nVidia GameWorks, your thoughts

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

so what do you guys think are you for or against it ? is it really preventing Games to run as well on AMD cards or is  just AMD being too lazy to do some work and optimize their drivesr so they can implement the Feature better and take use of it ? i mean it's a cool feature since it saves developers a lot of work and still deliver great visual quality, so i can't imagine theme saying no to it juts because AMD isn't catching up with it, because when mantle came out, it resulted an improvement in performance, so nVidia didn't chicken out and say to developers don't use it because it give our rival advantage, they went to the labs and optimized their driver to deliver similar performance, improved performance without even changing the rendering engine, so whay don't AMD do the same, go in there, create something new and it's up to developers witch one to use !

[meritmaster]

The market is competitive, and not equal.

 

This will do nothing but make the technology develop faster, and put more variety into the market.

[Darell3]

Tbh, i hope that AMD gets their shit together. Because yeah both manufactures has their up and downs with their products, but AMD tbh is just slacking behind. It's good to see on AMD that theirs performance improvements everytime they release a new driver but it's not noticeable..

[Askew]

Tbh, i hope that AMD gets their shit together. Because yeah both manufactures has their up and downs with their products, but AMD tbh is just slacking behind. It's good to see on AMD that theirs performance improvements everytime they release a new driver but it's not noticeable..

 

Prepare your anus.

[Lays]

don't care either way

[Rorgash]

what Nvidia did with Watch dogs is lock out amd for as long as they could so that they could work more on their drivers for it and help optimize the game for their cards, its business, might not be the cleanest thing but AMD is free to throw money at devs and get their head starts as well.

[meritmaster]

nVidia GameWorks is beyond stupid. It is down to the game developers, and the game developers only, to produce these effects in their products. As a developer it is your job to build your game. Using other tools or frameworks to build your games is fine as long as it doesn't give one set of hardware an advantage over another set of hardware, in this case it is graphics cards. If a game developer wants to implement fire physics then it is down to them, and them only, to produce that effect as it is their job, not nVidia or AMD.

I'm pretty sure the developer gets to decide if they want to institute Gameworks, or Mantle. 

 

"Using other tools or frameworks to build your games is fine as long as it doesn't give one set of hardware an advantage over another set of hardware, in this case it is graphics cards."

 

So you're saying there should be no competition in the market, and that companies can't act different than other companies? 

 

You do realize they are two different companies right?

 

You do realize Intel, and AMD were people who broke away from IBM, and decided to do things different from each other right?

[Humbug]

Tbh, i hope that AMD gets their shit together. Because yeah both manufactures has their up and downs with their products, but AMD tbh is just slacking behinde

they are? Didn't notice.

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

If you develop a technology and invest loads into R&D, the company that does has the right to choose wether or not to make it Open-Source, I don't blame nVidia, at the end of the day, if it means more people buy their cards, that's what they want!

there ya go

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

what Nvidia did with Watch dogs is lock out amd for as long as they could so that they could work more on their drivers for it and help optimize the game for their cards, its business, might not be the cleanest thing but AMD is free to throw money at devs and get their head starts as well.

there, just like nVidia did when they lunched Mantle, they didn't harp about the improvement with AMD cards no, they in there and Optimized there own stuff, that's why i like nVidia, AMD got the Bling for nothing

[Bagmup]

Don't care either way, AMD uses Mantle in BF4 and Thief, both mediocre games at best.

 

Nvidia does the same with Watch Dogs, a complete balls up of a game on PC anyway.

[jmaster299]

GameWorks in no way prevents AMD from performing their own optimization. 
 

 

what Nvidia did with Watch dogs is lock out amd for as long as they could so that they could work more on their drivers for it and help optimize the game for their cards, its business, might not be the cleanest thing but AMD is free to throw money at devs and get their head starts as well.

 

Not at all true. As Nvidia has pointed out, they can not ever prevent a developer from working with AMD to optimize the game for AMD hardware. When AMD made that claim it was 100% a lie. If Ubisoft didn't work with AMD it was 100% Ubisoft's choice.

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

nVidia GameWorks is beyond stupid. It is down to the game developers, and the game developers only, to produce these effects in their products. As a developer it is your job to build your game. Using other tools or frameworks to build your games is fine as long as it doesn't give one set of hardware an advantage over another set of hardware, in this case it is graphics cards. If a game developer wants to implement fire physics then it is down to them, and them only, to produce that effect as it is their job, not nVidia or AMD.

no it's not stupid mate, i can say mantle was stupid too, because it gave AMD cards advantage and it's up to the user whether use it or not even though the importance of mantle isn't as much as game works, mantle only optimizes performance, put for some one like my self, i look for the eye candy, stunning graphics and realistic stuff in games such as fire with game works and water with PhysX, because getting better performance rather than better visual quality doesn't seem like a great deal to me

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

GameWorks in no way prevents AMD from performing their own optimization. 

 thank you, as i said, what did nVidia do about mantle

[TechFan@ic]

People always like to throw in Mantle in their comparisons. A few months back it was Mantle vs G-Sync now it's Mantle vs GameWorks.
The fact is they're incomparable.

 

Mantle gives AMD a competitive advantage by reducing driver overhead and improving GPU performance. GameWorks on the other hand is entirely different. It gives Nvidia an advantage by ensuring that the basics of graphical effects essential to any game like good old shadows, lighting, water and ambient occlusion all run disproportionately slower on AMD hardware.

 

So in essence Mantle works to improve performance on AMD hardware without affecting Nvidia hardware, GameWorks works to reduce performance on AMD hardware rather than improve performance on Nvidia hardware.

Nvidia took the basic visuals and made them proprietary and then packaged these into one library it calls GameWorks.

Believe it or not GameWorks did absolutely nothing to improve graphics all the GameWorks features had already existed and been implemented in games for years before GameWorks was ever created.

In Crysis 3 which is an AMD title Nvidia had its own proprietary ambient occlusion HBAO & anti aliasing TXAA implemented as an option in the game both of these "features" are now GameWorks library assets, their code is property of Nvidia and cannot be disclosed to AMD for competitive reasons.

Far Cry 3 also another AMD title with the Nvidia proprietary ambient occlusion HBAO.

But unlike Watch Dogs in both Crysis 3 & Far Cry 3 the proprietary Nvidia features are implemented as an additional option with both standard anti aliasing & ambient occlusion alternatives as well as proprietary AMD alternatives.

In Watch Dogs this is not the case, the proprietary Nvidia HBAO for example is the only supported ambient occlusion in the game. There is no impartial SSAO setting or an alternative AMD one.
So it is absolute fact that AMD does not and had not at any point blocked Nvidia from optimizing AMD titles or even allow Nvidia to integrate its own proprietary technology. While Nvidia does the exact opposite.

The codes for AMD's proprietary Ambient Occlusion (HDAO), TressFX Hair & Global Illumination are all public.
The codes for Nvidia's proprietary AO (HBAO), HairWorks & GI Works are all locked.


Just for the fun of it, lets imagine a scenario where GameWorks is an AMD program and Nvidia is the victim here what would performance look like ?
Lets look at a game with specific proprietary AMD graphical effects, basic things like shadows, lighting & ambient occlusion.

This is an example of an AMD optimized game, doesn't have any GameWorks like proprietary features just plain old optimization.


Now lets look at a sequel to the game with GameWorks like AMD specific proprietary features. And before you check out the graph I want to point out that this is the first game in the world to implement Global Illumination, AMD was actually the first to develop a GI lighting engine not Nvidia as they would love you to believe.

 

DiRT Showdown is the world’s first game to use Global Illumination while it also supports Advanced Lighting via Forward+ Rendering, High Definition Ambient Occulation (HDAO) and Contact Hardening Shadows.

Using the maximum in-game quality settings, which includes the use of Global Illumination, we found that the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition as capable of rendering 67fps making it the fastest graphics card tested. It was 6% faster than a standard 7970 and a whopping 52% faster than the GeForce GTX 680.

http://www.techspot.com/review/546-amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/page7.html

And actually unlike GameWorks all the AMD "features" posted above are totally public so Nvidia can actually work to optimize the code for it. Now imagine if the code was actually not available to Nvidia. Now is that a world you want to live in ? where the competition is at a 50%+ disadvantage and can't do anything about it ? That's what a GameWorks future looks like.

 

[SymphonyX7]

Apparently, using a proprietary library to be included in an SDK is tantamount to anti-competitive conduct now? Oh, how the mind of the fanboy thinks. Just because there's a net gain on one side, doesn't mean there's a net loss on the other. This isn't very different from what AMD is doing with Mantle, the only exception is Mantle is completely optional for the developers to implement (since it's an alternative API). If AMD wants gains of themselves, they too can include their own libraries and tool extensions to be included in the SDKs of popular game development suites. Faster development time is always better because it allows the product to reach the market faster. If GameWorks helps them accomplish that, of course it'll be used. 

P.S. I'd prefer to look at this from the perspective as someone from the IT industry, rather than as a gamer.

[MilkyWhite]

If gameworks is about improving the game's graphics then why does watch dogs look like shit and run even shittier ?

[jmaster299]

People always like to throw in Mantle in their comparisons. A few months back it was Mantle vs G-Sync now it's Mantle vs GameWorks.

The fact is they're incomparable.

 

Mantle gives AMD a competitive advantage by reducing driver overhead and improving GPU performance. GameWorks on the other hand is entirely different. It gives Nvidia an advantage by ensuring that the basics of graphical effects essential to any game like good old shadows, lighting, water and ambient occlusion all run disproportionately slower on AMD hardware.

 

So in essence Mantle works to improve performance on AMD hardware without affecting Nvidia hardware, GameWorks works to reduce performance on AMD hardware rather than improve performance on Nvidia hardware.

Nvidia took the basic visuals and made them proprietary and then packaged these into one library it calls GameWorks.

Believe it or not GameWorks did absolutely nothing to improve graphics all the GameWorks features had already existed and been implemented in games for years before GameWorks was ever created.

In Crysis 3 which is an AMD title Nvidia had its own proprietary ambient occlusion HBAO & anti aliasing TXAA implemented as an option in the game both of these "features" are now GameWorks library assets, their code is property of Nvidia and cannot be disclosed to AMD for competitive reasons.

Far Cry 3 also another AMD title with the Nvidia proprietary ambient occlusion HBAO.

But unlike Watch Dogs in both Crysis 3 & Far Cry 3 the proprietary Nvidia features are implemented as an additional option with both standard anti aliasing & ambient occlusion alternatives as well as proprietary AMD alternatives.

In Watch Dogs this is not the case, the proprietary Nvidia HBAO for example is the only supported ambient occlusion in the game. There is no impartial SSAO setting or an alternative AMD one.

So it is absolute fact that AMD does not and had not at any point blocked Nvidia from optimizing AMD titles or even allow Nvidia to integrate its own proprietary technology. While Nvidia does the exact opposite.

The codes for AMD's proprietary Ambient Occlusion (HDAO), TressFX Hair & Global Illumination are all public.

The codes for Nvidia's proprietary AO (HBAO), HairWorks & GI Works are all locked.

Just for the fun of it, lets imagine a scenario where GameWorks is an AMD program and Nvidia is the victim here what would performance look like ?

Lets look at a game with specific proprietary AMD graphical effects, basic things like shadows, lighting & ambient occlusion.

This is an example of an AMD optimized game, doesn't have any GameWorks like proprietary features just plain old optimization.

Now lets look at a sequel to the game with GameWorks like AMD specific proprietary features. And before you check out the graph I want to point out that this is the first game in the world to implement Global Illumination, AMD was actually the first to develop a GI lighting engine not Nvidia as they would love you to believe.

 

http://www.techspot.com/review/546-amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/page7.html

And actually unlike GameWorks all the AMD "features" posted above are totally public so Nvidia can actually work to optimize the code for it. Now imagine if the code was actually not available to Nvidia. Now is that a world you want to live in ? where the competition is at a 50%+ disadvantage and can't do anything about it ? That's what a GameWorks future looks like.

 

LoL, you actually just proved that Nvidia and GameWorks are not at fault. You proved that by showing other games that use GameWorks assets that are still optimized for AMD GPUs. That 100% proves that Nvidia is in no way at fault for the lack of AMD optimization for Watch Dogs.

[TERAFLOP]

LoL, you actually just proved that Nvidia and GameWorks are not at fault. You proved that by showing other games that use GameWorks assets that are still optimized for AMD GPUs. That 100% proves that Nvidia is in no way at fault for the lack of AMD optimization for Watch Dogs.

I'm not sure if you can read properly if that's your conclusion.

[TechFan@ic]

LoL, you actually just proved that Nvidia and GameWorks are not at fault. You proved that by showing other games that use GameWorks assets that are still optimized for AMD GPUs. That 100% proves that Nvidia is in no way at fault for the lack of AMD optimization for Watch Dogs.

Nonsense. The fact that HBAO was in Crysis 3 before GameWorks existed proves that GameWorks shouldn't have existed in the first place.

You also need to realize that AMD can't optimize any feature put in the GameWorks library even if it wasn't in the library before. Because these libraries are locked.

So in fact it proves that Nvidia took basic graphical effects essential to any modern game that were actually public before and put them inside locked libraries which AMD has no access too thus making it impossible for AMD to optimize a feature which was actually optimizable before GameWorks existed.

It makes GameWorks even worse ! Nvidia isn't creating new effects and putting them in GameWorks. Nvidia is taking existing effects and locking them. There is absolutely 0 advantage in doing that from a graphics or development stand point the only reason Nvidia would take old effects and lock them is to disadvantage their competition there is no other rhyme or reason to it.

[jmaster299]

I'm not sure if you can read properly if that's your conclusion.

I understand it, but it's obvious that you don't The entire claim against GameWorks is that is supposedly locks developers out from optimizing games for AMD hardware. But as Techfan@ic posted, there are numerous games that use GameWorks assets, but yet they are still optimized for AMD hardware. They use both proprietary things like HBAO and TXAA and non-proprietary options for Ambient Occlusion and Anti-Aliasing. If using GameWorks was as restrictive as people are claiming, those games would not be optimized like they are.

HBAO, Physx and TXAA have never been public, even before GameWorks was given an official name. That is the mistake that you are all making. Developers still had to pay for and license those different assets from Nvidia before they combined into a single package deal.

[TechFan@ic]

I understand it, but it's obvious that you don't The entire claim against GameWorks is that is supposedly locks developers out from optimizing games for AMD hardware. But as Techfan@ic posted, there are numerous games that use GameWorks assets, but yet they are still optimized for AMD hardware. They use both proprietary things like HBAO and TXAA and non-proprietary options for Ambient Occlusion and Anti-Aliasing. If using GameWorks was as restrictive as people are claiming, those games would not be optimized like they are.

HBAO and TXAA have never been public, even before GameWorks was given an official name. That is the mistake that you are all making. Developers still had to pay for and license those different assets from Nvidia before they combined into a single package deal.

Again not true, since Watch Dogs uses Nvidia's proprietary HBAO ambient occlusion exclusively. In Crysis 3 & Far Cry 3, HBAO is an option with other essentially non-hardware biased alternatives.

If you play Watch Dogs and want to enable Ambient Occlusion you only have HBAO which performance terribly on AMD hardware exactly the way that AMD's HDAO performs terribly on Nvidia Hardware. But at least in Far Cry 3 you can choose between both HBAO & HDAO in addition to regular SSAO. With GameWorks titles you can't choose you only have the Nvidia option. This puts all AMD users at an inherit disadvantage.

AMD could've done the exact same thing in Far Cry 3 and only allowed for HDAO which would've given them an advantage across the board.

[jmaster299]

Again not true, since Watch Dogs uses Nvidia's proprietary HBAO ambient occlusion exclusively. In Crysis 3 & Far Cry 3, HBAO is an option with other essentially non-hardware biased alternatives.

If you play Watch Dogs and want to enable Ambient Occlusion you only have HBAO which performance terribly on AMD hardware exactly the way that AMD's HDAO performs terribly on Nvidia Hardware. But at least in Far Cry 3 you can choose between both HBAO & HDAO in addition to regular SSAO. With GameWorks titles you can't choose you only have the Nvidia option. This puts all AMD users at an inherit disadvantage.

AMD could've done the exact same thing in Far Cry 3 and only allowed for HDAO which would've given them an advantage across the board.

Watch Dogs only using HABO was Ubisoft's choice and that choice was in no way forced by Nvidia. It would be illegal for Nvidia to some how prevent a developer from using other assets or resources. You can't blame Nvidia for laziness on the part of the developer. I can't wait for Nvidia to take AMD to court for their liable claims.

[Immort]

Watch Dogs only using HABO was Ubisoft's choice and that choice was in no way forced by Nvidia. It would be illegal for Nvidia to some how prevent a developer from using other assets or resources. You can't blame Nvidia for laziness on the part of the developer. I can't wait for Nvidia to take AMD to court for their liable claims.

That's where you're wrong. Nvidia has a long history of strong-arming developers, bribing OEMs, threatening partners, you name it. Nvidia is known to fight dirty.

http://news.slashdot.org/story/00/07/20/189200/nvidias-ethics-questioned

[jmaster299]

That's where you're wrong. Nvidia has a long history of strong-arming developers, bribing OEMs, threatening partners, you name it. Nvidia is known to fight dirty.

http://news.slashdot.org/story/00/07/20/189200/nvidias-ethics-questioned

Prove it. People make those same false and libel claims all the time, yet they can never produce a single bit of proof. If what you say is true, and it's not, then Nvidia would have long ago been sued by AMD for doing so. Just like Intel was sued by AMD for doing the same thing.