Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jul 9, 2016.
Please tell me one AAA title that won't have DX12 this year.
Do we know the DX12 performance of this card yet?
That will be a surprise.
We don't really know anything about DX12 performance. There are few AMD sponsored games and one NVIDIA sponsored game and unsurprisingly competing hardware sucks in them. So I really have no clue why people are jumping in conclusions when there is only half baked DX12. Forza Apex is probably the best DX12 game out there but it runs butter smooth on potato grade gpu (well not quite but it runs well on everything).
In gears of war amd is tad stronger. Forza Apex I guess both are rather equal?
Quantum Break performance? Im sure no nvidia user want to hear about that.
There's not enough DX12 games to draw conclusions, period.
The problem with most, if not all DX12 games is that they are pretty much still in the beta process.
Months later these games/engines are still receiving large updates that fix big issues or just add basic PC features like uncapped framerates, or multi-gpu support.
There are still a few like Hitman, Quantum Break, possibly all the MS Store games that are still waiting for these features.
EDIT: No PC user wants to hear about Quantum Break performance, if any game will chase people back to consoles it's Quantum Break.
Actually Nvidia is already leading the DX12 effort since they offer 12_1 feature level. From that aspect AMD needs to improve their own efforts. I can't say the same for the previous generation of Nvidia, but currently Pascal offers everything that is required for DX12 at this point in time.
Can you tell me how many AAA titles will be DX12-only? You will end-up counting MS games.
Anyway, there are positives for Nvidia;
If Frostbite-engine is well optimised for Nvidia, then, games like Mass Effect: Andromeda should benefit, as well as the next Need for Speed etc.
Due to market-share, you'd be a foolish dev to not optimise for Nvidia and that's the reality of the situation we're going to see.
Why? The game is heavily underrated, it also looks great and plays great. Performance with Fury X is in mid 50's maxed out. Nvidia takes a hit in QB even more than in Hitman. 390 was 50% faster than 970, shocking i would say.
Ofc we want to talk about. Alan Wake 2 will based on the same engine. It has to get better.
Release-day Gears of War, Doom? :banana: Talk about playing driver catch-up.
Better to catch up than blame the engine.
Hehe mid-50fps. You advocate this crap running game just cause it runs better on AMD? Then you deserve every turd they throw at you.
Sure, Quamtum Break engine is tip top.
Because that is still awful performance. Try telling a console owner who is considering moving to the PC world he has to spend that much money and get that sort of performance, and he will stick with his console and spread the word that PC gaming is a rip off.
Everyone knows it's one of the worst ports in years, being less crap on AMD hardware does not change that.
The engine is crap, get over it.
Let's go back in time and look at how it was;
Baring in-mind the Nvidia crashing was discovered to be a windows bug...
In patch 1.7, a new bug was introduced where the mobile phone shook on AMD, but, not on Nvidia. I guess they couldn't fix it so now it shakes on both (lol!). Here's a GTX970 vs RX480 comparison;
Considering the GTX970 is nearly 2yrs old it's doing well vs the RX480. Now, if we add on 40% performance to GTX970 to have a guess where GTX1060 will be, then, you will find in QB that it'll be very competitive...even for such a crap engine that needs constant patching.
I think this model will be very very popular. Too bad about no triple or quad sli support.
The 1060 is looking pretty good price/performance wise.