nVidia's Tom Petersen raises a good point in AMD vs GameWorks issue

[patrickjp93]

Has more employees than Nvidia

Yes, but where in the company?

[Notional]

You must be joking. There's marked differences between each image. 8x to 16x kills a lot of jaggies and makes the beard much more realistic.

 

Hairworks runs at 64x tessellation at standard.

[sof006]

I don't believe they're lazy, I just think they're either overworked, assigned to different projects and can't get to the games, or something.

Either way, its the reason I don't tend to buy anything AMD anymore. The card itself is a power house but without the drivers to back it up then whats the point?

 

I remember having my 7990 but then after the more up to date drivers came out the more broken the card got, the last time I used that card the latest drivers I used for them ended up disabling the 2nd GPU and no matter what I did I could not for the life of me get the 2nd GPU to work until I installed the old drivers again.

[Guest Kloaked]

Either way, its the reason I don't tend to buy anything AMD anymore. The card itself is a power house but without the drivers to back it up then whats the point?

 

I remember having my 7990 but then after the more up to date drivers came out the more broken the card got, the last time I used that card the latest drivers I used for them ended up disabling the 2nd GPU and no matter what I did I could not for the life of me get the 2nd GPU to work until I installed the old drivers again.

 

They'll get the drivers out eventually, but that's the thing is you're waiting while everyone else is already having a good time at ultra settings.

[Slinkey]

They'll get the drivers out eventually, but that's the thing is you're waiting while everyone else is already having a good time at ultra settings.

I remember that frustration with my Crossfire R9 280x(s) They worked well individually, but together always crashed the game. No idea why, tbh don't care.

Go so angry I sold the cards to two of my friends who are happy with one of the cards each and bought my self 2 780Ti(s)

[Opcode]

You're confusing the statement, so I'm just going to let you continue this on your own.

Personally, I don't think I did. You implied that AMD would ruin GameWorks if it ever went open source (e.g. if they ever got their hands on it). For one, I strongly disagree. You have to understand that meanwhile AMD does push commits for their own solutions a lot of fixes and improvements come from the open source community. This is why proprietary software can never hold a candle to open source solutions. The only reason people lock software down is for commercialization. It doesn't necessarily mean what they have is good it just means they have something of their own that they can use to market. If you asked me or anyone else who has ever been knee deep in any type of code we'd all say the same thing. Nvidia and AMD need to just get together and have a baby, OpenWorks. As what AMD was initially planning to call it. Take the best of both GameWorks and TressFX and incorporate it into one big open source project. From there the adoption rate would skyrocket to where almost every single big game title would use it. With all the beauty of GPL standing behind it to constantly improve the code base. No more optimized for this or licensing fees for that. Hell even Intel could jump into the project and commit some of their own improvements and fixes. If it's one thing you shouldn't do is bank on software giving your hardware a competitive edge meanwhile it holds back the entire industry. For that GameWorks will always be just GameWorks. Nvidia's own little software solution for advanced physics and special effects.

[sof006]

They'll get the drivers out eventually, but that's the thing is you're waiting while everyone else is already having a good time at ultra settings.

Exactly. I don't. AMD is in the wrong, no ifs or buts about it. AMD needs to sort it out, if they don't I will forever remain a user of Nvidia products because... hey guess what? They work. Does AMD's stuff work? Nope. Does it eventually? Yeah of course it does, but only when AMD feels like making it work.

[patrickjp93]

Hairworks runs at 64x tessellation at standard.

Your point? It's easily changed! The other thing is Tessellation really helps is water which has HUGE differences.

[Notional]

Your point? It's easily changed! The other thing is Tessellation really helps is water which has HUGE differences.

 

1. All NVidia users are forced to run it at 64x.

2. The only reason you can even change the tessellation setting, is due to these GameWorks games. More specifically, it came about after Crysis 2 and their dx 11 NVidia patch, and Batman Origins. Both being stupidly excessive with tessellation, because of NVidia.

 

Harworks is not water, so why bring it up? I'm not against tessellation as a dx feature. I love seeing it implemented on brick walls for instance.

[patrickjp93]

Personally, I don't think I did. You implied that AMD would ruin GameWorks if it ever went open source (e.g. if they ever got their hands on it). For one, I strongly disagree. You have to understand that meanwhile AMD does push commits for their own solutions a lot of fixes and improvements come from the open source community. This is why proprietary software can never hold a candle to open source solutions. The only reason people lock software down is for commercialization. It doesn't necessarily mean what they have is good it just means they have something of their own that they can use to market. If you asked me or anyone else who has ever been knee deep in any type of code we'd all say the same thing. Nvidia and AMD need to just get together and have a baby, OpenWorks. As what AMD was initially planning to call it. Take the best of both GameWorks and TressFX and incorporate it into one big open source project. From there the adoption rate would skyrocket to where almost every single big game title would use it. With all the beauty of GPL standing behind it to constantly improve the code base. No more optimized for this or licensing fees for that. Hell even Intel could jump into the project and commit some of their own improvements and fixes. If it's one thing you shouldn't do is bank on software giving your hardware a competitive edge meanwhile it holds back the entire industry. For that GameWorks will always be just GameWorks. Nvidia's own little software solution for advanced physics and special effects.

Get off your soap box. Open Source communities bog down the entire process with in-fighting about directions to go, names to give, etc.. You want to know why Linux still sucks for desktop? It's because of the open source community. It is because the best programmers don't work on the open variants. They work on privately modified versions for the top firms like IBM, Cray, etc.. 

 

There still has yet to be an open source compiler that can match Intel's. There has yet to be a virtual machine software that can match Oracle's Virtual Box. There has yet to be a desktop OS that is as intuitive and reliable as Windows in its current form. Open source may be great for getting big bugs fixed quickly, but come on! The release schedule is slow as molasses and the quality can't keep up to proprietary or privately-maintained and updated code.

 

UE4 still can't match Frostbite or Cryengine, and that has a huge following bigger than the Linux development community.

[patrickjp93]

1. All NVidia users are forced to run it at 64x.

2. The only reason you can even change the tessellation setting, is due to these GameWorks games. More specifically, it came about after Crysis 2 and their dx 11 NVidia patch, and Batman Origins. Both being stupidly excessive with tessellation, because of NVidia.

 

Harworks is not water, so why bring it up? I'm not against tessellation as a dx feature. I love seeing it implemented on brick walls for instance.

No they aren't. You can easily change the Hairworks tessellation settings. Now, whether or not your current hardware has an engine strong enough to run it at high speeds is another matter.

[Notional]

No they aren't. You can easily change the Hairworks tessellation settings. Now, whether or not your current hardware has an engine strong enough to run it at high speeds is another matter.

 

NVidia users? No they cannot set the tessellation factor in HairWorks. The infamous .ini setting is for the AA applied to Hairwokrs, not the tessellation multiplier. Nvidia users has two settings: 64x and off. Wasteful for NVidia's own users.

[patrickjp93]

NVidia users? No they cannot set the tessellation factor in HairWorks. The infamous .ini setting is for the AA applied to Hairwokrs, not the tessellation multiplier. Nvidia users has two settings: 64x and off. Wasteful for NVidia's own users.

No, you can change it to whatever level you choose. It's the same way you change it for AMD. There's plenty of YouTube tutorials if you don't believe me. User error, replace user.

[Techhog]

You must be joking. There's marked differences between each image. 8x to 16x kills a lot of jaggies and makes the beard much more realistic.

To my understanding, it runs at 64x without messing with the driver. Yet, 16x looks practically the same as that default. So, why is it that high, or at the very least why can't I pick the factor in the game settings? The only explanation is that Nvidia wants to make it as demanding as possible for their own benefit.

[Notional]

No, you can change it to whatever level you choose. It's the same way you change it for AMD. There's plenty of YouTube tutorials if you don't believe me. User error, replace user.

 

I don't have an NVidia card, so I cannot check, but do you have any proof of this? This thread from last month says no: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/375871-is-there-any-way-of-changing-tessellation-levels-in-nvidia-control-panel/

[patrickjp93]

To my understanding, it runs at 64x without messing with the driver. Yet, 16x looks practically the same as that default. So, why is it that high, or at the very least why can't I pick the factor in the game settings? The only explanation is that Nvidia wants to make it as demanding as possible for their own benefit.

No, it means the game devs are lazy.

[patrickjp93]

I don't have an NVidia card, so I cannot check, but do you have any proof of this? This thread from last month says no: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/375871-is-there-any-way-of-changing-tessellation-levels-in-nvidia-control-panel/

That thread is entirely incorrect, and I'm currently on a cell phone and am not going out of my way right this moment. Seriously, YouTube: change Nvidia hairworks settings.

[azurezeed]

oh not again

DAD! Timmy put his foot in the meat grinder again!

We're going to need another Timmy

[Gibbons]

No, it means the game devs are lazy.

 

AFAIK Nvidia handles the implementation of Hairworks and not the game devs. Meaning Nvidia picks the level of tessellation and the game devs can't interfere with the code.

[patrickjp93]

AFAIK Nvidia handles the implementation of Hairworks and not the game devs. Meaning Nvidia picks the level of tessellation and the game devs can't interfere with the code.

There's plenty of games which provide menus and sliders for all tons of Gameworks features and PhysX features. CDPR is being lazy.

[Notional]

That thread is entirely incorrect, and I'm currently on a cell phone and am not going out of my way right this moment. Seriously, YouTube: change Nvidia hairworks settings.

 

No hit on anything useful. Only on off settings. The thread I linked, says no way, and even threads on GeForce.com says the same thing. Please find my a source, when you have the time, as I would love to see it. Afaik and google as well, only AMD has a tessellation multiplier setting in the driver software.

[Opcode]

Get off your soap box. Open Source communities bog down the entire process with in-fighting about directions to go, names to give, etc.. You want to know why Linux still sucks for desktop? It's because of the open source community. It is because the best programmers don't work on the open variants. They work on privately modified versions for the top firms like IBM, Cray, etc.. 

 

There still has yet to be an open source compiler that can match Intel's. There has yet to be a virtual machine software that can match Oracle's Virtual Box. There has yet to be a desktop OS that is as intuitive and reliable as Windows in its current form. Open source may be great for getting big bugs fixed quickly, but come on! The release schedule is slow as molasses and the quality can't keep up to proprietary or privately-maintained and updated code.

 

UE4 still can't match Frostbite or Cryengine, and that has a huge following bigger than the Linux development community.

Any reply starting with an insult ultimately justifies the weight of the rest of the post. Open source communities don't bog down progression or any particular direction to bring software. You don't need to talk or collaborate with any single person on an open source project which is one of the true beauties of it. The direction and foundation is already established since the initial commit. All we do is skim through the code and find flaws or better ways of handling things and commit our own optimizations and fixes. Per example I can go over to the OpenMP GIT right now and fork it and start pushing my own fixes and improvements to their current HSA implementation. Linux on one hand doesn't really suck for the desktop at all. I guess me being a power user knowing how to tame it gives me an advantage although the kernel is mature but the same cannot be said about the desktop environments. This is why a lot of distributions that you may have used feel of not being polished or living up to its true potential. The software in question is taken from a completely different aspect as there would only be a single repository for the project and not a dozen forks of it for different purposes. It would be like me pushing my LTT source code to GIT right now. A lot of people here would collaborate on it since this is a community where the software is entirely based around although most people would just push commits for me to validate and approve to improve the code base. Possibly even people who aren't part of this community that came across my GIT while searching the web. The tool is already an established and functional product but like any great software it can always use improvements.

 

Now you're just spewing nonsense per usual. Intel's compiler is nothing great unless you're leveraging their own in house optimizations they do for their own hardware (known fact). I don't even bother with it because I can get better performance and reliable code out of other compilers (GCC & FASM). VirtualBox is open source which is why it's so dynamic across any platform (Windows, OS X, Linux). If you're boasting how reliable Windows is then clearly some part of your logic is flawed. It's one of the most clunky, slow and insecure operating systems known to man. The only part that it has going for it is that it's more intuitive on the desktop which is also another major downfall to its horrendous security. If Microsoft pushed Windows in its entirety to GIT it would shine brighter than it ever has.

 

Like said pushed either engine to a GIT and watch what happens. GameWorks and TressFX are already established and have fully featured code.

[patrickjp93]

Any reply starting with an insult ultimately justifies the weight of the rest of the post. Open source communities don't bog down progression or any particular direction to bring software. You don't need to talk or collaborate with any single person on an open source project which is one of the true beauties of it. The direction and foundation is already established since the initial commit. All we do is skim through the code and find flaws or better ways of handling things and commit our own optimizations and fixes. Per example I can go over to the OpenMP GIT right now and fork it and start pushing my own fixes and improvements to their current HSA implementation. Linux on one hand doesn't really suck for the desktop at all. I guess me being a power user knowing how to tame it gives me an advantage although the kernel is mature but the same cannot be said about the desktop environments. This is why a lot of distributions that you may have used feel of not being polished or living up to its true potential. The software in question is taken from a completely different aspect as there would only be a single repository for the project and not a dozen forks of it for different purposes. It would be like me pushing my LTT source code to GIT right now. A lot of people here would collaborate on it since this is a community where the software is entirely based around although most people would just push commits for me to validate and approve to improve the code base. Possibly even people who aren't part of this community that came across my GIT while searching the web. The tool is already an established and functional product but like any great software it can always use improvements.

Now you're just spewing nonsense per usual. Intel's compiler is nothing great unless you're leveraging their own in house optimizations they do for their own hardware (known fact). I don't even bother with it because I can get better performance and reliable code out of other compilers (GCC & FASM). VirtualBox is open source which is why it's so dynamic across any platform (Windows, OS X, Linux). If you're boasting how reliable Windows is then clearly some part of your logic is flawed. It's one of the most clunky, slow and insecure operating systems known to man. The only part that it has going for it is that it's more intuitive on the desktop which is also another major downfall to its horrendous security. If Microsoft pushed Windows in its entirety to GIT it would shine brighter than it ever has.

Like said pushed either engine to a GIT and watch what happens. GameWorks and TressFX is already established and fully featured code.

BS a million times over. Linux and its various distro maintainers are getting torn apart by community wars all the time, and the less than well-motivated programmers do not keep up with a dedicated company.

No, ICC beats GCC and Clang even without a single proprietary library. Even without CilkPlus and OpenMP you can get better vectorized code. I even did compiler comparisons myself in the code samples I provided on my blog. GCC and clang are 10% slower on the best of comparisons, up to 30% slower in others.

Windows 8.1 pretty much killed the idea of it being insecure. Linux only has the benefit of being less ubiquitous. Gene spafford almost daily releases new faults in the security of it.

Seriously, get off your soap box.

[Opcode]

BS a million times over. Linux and its various distro maintainers are getting torn apart by community wars all the time, and the less than well-motivated programmers do not keep up with a dedicated company.

No, ICC beats GCC and Clang even without a single proprietary library. Even without CilkPlus and OpenMP you can get better vectorized code. I even did compiler comparisons myself in the code samples I provided on my blog. GCC and clang are 10% slower on the best of comparisons, up to 30% slower in others.

Windows 8.1 pretty much killed the idea of it being insecure. Linux only has the benefit of being less ubiquitous. Gene spafford almost daily releases new faults in the security of it.

Seriously, get off your soap box.

Like I said Linux endures a lot of forks of forks for just about everything. It's hard to expect one piece of Linux to be really mature other than the Kernel. I never referenced Linux in my previous posts (for a reason) so I don't know why you bring it up. I stated clearly that any existing software solution can be made better if it was pushed to GIT. Your side winding stories aren't relevant to my posts at all and seems like a attempt to negate the fact that you cannot compete with completely agreeable statements.

 

How you use it and how you're unable to squeeze performance out of it is none of my concerns. You should know what should be ran through a compiler and what should be hand written. I don't need to worry about compilers regardless to what I use as if my software needs to be on top of the chain in terms of performance I can do all of the optimizations myself. Note I'm not saying GCC is faster than ICL all by itself. I'm saying I can get more performance out of it because of how I use it in tandem with FASM. There's no way ICL or GCC (generated code) could ever touch hand optimized code. At the end of the day as a software developer I can say it literally doesn't matter what you compile in. The performance difference is truly negligible for the human brain to comprehend even over an accumulated time period. We're talking literally nanoseconds here which is really only going to show up in synthetics. My tray tool will not be any faster if I compiled my custom compiler in ICL and then recompiled my tray tool.

 

Windows 8.1 never killed the idea of being insecure. I can compromise any Windows build that you can name with just two clicks of your mouse (that's including with whatever typical antivrius software being active). It doesn't take much to get to ring 0. I would call that a far shot from being secure.

 

Maybe I like soap?

[AHaskin14]

OOOOOOOH BURN!!!! But really. Why is it that people think soooo differently about Nvidia and AMD than they do ANY other company in existance. A corporation is a corporation and it's their job to be sucessful.