Asynchronous Compute

Yeah, there is a streaming /cpu code bottleneck or frame pacing bug that triggers min fps every now and then,.. Think it was mentioned @ oc3d review
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/quantum_break_pc_performance_review/9


I mean look at old version Fury min 36fps and now the same min 36fps..

 

amd drivers did get better after they got called out several times, I still dont see how consoles have much to do with their drivers getting better? (some other people keep bringing them up) Their two biggest problems were crappy frametimes and overhead, theyve made huge improvements in both.

 

Who's saying that consoles has anything to do with drivers?

Their drivers got better but it's a really minor improvement overall and they still sucks compared to NV's DX11 driver in pretty much every CPU limited situation.

 

It's from 33-50% up in draw call performance. That's not minor.

 

Nvidia clearly gimping maxwell in favor of kepler now

 

I think WoW had the same performance in favor nvidia, most blizzard games do. Kinda surprised by the numbers, game isnt hard to run at all.

Gonna be more interesting to see FM6 dx12 performance tommorow, hopefuly.

 

If you refer to my argument, I simply said they don't care, not that they gimped. Overwatch is not exactly an example of a modern game with a modern engine.

 

from 1.1mill to ~1.5mill? Dunno still seems low compared to 2.5mill by nv gpu e.g. 780gtx or 980ti for that matter..

jk

And how is that 280X @ min 37 avg 48fps vs 780gtx @ min 54 avg 59fps or even 770gtx now?

Had to rub it in a little



Dunno, from what I saw WOW is mostly low threaded game, that's why nv pulls ahead so much, it has a lot of drawcalls by both single and multi threaded parts.

 

I wasn't referring to you haha just posting overwatch results and being cheeky

 

Well, you're both right. I'm a long time StarCraft player, and the SC2 engine (which is more or less the Blizzard engine) is seriously NVIDIA favorited

 

Do you even lift? if u still play SC2 let me know in the pm

But ye sc engine always favor nvidia, but it's one of the worst engines ever, can't utilize even two cores as needed, overwatch seems to have improved engine at last.

 

That's minor since it resulted in a very small performance gains in actual games.

 

Overwatch is exactly a modern game with a modern engine. Not like you have a slightest clue what constitutes a modern engine and modern game, but I'll give you a clue, it's not all about photorealism.

 

I don't know about that, but dismissing the result simply because it doesn't stress the same aspects of the GPU as "modern games" do (compute, console ports, GCN on console) isn't a very good argument.

The real issue here is that High End cards will get very high framerates, which means geometry is being stressed, which means this sucks for GCN, also driver overhead will impair those high fps. I don't expect Fury cards to do much better than Hawaii here

I'm more interested in seeing the performance charts at very high resolutions say 5k

That should result in gains for GCN vs NV

I hate having to say 'GCN vs NV' btw, I know one is a company and the other a family of uarchs but saying fermi/kepler/maxwell/pascal is too much

 

You could argue that Heroes and SC2 (who share the engine) are modern games. But they are using only two threads. There are a lot of games that don't have photorealism but they are properly threaded at least.

That lead to the introduction of the 300 series. Please let's not get into this again.

 

Well, you should consider that this "vs" there is actually different for Fermi, Kepler and Maxwell at least so saying GCN vs NV isn't really telling much.

That lead to nothing. Games which were faster on NV because of their superior DX11 drivers are still faster on NV even after the release of 300 series. Cue in the Overwatch case from previous page. Precisely because the driver related increases were minimal.

 

Can't argue with that, I'm just lazy

You could say the same for the various iterations of GCN though, so at least I'm impartial in my laziness

 

Neither 390x, nor FuryX? Alrighty then.

 

Overclock your memory, congratulations, you just upgraded to a 390

 

GCN 1.2 has way better Geometry performance than GCN 1.1