Should I wait for Vega?

[Prysin]

3 minutes ago, Vlence said:

 

Unload PhysX to the CPU... Never heard of that. Can you give me a link detailing this? One from NVIDIA will be highly appreciated.

 

Yes I'll be learning Vulkan and DX12 and so dual GPUs seem to be the way to go. But besides 4k 60fps I want dual screens so I have a larger viewport for my windows.

 

So this is what I thought initially - One AMD(polaris/vega/navi) card for a 2160p screen and one NVIDIA card for a 1440p screen. If I can really do that with the PhysX and one Vega card is able to give me 4k 60fps without AA, I think I might just do that...

i cannot find the specific tutorial in how to do it. But i know that PhysX in The Witcher 3 uses the CPU, regardless if you got a Nvidia or AMD card.

 

Here is some generic info from Nvidia:
http://http.developer.nvidia.com/GPUGems/gpugems_ch28.html
http://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/index.html

Link to PhysX sub-forum

https://devtalk.nvidia.com/default/board/66/physx-and-physics-modeling/

 

[Vlence]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

i cannot find the specific tutorial in how to do it. But i know that PhysX in The Witcher 3 uses the CPU, regardless if you got a Nvidia or AMD card.

 

Here is some generic info from Nvidia:
http://http.developer.nvidia.com/GPUGems/gpugems_ch28.html
http://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/index.html

Link to PhysX sub-forum

https://devtalk.nvidia.com/default/board/66/physx-and-physics-modeling/

 

Sorry but I didn't find the links you sent me very informative...

 

I ran a Google search and read some posts. Everything talks about gameplay. I don't really care about that. What I want to know is will I be able to develop with PhysX with an NVIDIA card if I have an AMD card installed alongside.

[Prysin]

2 minutes ago, Vlence said:

Sorry but I didn't find the links you sent me very informative...

 

I ran a Google search and read some posts. Everything talks about gameplay. I don't really care about that. What I want to know is will I be able to develop with PhysX with an NVIDIA card if I have an AMD card installed alongside.

yes. If you unload PhysX execution to the CPU you will. As for GPU, maybe. Depends if you use GeForce drivers or not.

If you get a cheap end Quadro for NVIDIA, the professional drivers shouldnt "shut down" when it detects a AMD card. GeForce drivers WILL disable themselves if the AMD card is the "master".

[Vlence]

6 minutes ago, Prysin said:

yes. If you unload PhysX execution to the CPU you will. As for GPU, maybe. Depends if you use GeForce drivers or not.

If you get a cheap end Quadro for NVIDIA, the professional drivers shouldnt "shut down" when it detects a AMD card. GeForce drivers WILL disable themselves if the AMD card is the "master".

Links please.

[Prysin]

1 minute ago, Vlence said:

Links please.

my own testing with a GeForce GTX 950 and a AMD A10 7850k iGPU and AMD Radeon R9 295x2.

 

If AMD GPU is used as primary display output, the GeForce card doesnt work as normal. It will only function properly under DX12 Multi Vendor GPU.

If GTX 950 is used as primary, AMD cards can still be used for accelerating things. But the two consumer drivers does NOT like eachother.

[Vlence]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

my own testing with a GeForce GTX 950 and a AMD A10 7850k iGPU and AMD Radeon R9 295x2.

 

If AMD GPU is used as primary display output, the GeForce card doesnt work as normal. It will only function properly under DX12 Multi Vendor GPU.

If GTX 950 is used as primary, AMD cards can still be used for accelerating things. But the two consumer drivers does NOT like eachother.

The heck... that's a quad GPU setup that you have...

 

According to the Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks, amd gpus are better suited for dx12.

 

How do you decide which one is the primary? I'll use two screens, one for nvidia and one for amd

[Prysin]

2 minutes ago, Vlence said:

The heck... that's a quad GPU setup that you have...

 

According to the Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks, amd gpus are better suited for dx12.

 

How do you decide which one is the primary? I'll use two screens, one for nvidia and one for amd

one screen for each will prolly be a bitch to get working.

 

Primary GPU = the GPU that had the display connected to it during boot-up of the computer.

 

Also, have not tested with Quad GPU.

 

Tested like this:
R9 295x2 + 950 -> i7 4790k / FX 8320

A10 7870k* + 950

A10 7870k* + R9 295x2

 

tested in Ashes of the Singularity using Multi Vendor GPU.

 

Also i said wrong. its a 7870k, not 7850k

[Vlence]

2 minutes ago, Prysin said:

one screen for each will prolly be a bitch to get working.

 

Primary GPU = the GPU that had the display connected to it during boot-up of the computer.

That's why they connect all monitors to the same GPU...

 

Seems like it's easier to just get two machines...

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 hour ago, Vlence said:

The heck... that's a quad GPU setup that you have...

 

According to the Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks, amd gpus are better suited for dx12.

Ashes of the Singularity uses one aspect of DX12 that works well for that game. That does not mean every AAA developer will rush out and use it because it may not offer any real benefit to them.

[LAwLz]

2 hours ago, Vlence said:

Vega is supposed to be the flagship for the Polaris lineup, if what I heard is correct. If I should SLI or CrossFire only high end cards doesn't it beat the purpose of multiple GPUs? I mean, it's more affordable to stick two cheaper cards than two expensive ones.

It is usually a really bad idea to run two lower end cards over a single high end card.

Sometimes Crossfire/SLI doesn't work at all, and in those cases you are stuck with the performance of a single low end card.

A lot of times scaling is very bad. Not so much an issue weeks/months after a AAA game is released, but at launch and for games where the developers don't care that much about performance (read: most of them) you usually end up with pretty bad scaling. Two cards might only perform like one and a half. You will most likely experience more glitches in games with multi-GPU setups as well.

 

Single GPU setups are just far more consistent than multi GPU ones.

 

2 hours ago, Vlence said:

By I can't wait too long means no more than 6 months.

 

I don't want NVIDIA because, well, I don't wanna spend all of that on something too expensive. See, I thought I would get myself an RX 480 and a 1070 so I could play around with GameWorks and GPUOpen while learning game dev but after reading a few posts, it has become apparent to me the drivers won't play too well. Especially when it comes to PhysX.

 

So I decided I'll get myself a dual polaris or vega. Cheaper and satisfactory performance, I guess.

If you need the system within 6 months then wait 6 months and then decide which parts to buy. There is no point in trying to decide which parts you should buy half a year from now. Nobody knows what the prices will be like, which parts will be out or even how they will perform. Anyone saying anything else is a liar, ignorant or a wizard with a crystal ball that can see into the future.

Again, buy what you need, when you need it. Don't plan your build 6 months ahead of time because your plans will most likely change as prices and the hardware available changes.

 

What do you mean "spend all of that on something too expensive"? Your budget is 6000... Trust me, you can get a computer for under 6000 without only buying AMD parts. You should focus less on what brand you buy from, and more on what the product you are buying can/can't do.

 

You are complicating things way too much. You said that you have just started to learn game development. Having support for dual GPUs should be the least of your priorities right now. You have to learn to walk before you can run.

 

AMD cards can't do PhysX on the GPU, but they can do it on the CPU (although that is not recommended for very PhysX heavy games). You can also use other physics engines like Havok.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Prysin said:

not to mention. Whilst not required, having a Crossfire or SLI system as a developer is handy, as it simplifies bug-fixing on the developers side.

 

If he/she is planning to code for Vulcan (most likely unless he picks up a off the shelf engine like Unreal Engine 4).

 

However, the amount of hardware needed to make a game is entirely up to the developer, and whether he will need 8 cores 16 threads, or 2 cores 2 threads is simply up to how complicated he/she is planning to make the game/engine.

He is just starting out. Corssfire and SLI support should be very low on the priority list. Learning how to make a game run on a single GPU comes first.

 

I think you forgot something in the mid section there. Seems like there should be something after "if he is planning to code for Vulcan."

 

Yes, how much hardware you need entirely depends on the game. However, this is someone who has just started learning game development. When someone who is new in a field tries to estimate what will be needed in 6 months they usually end up being completely wrong. That's why I keep saying that you should only buy what you need, and when you need it. Anything else is basically gambling with your money.

 

 

1 hour ago, Vlence said:

According to the Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks, amd gpus are better suited for dx12.

You can not evaluate the performance of a library using a single implementation.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Vlence said:

That's why they connect all monitors to the same GPU...

 

Seems like it's easier to just get two machines...

You could get a motherboard with switches to turn on/off PCIe slots and a simple HDMI switch.

It would require a restart when you switch between AMD and Nvidia, but it should be more practical than having two computers.

 

All you would need to do is turn off your system, flip a switch to turn PCIe slot 1 off, and then flip another switch to turn on PCIe slot 2, and then flip the switch on your HDMI switch. Once the system turns on it would be like if you physically pulled card 1 out, and put in card 2 in its place.

[Prysin]

44 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

He is just starting out. Corssfire and SLI support should be very low on the priority list. Learning how to make a game run on a single GPU comes first.

 

I think you forgot something in the mid section there. Seems like there should be something after "if he is planning to code for Vulcan."

 

Yes, how much hardware you need entirely depends on the game. However, this is someone who has just started learning game development. When someone who is new in a field tries to estimate what will be needed in 6 months they usually end up being completely wrong. That's why I keep saying that you should only buy what you need, and when you need it. Anything else is basically gambling with your money.

Personally, i'd say just have a SLI or CF or both setup at hand. Be it even low end GPUs just so you can test and fool around with it until the time comes.

It is not always intuitive to just do one thing at a time, and sometimes, learning two tings at once, if in relation to one another, can teach you some "secrets" that will benefit both. Something that would be a nightmare to "fix" or "add in" later on when its all perfectly made for a single GPU.

 

If you make your game for single GPU, then try to shoehorn in multi-gpu later, it will never truly be good for multi GPU. It has to have it from the start, from the very beginning.

[Vlence]

21 hours ago, Prysin said:

Personally, i'd say just have a SLI or CF or both setup at hand. Be it even low end GPUs just so you can test and fool around with it until the time comes.

It is not always intuitive to just do one thing at a time, and sometimes, learning two tings at once, if in relation to one another, can teach you some "secrets" that will benefit both. Something that would be a nightmare to "fix" or "add in" later on when its all perfectly made for a single GPU.

 

If you make your game for single GPU, then try to shoehorn in multi-gpu later, it will never truly be good for multi GPU. It has to have it from the start, from the very beginning.

 

21 hours ago, LAwLz said:

You could get a motherboard with switches to turn on/off PCIe slots and a simple HDMI switch.

It would require a restart when you switch between AMD and Nvidia, but it should be more practical than having two computers.

 

All you would need to do is turn off your system, flip a switch to turn PCIe slot 1 off, and then flip another switch to turn on PCIe slot 2, and then flip the switch on your HDMI switch. Once the system turns on it would be like if you physically pulled card 1 out, and put in card 2 in its place.

 

21 hours ago, LAwLz said:

It is usually a really bad idea to run two lower end cards over a single high end card.

Sometimes Crossfire/SLI doesn't work at all, and in those cases you are stuck with the performance of a single low end card.

A lot of times scaling is very bad. Not so much an issue weeks/months after a AAA game is released, but at launch and for games where the developers don't care that much about performance (read: most of them) you usually end up with pretty bad scaling. Two cards might only perform like one and a half. You will most likely experience more glitches in games with multi-GPU setups as well.

 

Single GPU setups are just far more consistent than multi GPU ones.

 

If you need the system within 6 months then wait 6 months and then decide which parts to buy. There is no point in trying to decide which parts you should buy half a year from now. Nobody knows what the prices will be like, which parts will be out or even how they will perform. Anyone saying anything else is a liar, ignorant or a wizard with a crystal ball that can see into the future.

Again, buy what you need, when you need it. Don't plan your build 6 months ahead of time because your plans will most likely change as prices and the hardware available changes.

 

What do you mean "spend all of that on something too expensive"? Your budget is 6000... Trust me, you can get a computer for under 6000 without only buying AMD parts. You should focus less on what brand you buy from, and more on what the product you are buying can/can't do.

 

You are complicating things way too much. You said that you have just started to learn game development. Having support for dual GPUs should be the least of your priorities right now. You have to learn to walk before you can run.

 

AMD cards can't do PhysX on the GPU, but they can do it on the CPU (although that is not recommended for very PhysX heavy games). You can also use other physics engines like Havok.

 

 

 

He is just starting out. Corssfire and SLI support should be very low on the priority list. Learning how to make a game run on a single GPU comes first.

 

I think you forgot something in the mid section there. Seems like there should be something after "if he is planning to code for Vulcan."

 

Yes, how much hardware you need entirely depends on the game. However, this is someone who has just started learning game development. When someone who is new in a field tries to estimate what will be needed in 6 months they usually end up being completely wrong. That's why I keep saying that you should only buy what you need, and when you need it. Anything else is basically gambling with your money.

 

 

 

You can not evaluate the performance of a library using a single implementation.

Thanks so much. You guys have been very helpful.

 

I guess I'll take a single vega, if it comes out. Otherwise pascal it is... Get a second one later when I'm proficient enough with game dev on a single card.

[LAwLz]

2 minutes ago, Vlence said:

Thanks so much. You guys have been very helpful.

 

I guess I'll take a single vega, if it comes out. Otherwise pascal it is... Get a second one later when I'm proficient enough with game dev on a single card.

That sounds like a good idea to me. It should be out within 6 months.

[Vlence]

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

That sounds like a good idea to me. It should be out within 6 months.

Dude I need somebody to explain water blocks to me. You got links?

[dalekphalm]

32 minutes ago, Vlence said:

Dude I need somebody to explain water blocks to me. You got links?

Waterblocks are literally a piece of metal (The heatsink) hollowed out that allows water to flow through it (The inside of the hollow is engineered specifically to allow heat transmission). The water is in a loop, with a water pump that cycles the water throughout the system, and a Radiator (Just like a car, basically a giant water holding device with lots of small fins that radiate the heat out of the water and into the air), and the radiator has a fan attached to it, to blow cool air through the fins, which helps cool the water faster.

 

Most watercooling setups also contain a reservoir, which is just a tank filled with extra water, to make sure that the system never creates an air pocket.

 

Watercooling is generally significantly more efficient (and often quieter, but it depends on the specific pump and how much noise it makes) compared to traditional air coolers.

[Prysin]

32 minutes ago, Vlence said:

Dude I need somebody to explain water blocks to me. You got links?

waterblocks are basically a copper or zinc plate with fins on it. Water enters the "entry fitting", and through sheer water pressure provided by the pump in the watercooling loop, the water moves throughout the waterblock. The fins inside the block  increase the cooling surface of the copper or zinc plate and help direct the waterflow in a certain direction before it comes out of the "exit fitting".