rx480 gains big in Dx12 benchmark over gtx970

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Pohernori said:

 

Neh... The 970 is just weak.

 

Pascal has performance improvements when async was enabled. No?

The 970 isn't weak, it's dated. At 1080p it's still a great card (incoming caveat) if you already own one.

 

That's actually the issue. Run the Time Spy benchmark and the 1070 and 1080 get a boost from async, same with my 980ti actually. My 980ti doesn't get as big a boost as Pascal but it's there. So how come Doom doesn't reflect this? Use FXAA so async is disabled and Pascal and my 980ti get a big boost. Looking into it async isn't implemented in Doom using Valkan. So who's to blame? And if this happened to AMD people would be losing their minds, so why the double standard?

 

"Does DOOM support asynchronous compute when running on the Vulkan API?

Asynchronous compute is a feature that provides additional performance gains on top of the baseline id Tech 6 Vulkan feature set.

Currently asynchronous compute is only supported on AMD GPUs and requires DOOM Vulkan supported drivers to run.  We are working with NVIDIA to enable asynchronous compute in Vulkan on NVIDIA GPUs. We hope to have an update soon.

Click here for additional information on asynchronous compute."

 

https://community.bethesda.net/thread/54585?start=0&tstart=0

[DXMember]

didn't we see the same thing in Ashes of the Singularity, or is Futuremark now biased, because they dropped tesselation?

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

24 minutes ago, App4that said:

The 970 isn't weak, it's dated. At 1080p it's still a great card (incoming caveat) if you already own one.

 

That's actually the issue. Run the Time Spy benchmark and the 1070 and 1080 get a boost from async, same with my 980ti actually. My 980ti doesn't get as big a boost as Pascal but it's there. So how come Doom doesn't reflect this? Use FXAA so async is disabled and Pascal and my 980ti get a big boost. Looking into it async isn't implemented in Doom using Valkan. So who's to blame? And if this happened to AMD people would be losing their minds, so why the double standard?

 

"Does DOOM support asynchronous compute when running on the Vulkan API?

Asynchronous compute is a feature that provides additional performance gains on top of the baseline id Tech 6 Vulkan feature set.

Currently asynchronous compute is only supported on AMD GPUs and requires DOOM Vulkan supported drivers to run.  We are working with NVIDIA to enable asynchronous compute in Vulkan on NVIDIA GPUs. We hope to have an update soon.

Click here for additional information on asynchronous compute."

 

https://community.bethesda.net/thread/54585?start=0&tstart=0

 

It was weak the moment it came out. But you can't call it that 2 years ago because its still fast. 

 

The 970 is already off of my recommended list for quite awhile, 390/x is slowly dropping off as well. 

 

Either way, because doom uses Vulkan there are still things to work out. Dx12 has been in the works for quite sometime. 

 

Also in the jc3 hoha. Nvidia used dx12_1 features and most didn't complain that amd cards had no benefit to it. The only negative thing was still the obscene amount in tessellation. But that was also resolved. 

 

So you don't need to make up a problem that doesn't exists. Because one, AMD and NVIDIA are olaying the same game. AMD pushes async the same way Nvidia pushed tessellation. If you'd had kept quiet then something would be wrong. Both sides are still very competitive and fan clubs from both sides are still raging. This means the competition is very much alive.

 

Async is supported only in amd the same way some 12_1 features are only supported in nvidia. Both sides lack certain hardware to fully utilise dx12. Though this is no longer true for the new gen of cards.

[App4that]

5 minutes ago, Pohernori said:

 

It was weak the moment it came out. But you can't call it that 2 years ago because its still fast. 

 

The 970 is already off of my recommended list for quite awhile, 390/x is slowly dropping off as well. 

 

Either way, because doom uses Vulkan there are still things to work out. Dx12 has been in the works for quite sometime. 

 

Also in the jc3 hoha. Nvidia used dx12_1 features and most didn't complain that amd cards had no benefit to it. The only negative thing was still the obscene amount in tessellation. But that was also resolved. 

 

So you don't need to make up a problem that doesn't exists. Because one, AMD and NVIDIA are olaying the same game. AMD pushes async the same way Nvidia pushed tessellation. If you'd had kept quiet then something would be wrong. Both sides are still very competitive and fan clubs from both sides are still raging. This means the competition is very much alive.

 

Async is supported only in amd the same way some 12_1 features are only supported in nvidia. Both sides lack certain hardware to fully utilise dx12. Though this is no longer true for the new gen of cards.

The lack of async support in Doom for Nvidia cards has nothing to do with compliance. Might be Nvidia, might be id, might be AMD. Don't know. But it's BS.

 

Competition is good, blank checks written to companies gets us Gameworks and 3.5g of VRAM. Why I'm outspoken.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

10 minutes ago, App4that said:

The lack of async support in Doom for Nvidia cards has nothing to do with compliance. Might be Nvidia, might be id, might be AMD. Don't know. But it's BS.

 

Competition is good, blank checks written to companies gets us Gameworks and 3.5g of VRAM. Why I'm outspoken.

 

And it also gave us the 7970 which came out too early to use any of the dx12 features. 

 

Pascal has better async support than maxwell. AMD just needs to find another way to be competitive. AMD doing exactly what nvidia does will cause quite alot of chaos. 

[Humbug]

1 hour ago, App4that said:

What we don't need is the same people who cry "gimping" celebrating other cards being held back. Everyone has to pick one, and you only get one. You want competition between the two manufactures that includes tactics like holding the competitors card back by the heavy use of features that limit performance. Or, you want fair implementation of features so that both manufacturers cards have a chance to perform at their best.

 

it's important to recognize the difference between gimping somebody's performance and uplifting somebody else's performance. Let's take this issue with doom vulkan asynchronous compute. It makes AMD GPUs faster, and it does not hurt nvidia users. They are not being held back. Yes it does change the relative competitive performance position. But nobody has got hurt in the process, nobody has lost absolute performance, nobody has got gimped. Maybe AMD benefitted more from vulkan but Nvidia users did not get hurt. In fact they even got some gains. This is a win for the industry, for pc gaming and future Nvidia architectures will benefit more.

 

fanboys on the Internet taking the opportunity to flame, or people worrying about somebody else getting bigger gains (due to buyer's remorse)... Those are seperate issues. I agree with you that's toxic.

[App4that]

3 minutes ago, Humbug said:

it's important to recognize the difference between gimping somebody's performance and uplifting somebody else's performance. Let's take this issue with doom vulkan asynchronous compute. It makes AMD GPUs faster, and it does not hurt nvidia users. They are not being held back. Yes it does change the relative competitive performance position. But nobody has got hurt in the process, nobody has lost absolute performance, nobody has got gimped. Maybe AMD benefitted more from vulkan but Nvidia users did not get hurt. In fact they even got some gains. This is a win for the industry, for pc gaming and future Nvidia architectures will benefit more.

 

fanboys on the Internet taking the opportunity to flame, or people worrying about somebody else getting bigger gains (due to buyer's remorse)... Those are seperate issues. I agree with you that's toxic.

But Nvidia cards are being held back in Doom, I posted the link. Not allowing Nvidia cards to use async while allowing AMD to is gimping. Might be Nvidia's fault, who knows. But it's there.

[Humbug]

16 minutes ago, App4that said:

But Nvidia cards are being held back in Doom, I posted the link. Not allowing Nvidia cards to use async while allowing AMD to is gimping. Might be Nvidia's fault, who knows. But it's there.

they said they were actively working on it with nvidia. If it's a new thing with nvidia pascal then it's understandable the devs would take longer, compared to gcn AMD cards which they had access to for years...

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Humbug said:

they said they were actively working on it with nvidia. If it's a new thing with nvidia pascal then it's understandable the devs would take longer, compared to gcn AMD cards which they had access to for years...

And the 480? See the problem? If it happens to AMD there are pitchforks and torches. If it happens to Nvidia there are cheers or at best excuses. 

 

Don't get me wrong. I'm horribly disappointed in Pascal so far because of the price to performance. And the fact that the cards that come at a premium because of better power delivery don't offer any benefit it overclocking. But come on. This is straight up bull shit. 

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

3 minutes ago, App4that said:

And the 480? See the problem? If it happens to AMD there are pitchforks and torches. If it happens to Nvidia there are cheers or at best excuses. 

 

Don't get me wrong. I'm horribly disappointed in Pascal so far because of the price to performance. And the fact that the cards that come at a premium because of better power delivery don't offer any benefit it overclocking. But come on. This is straight up bull shit. 

 

I didn't see any pitch forks when JC3 used DX12_1 features? 

[App4that]

2 minutes ago, Pohernori said:

 

I didn't see any pitch forks when JC3 used DX12_1 features? 

Because AMD cards didn't suffer, that's why. And this is about features that are supported by a card being blocked. 

[Humbug]

4 minutes ago, App4that said:

And the 480? See the problem? If it happens to AMD there are pitchforks and torches. If it happens to Nvidia there are cheers or at best excuses. 

 

Don't get me wrong. I'm horribly disappointed in Pascal so far because of the price to performance. And the fact that the cards that come at a premium because of better power delivery don't offer any benefit it overclocking. But come on. This is straight up bull shit. 

480 is another AMD GCN GPU. The R&D which they did for activating the feature on previous AMD chips was probably transferrable.

 

 

 

[App4that]

2 minutes ago, Humbug said:

480 is another AMD GCN GPU. The R&D which they did for activating the feature on previous AMD chips was probably transferrable.

 

 

 

And if it was reversed? Would you be making excuses or questioning why? 

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

1 minute ago, App4that said:

Because AMD cards didn't suffer, that's why. And this is about features that are supported by a card being blocked. 

 

Well. We know for sure maxwell doesn't support it. At all. Pascal would, but you need to let nvidia work things out so that pascal gets the performance increase in doom. And even if it doesn't. The performance doesn't degrade if nvidia works things out. 

 

Quote

Asynchronous compute is a feature that provides additional performance gains on top of the baseline id Tech 6 Vulkan feature set.

Currently asynchronous compute is only supported on AMD GPUs and requires DOOM Vulkan supported drivers to run.  We are working with NVIDIA to enable asynchronous compute in Vulkan on NVIDIA GPUs. We hope to have an update soon.

 

https://community.bethesda.net/thread/54585

 

Its not blocked. Nvidia is certainly working on it. 

[Humbug]

8 minutes ago, App4that said:

And if it was reversed? Would you be making excuses or questioning why? 

The devs have said they are working with nvidia on it, so in such scenarios I would not need to make excuses. If time goes on and we have no progress then we need to start questioning id and nvidia to find out if it has been neglected or is a genuine technical limitation.

[App4that]

15 minutes ago, Pohernori said:

 

Well. We know for sure maxwell doesn't support it. At all. Pascal would, but you need to let nvidia work things out so that pascal gets the performance increase in doom. And even if it doesn't. The performance doesn't degrade if nvidia works things out. 

 

 

https://community.bethesda.net/thread/54585

 

Its not blocked. Nvidia is certainly working on it. 

Then I'm sure you can explain my Maxwell card supporting async? Because it does. The 980 and below don't, but the 980ti does. 

 

And if id said they were working with AMD as to why async was blocked on AMD and not Nvidia I'm sure you'd be fine with it. That was sarcasm. 

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

16 minutes ago, App4that said:

Then I'm sure you can explain my Maxwell card supporting async? Because it does. The 980 and below don't, but the 980ti does. 

 

And if id said they were working with AMD as to why async was blocked on AMD and not Nvidia I'm sure you'd be fine with it. That was sarcasm. 

 

You getting a lil bit of performance increase doesn't mean it supports it. Its quite common knowledge that Maxwell doesn't have hardware schedulers for async. They'll receive support when Nvidia wants them to.

 

Well. When CD Project Red said they would work with AMD to resolve the tessellation issues, I was pretty fine with that. And the creator of ENB gives zero support to AMD cards. I also had no comments to that. 

 

The double standard issue that you've been raising up, I have done some digging. Turns out that it doesn't exists and that its just another ploy by the nvidia fan club. Heh sneaky bastards. 

[App4that]

5 hours ago, Pohernori said:

 

You getting a lil bit of performance increase doesn't mean it supports it. Its quite common knowledge that Maxwell doesn't have hardware schedulers for async. They'll receive support when Nvidia wants them to.

 

Well. When CD Project Red said they would work with AMD to resolve the tessellation issues, I was pretty fine with that. And the creator of ENB gives zero support to AMD cards. I also had no comments to that. 

 

The double standard issue that you've been raising up, I have done some digging. Turns out that it doesn't exists and that its just another ploy by the nvidia fan club. Heh sneaky bastards. 

Oh due tell, because I learned of this from Bethesda on their forums.

 

And the 980ti does support async, just not nearly as well as AMD. That's like saying a Model T doesn't support roads because of how slow it is  

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

3 minutes ago, App4that said:

Oh due tell, because I learned of this from Bethesda on their forums.

 

And the 980ti does support async, just not nearly as well as AMD. That's like saying a Model T doesn't support roads because of how slow it is  

 

afaik even the 980 Ti doesn't have hardware schedulers for async. Did nvidia officially say only the 980 Ti supports async?  I might have missed that out. 

[App4that]

6 minutes ago, Pohernori said:

 

afaik even the 980 Ti doesn't have hardware schedulers for async. Did nvidia officially say only the 980 Ti supports async?  I might have missed that out. 

It's a simple matter of throwing asynchronous tasks at it and seeing if they're completed. Need a AMD card to know the disparity but it's, generous I'm sure.

 

Anyway, completely besides the point. For some reason Nvidia users got cock blocked and the forum that freaks out if AMD gets even mentioned in the wrong light could care less. 

 

Just once, to know what it feels like, I'd like a day of balance here. 

[AresKrieger]

6 minutes ago, Pohernori said:

 

afaik even the 980 Ti doesn't have hardware schedulers for async. Did nvidia officially say only the 980 Ti supports async?  I might have missed that out. 

It supports async hardware wise (drivers don't I assume) but only 16 queued instructions, though async is basically pointless in any game that doesn't have massive amounts calculations like AI (which is why ashes benefits from it so much)

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

2 minutes ago, App4that said:

It's a simple matter of throwing asynchronous tasks at it and seeing if they're completed. Need a AMD card to know the disparity but it's, generous I'm sure.

 

Anyway, completely besides the point. For some reason Nvidia users got cock blocked and the forum that freaks out if AMD gets even mentioned in the wrong light could care less. 

 

Just once, to know what it feels like, I'd like a day of balance here. 

 

So its just your own conclusion then? 

 

LOLOLOL You expect people to freak out when Nvidia says they're working on it? Its not like they can magically make it happen overnight.  

 

This is already as balanced as it can be. Both sides throwing shit at each other. I wouldn't be here if it was all quiet. 

[Coaxialgamer]

i do wonder why the rx 480 is underclocked in the featured hitman results ... 

Otherwise , meh , 3dmark was never a very good indication of real world gaming performance

[App4that]

5 minutes ago, Pohernori said:

 

So its just your own conclusion then? 

 

LOLOLOL You expect people to freak out when Nvidia says they're working on it? Its not like they can magically make it happen overnight.  

 

This is already as balanced as it can be. Both sides throwing shit at each other. I wouldn't be here if it was all quiet. 

Where is there a Nvidia fan left here  I think I saw one a few days ago but Godlygamer got him. This forum is a AMD circle jerk and you know it. 

 

I get spun up because I actually use my PC to play video games with people. People with lives and families, jobs and bills. Just about all of them use 970s. Because it was a popular card. A lot of them don't care about the political BS you and I get mixed up in, no time for that. So how exactly is it worth celebrating that their card is being phased out premiturely? A lot of them don't know that, hell one was still using his at stock clocks so he thinks he bought a Bugati because he final applied a overclock  Is he someone people should be throwing poop at because of his graphics card? When a graphics card has issues it effects people, not the company that sold it. Why I advise so many AMD products yet most would think I'm a Nvidia fan. Couldn't be farther from the truth. I'm defending friends. 

[ivan134]

11 minutes ago, App4that said:

Where is there a Nvidia fan left here  I think I saw one a few days ago but Godlygamer got him. This forum is a AMD circle jerk and you know it. 

 

I get spun up because I actually use my PC to play video games with people. People with lives and families, jobs and bills. Just about all of them use 970s. Because it was a popular card. A lot of them don't care about the political BS you and I get mixed up in, no time for that. So how exactly is it worth celebrating that their card is being phased out premiturely? A lot of them don't know that, hell one was still using his at stock clocks so he thinks he bought a Bugati because he final applied a overclock  Is he someone people should be throwing poop at because of his graphics card? When a graphics card has issues it effects people, not the company that sold it. Why I advise so many AMD products yet most would think I'm a Nvidia fan. Couldn't be farther from the truth. I'm defending friends. 

Then I'm going to assume you were mad as fuck at Nvidia for cockblocking AMD cards from using dx 10.1 in Assassin's Creed 1?