First Nvidia & AMD Deus Ex: Mankind Divided DX12 Benchmark appeared

[That Norwegian Guy]

1 hour ago, UndueHatred said:

Source

not actually a bug, it's a feature of the Nvidia drivers that forces Pascal cards out of concurrent async compute if the game tries to run it (because they can't) into context switching

[Vode]

Not surprized.

 

Fury X and Rx 480 should be this fast in all games. But GCN doesn't mix with DX11 at all and we got used to the subpar performance. 980Ti should never have been faster than a Fury X, according to what the hardware is capable of.

 

It's just that Nvidia releases cards which perform to almost their fullest potential at release while the AMD card get gimped by the drivers, relying on hardware async compute, which just isn't really good with DX11. AMD bet on the DX12-horse way to early.

[Doobeedoo]

Well, needs more work, I've seen it's beta so. But yeah.

[Devin92]

2 hours ago, Godlygamer23 said:

AMD drivers have a higher CPU overhead versus NVIDIA drivers

Can some one explain what is CPU overhead????

[Bouzoo]

And here I finally decided my next GPU would be the 1060. Back to the drawing board. 

[The Benjamins]

1 minute ago, Devin92 said:

Can some one explain what is CPU overhead????

When a driver has high cpu overhead it means it makes a lot of requests/actions to the cpu for that device to run. So a driver with low cpu overhead will use the cpu less to allow the device to run.

[Devin92]

6 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

When a driver has high cpu overhead it means it makes a lot of requests/actions to the cpu for that device to run. So a driver with low cpu overhead will use the cpu less to allow the device to run.

So if i am understanding right, it means dx12 makes GPU works more independently? it get its own cores and rams and run like a little computer other than a connected device?

[lukart]

1 hour ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Sounds like a really shitty DX12 port again....

 

Only 5% boost on radeon cards? Yea no shit then the Nvidia cards are suffering. Why the fuck can't developers not suck at DX12.

Well they made sure everyone knew it was a beta.
So there's still hope.... 

[Prysin]

18 minutes ago, Devin92 said:

Can some one explain what is CPU overhead????

when you have high CPU overhead, the CPU is being asked to do more then it should do. Likewise, when you have low CPU overhead, the CPU does just the work it needs to, instead of doing a lot of extra work that will not help performance.

 

Vulkan/DX12 helps in multiple ways

First off, it removes the "driver" based CPU overhead (which for AMD has been pretty bad)

second off, by further spreading the workload over multiple cores/threads, you can balance the load on the CPU much more carefully. Thus not overloading the CPU, but keeping it fed with just the right amount of work.

[Coaxialgamer]

So my OC 290x performs as well as a gtx 1080 in this game ? ok i don't know what to say honestly ...

[Prysin]

33 minutes ago, Coaxialgamer said:

So my OC 290x performs as well as a gtx 1080 in this game ? ok i don't know what to say honestly ...

you should be a gent and offer your sincere condolences to buyers of Maxwell and Pascal products.

[The Benjamins]

1 hour ago, Devin92 said:

So if i am understanding right, it means dx12 makes GPU works more independently? it get its own cores and rams and run like a little computer other than a connected device?

kinda, it just needs less or better utilizes host resources.

[Monkey Dust]

3 hours ago, Morgan MLGman said:

We'll see what Vega will bring (besides HBM2), cause Polaris is a little weird. It's aimed more at 1080p and efficiency, but it lost a little of good ol' compute compared to Hawaii.

 

My 290X despite being similar at 1080p to a 480 (it's faster by quite a bit as it's OC'd), beats the 480 significantly in DX12 due to its beefy Hawaii XT chip and a wide, 512 bit memory bus (especially coming in handy at higher resolutions). Look at the difference between the 390X and the 480 at the first graph, that pretty much describes it, as it's got the same chip as my 290X, it's just higher factory clocked, so this is pretty much how much faster a 290X is over a 480 in DX12...

Yeah I'm feeling pretty silly for having bought a 980 now, the 295 x2 wasn't much more at the time than my EVGA 980 FTW. Though I guess it's 4GB effective VRAM may count against soon, versus a pair of 8GB 290Xs. 

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, Monkey Dust said:

Yeah I'm feeling pretty silly for having bought a 980 now, the 295 x2 wasn't much more at the time than my EVGA 980 FTW. Though I guess it's 4GB effective VRAM may count against soon, versus a pair of 8GB 290Xs. 

980 was never a good value card, and is even worse value now, its 4GB of VRAM is a limiting factor that doesn't allow this card to go anything higher than 1080p tbh.

 

How could you not get a 295x2... A single 290X is very close to the 980 in performance, you can surpass stock 980 performance by overclocking, and in DX12 it literally shits on a 980... Now imagine having two of those on one card...

[Misanthrope]

So you actually loose performance with Nvidia cards vs DX11?

 

So much stupid....so much....

[Master Disaster]

4 hours ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Did AMD sponsor this game? Like WTF...

It literally has an AMD logo as the first movie when you run the game. 

[Monkey Dust]

20 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

980 was never a good value card, and is even worse value now, its 4GB of VRAM is a limiting factor that doesn't allow this card to go anything higher than 1080p tbh.

 

How could you not get a 295x2... A single 290X is very close to the 980 in performance, you can surpass stock 980 performance by overclocking, and in DX12 it literally shits on a 980... Now imagine having two of those on one card...

It's fine for 1440p, though running two for 4K would probably be a bit optimistic. And to be fair to the 980 it's still a solid DX11 card which is largely what I have been playing in the 18-ish months I've owned the card, with no crossfire/SLI issues, and DX11 is probably what I'll mostly playing for the next 12. But yeah the 980 I think will get replaced next year, whereas the 295x2 would probably be good for a couple of years after that, unless the AIO pump died.

 

In defence of my choice, DX12 wasn't even being talked about back then, let alone benchmarks out in the wild. And I really wanted adaptive sync, and G-Sync was out but Freesync wasn't. And I would have needed a bigger case. But with hindsight, yeah I should have got the 295x2, but it's a bit late now.

[Michael McAllister]

If Nvidia's performance is worse in DirectX 12, why not just use DirectX 11?  The performance will vary between games anyway, regardless of whether or not you choose AMD or Nvidia.  Just use the card that performs the best in the games you play.

This whole notion that Pascal is useless doesn't hold much water because you're not just paying for the hardware.  You're also paying for the software suite which enables things like Ansel, adaptive v-sync, G-Sync, and ShadowPlay.  Granted, there are third-party software solutions to take advantage of the GPU H.264 encoding (i.e. OBS), but having that option baked into a software package makes it easy and convenient to use.

[Morgan MLGman]

1 minute ago, Monkey Dust said:

It's fine for 1440p, though running two for 4K would probably be a bit optimistic. And to be fair to the 980 it's still a solid DX11 card which is largely what I have been playing in the 18-ish months I've owned the card, with no crossfire/SLI issues, and DX11 is probably what I'll mostly playing for the next 12. But yeah the 980 I think will get replaced next year, whereas the 295x2 would probably be good for a couple of years after that, unless the AIO pump died.

 

In defence of my choice, DX12 wasn't even being talked about back then, let alone benchmarks out in the wild. And I really wanted adaptive sync, and G-Sync was out but Freesync wasn't. And I would have needed a bigger case. But with hindsight, yeah I should have got the 295x2, but it's a bit late now.

It's meh for 1440p imho, I've been pushing 4GB of VRAM in my 290X at 1200p for quite a while, a 390X is a better 1440p choice for less money with twice as much VRAM and DX12 performance that's around 980Ti...

[sgloux3470]

I find it mildly entertaining that reviewers continue to be "surprised" by Nvidia's performance dropping in DX12 over DX11.

 

We've already seen it half a dozen times.  Hitman, Tomb Raider and Ashes all showed the same thing.

 

Can we call a trend a trend yet?

 

 

[ltguy]

Not sure why this surprises anyone, looks at the compute power of the fury x. Amd has always had more powerful but poorly utilized cards. 

[Valentyn]

1 hour ago, Michael McAllister said:

If Nvidia's performance is worse in DirectX 12, why not just use DirectX 11?  The performance will vary between games anyway, regardless of whether or not you choose AMD or Nvidia.  Just use the card that performs the best in the games you play.

 

This chap gets it.

There is no visual differences between DX11 or 12, so just use the API in the game that gives you the best performance.

This applies to all games and GPUs.

[zMeul]

Quote

Known DirectX 12 issue:
- There is a known bug that causes some very high end cards to regress relative to DirectX 11. This bug is being addressed by the development team.

http://steamcommunity.com/app/337000/discussions/0/343785574535318768/

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 hours ago, sgloux3470 said:

I find it mildly entertaining that reviewers continue to be "surprised" by Nvidia's performance dropping in DX12 over DX11.

 

We've already seen it half a dozen times.  Hitman, Tomb Raider and Ashes all showed the same thing.

 

Can we call a trend a trend yet?

 

 

Uhhh considering all of them no longer drop fps no we cant.

 

More like bad dx11>bad dx 12>decent dx11=> decent dx 12.

[Curufinwe_wins]

5 hours ago, ivan134 said:

This game uses the same engine as Hitman though where AMD is faster even in dx 11 because the it seems to be a compute heavy engine. AMD's gigantic gains in dx12 tend to be in games where they have a really huge CPU overhead in dx 11.

 

Also, the 470 is faster than a 1060 using Vulkan.

I don't know if I believe that... the 480 was margin of error different in 1080p by the 980, and the 1060 beats the 980 in doom by a small margin, but I guess all 4 cards could be very tightly packed.

 

Edit nevermind. Apparently the 1060 kinda sucks at doom for some reason. Losing to the 970. According to tech power up.  Guru3d has much different results. This is odd....

 

Anyways the 470 seems to be only an fps or two slower than the 480 in most titles, so it's a better value card than the 480. Esp since the 4GB model is a unicorn. Same enough deal with most cut downs in the past though.