge as much as they want and people have no choice, but to get it, all because of wanting the better gpu. If AMD does make a 2080Ti like card, then price from both teams will drop which is what everyone wants. $400+ for a mid range 2060, this is getting way out of hand.

If they were priced beyond what people would pay they wouldn't have sold enough and prices would have dropped.  No one has to buy and no one is being forced to buy a $1200 GPU.  

The Radeon VII did not reduce the prices on the 2080.  Also why would you buy a 2060 for $400 when the $350 cards perform about the same?  Also I think the RTX 2060 is priced much better than any higher card in the RTX line.  I built a computer for a friend's Christmas present and used a RTX 2060 FE.  I ended up buying another for myself since it was so well made and the performance was great especially for the price when compared to other video cards in that price range.  

[Mira Yurizaki]

2 hours ago, BobbyPdue said:

If they were priced beyond what people would pay they wouldn't have sold enough and prices would have dropped.  No one has to buy and no one is being forced to buy a $1200 GPU.  

The Radeon VII did not reduce the prices on the 2080.  Also why would you buy a 2060 for $400 when the $350 cards perform about the same? 

Going to join the "Actually Squad" for a moment here.

 

That $1200 GPU really has a base MSRP of $999: https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=11G-P4-2281-KR

Similarly the $800 GPU starts at $700: https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=08G-P4-2080-KR

And lastly the... I dunno, $600? $650? GPU starts at $500: https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=08G-P4-1071-KR

And I don't know where the $400 card is coming from: https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=06G-P4-2060-KR

[BobbyPdue]

31 minutes ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

Going to join the "Actually Squad" for a moment here.

 

That $1200 GPU really has a base MSRP of $999: https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=11G-P4-2281-KR

Similarly the $800 GPU starts at $700: https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=08G-P4-2080-KR

And lastly the... I dunno, $600? $650? GPU starts at $500: https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=08G-P4-1071-KR

And I don't know where the $400 card is coming from: https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=06G-P4-2060-KR

I don't know why you are arguing a point I never made. In fact I said "why would you buy a 2060 for $400 when the $350 cards perform about the same".  There are 2080 ti's that cost $1200 including the one I bought, so I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, but the point I was making was NVIDIA set their prices on what the market could handle and not some evil plot to keep people from buying video cards unless they sold their souls.  Posting the cheapest video cards in each category is just splitting hairs. 

[Mira Yurizaki]

5 minutes ago, BobbyPdue said:

I don't know why you are arguing a point I never made. In fact I said "why would you buy a 2060 for $400 when the $350 cards perform about the same".  There are 2080 ti's that cost $1200 including the one I bought, so I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, but the point I was making was NVIDIA set their prices on what the market could handle and not some evil plot to keep people from buying video cards unless they sold their souls.  Posting the cheapest video cards in each category is just splitting hairs. 

Rereading it, yeah, my post wasn't necessary.

 

But I get a knee-jerk reaction when I see people posting prices because of the rampant cherry picking I see here.

[Mira Yurizaki]

4 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

I think it's more due to age and the fact that Lisa is announcing Zen 2+Navi next month.  So, companies are trying to lower their cards to compete with what they probably know and we don't.  That and it usually helps with sales when you lower the price over time.  The only card that we have any knowledge on is the Radeon VII which probably performs closer to the 2080 than it did last month as the first couple of drivers were a mess and holding it back.  Can't confirm since nobody has updated since last months testing.   But, Lisa said that is part of the high anything else like it being a place holder and so on is pure speculation.  Nobody from AMD confirmed that.

The biggest issue from the Radeon VII is it's likely based on the Instinct cards. Development costs weren't much of a concern since they could justify a large selling price in that sector.

 

And as far as I can tell from the rest of the industry, 7nm has not been kind to anyone.

[pas008]

4 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

I think it's more due to age and the fact that Lisa is announcing Zen 2+Navi next month.  So, companies are trying to lower their cards to compete with what they probably know and we don't.  That and it usually helps with sales when you lower the price over time.  The only card that we have any knowledge on is the Radeon VII which probably performs closer to the 2080 than it did last month as the first couple of drivers were a mess and holding it back.  Can't confirm since nobody has updated since last months testing.   But, Lisa said that is part of the high anything else like it being a place holder and so on is pure speculation.  Nobody from AMD confirmed that.

you could have got those prices since like november

[pas008]

2 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

 

Not here in the US I was watching the 2080 Ti here and there was no card under 1200 then.  The 2080 and others maybe, but the 2060 came out this year, irrc.

straight from evga 2080ti for $999 back since november

reddit and evga has many old posts on this

they go fast