AMD's Richard Huddy on DirectX 11, Eyefinity, and the competition

[MrK6]

Need time refine is okay, but saying that it works now is different. As I already said, there will be a Dx11.x if it has something to do with the hardware. Again, I don't think Nvidia did it right either, so save money for the next generation video cards. As of now, Dirt 2 is the "big thing" about Dx11 and it actually runs much faster in Dx9, so why not just play in Dx9?

Hey, for ATI fans who brought a 5xxx card, you are lucky, the price is good enough even without Dx11 support unless you are smart enough to downgrade to a lower card just for Dx11. If you haven't brought it, then just keep in mind that there is nothing new that you are missing at the moment. Wait a bit until Fermi comes out and there will be another price cut.

If you did see big differences like Mrk6, by all means buy whatever you need to enjoy Dx11.

I reread what I wrote and I might have come off sounding like a dick, which I didn't have the intention to, but I was trying to refocus the scope of the discussion. I don't see "big" differences, it's still the same game. However there are differences, little nuances that add to the overall immersion, and that's what furthers game progression. I'll take anything I can get.

It works now but the effect is no where near what it could be if any of the games were built form the ground up to use the effect in the right places with the right lighting.

I notice a difference, especially in some of the specular effects. It is not as dramatic as it could be, but no reason to discount it as viable. It it does seem grafted. It will probably take a full cycle of having hardware before we see its true potential. Most developers will learn new techniques after the GDC Game Developers Conference Vancouver Canada May 6-7, 2010.

I was going to bring these points up and I'm glad you touched upon them. We are stuck with DX9 games until a new generation of consoles come out, like it or not. And grafted is exactly what DX11 will be until then (unless DX11.x or 12 is out). No developer is going to waste his or her time coding a game from the ground up using an API that only a very small segment of the market has access to. Now implementation might (and hopefully will) get better the longer DX11 is around, and we may see better effects with less of a performance hit, but that's still to come.

 

[evolucion8]

DX11 isn't much different from DX10.1, so the impact in performance compared to DX9 should be the same in Dirt 2. With the only difference that DX11 should have a slight performance boost in some tasks compared to previous DX iterations, so in the future when more stuff is added to screen, it will run more efficient and faster compared to DX10 and specially DX9 and their draw calls overhead.

Far Cry 2 was a nice achievement because it ran better on DX10 and looked better too, but since game development is driven by consoles, I think that DX11 will take the market slowly. Dirt 2 simply looks better in DX11, period, and only has an impact of between 10% and 30% compared to DX9 and depending of the hardware used, for some reason HD 5800 series has a harder impact but probably because they run at higher FPS compared to the HD 5700 series.

 

[BFG10K]

Over 100 games have been improved using TWIMTBP program. I'm pretty sure a lot of those benefits worked on ATI cards. Heck even HL2 uses code licensed from NVIDIA and that was a game severely hyped by ATI.

I notice you completely failed to address the point, as usual. I don’t see TWIMTBP as part of this thread, do you?

The point is that certain individuals were running around and claiming ATi shouldn’t have access to Batman’s AA code because nVidia invested engineering resources into it. Well then, the same thing applies to ATi's Stalker DX10 AA code, except that it does run on nVidia’s cards and benefits them.

I'm sorry you bought the wrong card and a lot of features (MSAA in Batman, PhysX, etc.) don't work for you. However, crying about it when the company you love was unwilling to do the work is just pathetic.

Are you for real?

Do the work AMD. Do the work AMD. Do the work AMD. Do the work AMD. Do the work AMD.

They did – by implementing DX10 AA in Stalker, which nVidia now benefits from. I guess you’d expect this code to be locked down like that tractor you talked about, hmm?

 

[Wreckage]

They did – by implementing DX10 AA in Stalker, which nVidia now benefits from. I guess you’d expect this code to be locked down like that tractor you talked about, hmm?

I notice you completely failed to address the point, as usual. I don’t see Stalker as part of my post, do you?

You are making a strawman argument that has no place here.

Did NVIDIA improve over a 100 games that run fine on ATI hardware?

Could AMD have provided support to Eidos to get AA running on their hardware?

The answer to both is, yes and it pretty much deflates your argument.

 

[BFG10K]

I notice you completely failed to address the point, as usual. I don’t see Stalker as part of my post, do you?

Again, are you for real?

Stalker was in Huddy’s interview, which I quoted and commented on. Then you quoted me and starting harping on about TWIMTBP, which has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

I know you love to troll, but it’s really quite silly when you do it this blatantly.

 

[Wreckage]

Again, are you for real?

Stalker was in Huddy’s interview, which I quoted and commented on. Then you quoted me and starting harping on about TWIMTBP, which has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

I know you love to troll, but it’s really quite silly when you do it this blatantly.

Your personal attacks aside. My point is, was and still continues to be.... NVIDIA has impoved 100's of games and yet some people are getting their panties in a bunch about 1 game that NVIDIA added a non-standard feature to. A feature AMD could have also added, but chose not to. So, fine you picked 1 game...Stalker. Wake me when they get even close to the number of games NVIDIA has improved. I have a feeling that wake up call will never come.

 

[MrK6]

Your personal attacks aside. My point is, was and still continues to be.... NVIDIA has impoved 100's of games and yet some people are getting their panties in a bunch about 1 game that NVIDIA added a non-standard feature to. A feature AMD could have also added, but chose not to. So, fine you picked 1 game...Stalker. Wake me when they get even close to the number of games NVIDIA has improved. I have a feeling that wake up call will never come.

AMD doesn't need to improve the games, their hardware already owns it. Since you have your panties in a knot over Batman: AA and "Nsist" on defending a company that doesn't give a shit about you, let's talk about that. For instance, my 5870 is so fast, it doesn't need any optimized code: I played through Batman @2560x1600 with 4x MSAA at 60FPS+ anyway. So even though NVIDIA blocked AMD's implementation of an optimized MSAA path by vendor locking and open standard, it really didn't matter. I guess NVIDIA has to play dirty because their hardware is inferior.

 

[evolucion8]

AMD doesn't need to improve the games, their hardware already owns it. Since you have your panties in a knot over Batman: AA and "Nsist" on defending a company that doesn't give a shit about you, let's talk about that. For instance, my 5870 is so fast, it doesn't need any optimized code: I played through Batman @2560x1600 with 4x MSAA at 60FPS+ anyway. So even though NVIDIA blocked AMD's implementation of an optimized MSAA path by vendor locking and open standard, it really didn't matter. I guess NVIDIA has to play dirty because their hardware is inferior.

You are right, specially a game using old outdated DX9 technology (Which looks damn fine), using an API that can tax a GPU like DX10x will simply widen the difference, and we can't talk about DX11 performance because nVidia doesn't have DX11 support at all!! (Wreckage style on that one)

 

[akugami]

Your personal attacks aside. My point is, was and still continues to be.... NVIDIA has impoved 100's of games and yet some people are getting their panties in a bunch about 1 game that NVIDIA added a non-standard feature to. A feature AMD could have also added, but chose not to. So, fine you picked 1 game...Stalker. Wake me when they get even close to the number of games NVIDIA has improved. I have a feeling that wake up call will never come.

BS, Batman's AA mode might not have been implemented in the game engine as a standard feature (which is a completely different argument) but the actual implementation was fully standard impelemntation of AA in DirectX. If it was non-standard and used some nVidia only technology then it wouldn't be able to run on AMD GPU's with nothing more than a Vendor ID change. While the nVidia code may be proprietary, the actual implementation of the AA complies to DX standards and will work on any DX card that supports it.

This, like many of your arguments, has already been debunked in previous threads. People are not stupid and they have memories that extend past three months. Repeating the same false arguments a few months later doesn't mean people forget that you already presented the same arguments, nor will it mean they forget that the arguments have already been squashed.

AMD doesn't need to improve the games, their hardware already owns it. Since you have your panties in a knot over Batman: AA and "Nsist" on defending a company that doesn't give a shit about you, let's talk about that. For instance, my 5870 is so fast, it doesn't need any optimized code: I played through Batman @2560x1600 with 4x MSAA at 60FPS+ anyway. So even though NVIDIA blocked AMD's implementation of an optimized MSAA path by vendor locking and open standard, it really didn't matter. I guess NVIDIA has to play dirty because their hardware is inferior.

I don't think nVidia has to play dirty and from a business perspective they really aren't playing dirty, nor are they doing anything illegal. There really is two schools of thought on this and you have to look at it from all perspectives.

From a business standpoint, and I've said this before, I actually applaud what they tried to do. It was a gamble that backfired but if it worked, nVidia could have slowly put a deathgrip on the industry and ensured their cards would almost always be needed to have the best experiences in a game.

From a consumer standpoint, this is nVidia and the developer bending you over, and then asking you how much you like it. Apparently most people don't like it but the usual nVidia defenders sound like they like it a lot. Reminds me of the Kevin Bacon scene in Animal House, "Thank you, sir, may I have another?"

 

[Wreckage]

BS, Batman's AA mode might not have been implemented in the game engine as a standard feature

Making it non-standard. Thank you for proving my point. :thumbsup:

 

[T2k]

bs, batman's aa mode might not have been implemented in the game engine as a standard feature (which is a completely different argument) but the actual implementation was fully standard impelemntation of aa in directx. If it was non-standard and used some nvidia only technology then it wouldn't be able to run on amd gpu's with nothing more than a vendor id change. While the nvidia code may be proprietary, the actual implementation of the aa complies to dx standards and will work on any dx card that supports it.

This, like many of your arguments, has already been debunked in previous threads. People are not stupid and they have memories that extend past three months. Repeating the same false arguments a few months later doesn't mean people forget that you already presented the same arguments, nor will it mean they forget that the arguments have already been squashed.



I don't think nvidia has to play dirty and from a business perspective they really aren't playing dirty, nor are they doing anything illegal. There really is two schools of thought on this and you have to look at it from all perspectives.

From a business standpoint, and i've said this before, i actually applaud what they tried to do. It was a gamble that backfired but if it worked, nvidia could have slowly put a deathgrip on the industry and ensured their cards would almost always be needed to have the best experiences in a game.

From a consumer standpoint, this is nvidia and the developer bending you over, and then asking you how much you like it. Apparently most people don't like it but the usual nvidia defenders sound like they like it a lot. Reminds me of the kevin bacon scene in animal house, "thank you, sir, may i have another?"

:d:d:d

 

[PingviN]

No, it is a standard procedure they used. It's the way AA is implemented, not some all-new Nvidia technology.

 

[Attic]

What happened to this thread?,... again?, oh, it's been wrecked.

It's unfortunate that this is being tolerated here.


Huddy makes his point about a decisive difference between AMD and nVidia when talking about their game programs in the first page of the interview here, "...the difference in the way [AMD] works - we work through enablement and open standards. [Nvidia] works through closed standards and disablement, which, to me is inexcusable; it's as bad as that".

This is seen with the examples of AMD's work on Stalker, open, and nVidia's work with Batman, closed.

 

[akugami]

Making it non-standard. Thank you for proving my point. :thumbsup:

Umm...your understanding of the English language is either highly highly flawed or you are acting stupid on purpose to troll the thread. I pick option two.

This is an example of a useless, off topic, personal attack. Attack his message, not the messenger. Thanks
Allow me to clarify: attack it with facts, not "your message is stupid." -Admin DrPizza

 

[Lonbjerg]

What happened to this thread?,... again?, oh, it's been wrecked.

It's unfortunate that this is being tolerated here.


Huddy makes his point about a decisive difference between AMD and nVidia when talking about their game programs in the first page of the interview here, "...the difference in the way [AMD] works - we work through enablement and open standards. [Nvidia] works through closed standards and disablement, which, to me is inexcusable; it's as bad as that".

This is seen with the examples of AMD's work on Stalker, open, and nVidia's work with Batman, closed.

Well I rather have something proprietary, than nothing "open for all"

AMD...talking GPU-physics since 2006...keyword: talking

 

[Voo]

Umm...your understanding of the English language is either highly highly flawed or you are acting stupid on purpose to troll the thread. I pick option two.

I think his brain just masks out the sentences that don't confirm to his ideology,

But I don't think Nvidia will try something like that again in the near future, after all most consumers don't honor something that is detremental to the whole PC gaming experience and future.. sure they can always count on their fanboys, but they buy nVidia so or so, so they can ignore them without any problems..

@Lonberg: He talks solely about the AA implementation and not physics, which is something completly different. Nobody here has a problem if nvidia supports physix, which is per se nvidia only. A open standard is in works and there are other engines as well, so we'll see which wins, nothing wrong with that.
But implementing a standard AA algorithm and then locking the competition out is wrong and bad for the whole PC as a gaming plattform.

 

[T2k]

What happened to this thread?,... again?, oh, it's been wrecked.

It's unfortunate that this is being tolerated here.

This VGA forum is a very weird place, some powerful hand is constantly making sure certain group of people will never be banned...

Huddy makes his point about a decisive difference between AMD and nVidia when talking about their game programs in the first page of the interview here, "...the difference in the way [AMD] works - we work through enablement and open standards. [Nvidia] works through closed standards and disablement, which, to me is inexcusable; it's as bad as that".

This is seen with the examples of AMD's work on Stalker, open, and nVidia's work with Batman, closed.

I agree. You might want to check the rest of their PR operations like forcing HW vendors to create separate SKUs for "Certified for NV SLI" even though it's the exact same product as the "Certified for ATI Crossfire" ones (PSU) - they think when it comes to distribution and shelf space they will rather stock one type and it's going to be the Nvidia one...

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

If they made Batman in DX10 then AA wouldn't have been an issue but it isn't too big of a deal regardless. ATI users can hack it or force it in CCC. This issue has been going on forever, let it rest already. These are just GPU's, stop being so obsessed about them. Why do people have brand preference to this degree?

 

[T2k]

Well I rather have something proprietary, than nothing "open for all"

AMD...talking GPU-physics since 2006...keyword: talking

Nonsense. Have you heard of Havok (now owned by Intel)? You know, something that's commercial and way more professional than PhysX and used by almost every AAA title - it's IHV-neutral and supported since Radeon 9700 Pro (*EDIT: I'm not exactly sure about this part keep in mind)... PhysX is great to start with because it's free - however Havok is also free for non-commercional use (=you can use it free until you're ready to ship...)

And Huddy (finally!) took an unusual stance and reveled that they (ATI) did talk to Nvidia about PhysX and NV clearly told them go to hell - while at the same time publicly NV keep lying about being open for licensing it to ATI.

Typical example of Nvidia's crooked corporate & business behavior.

Stop Trolling -Admin DrPizza

 

[ginfest]

Nonsense. Have you heard of Havok (now owned by Intel)? You know, something that's commercial and way more professional than PhysX and used by almost every AAA title - it's IHV-neutral and supported since Radeon 9700 Pro... PhysX is great to start with because it's free - however Havok is also free for non-commercional use (=you can use it free until you're ready to ship...)

And Huddy (finally!) took an unusual stance and reveled that they (ATI) did talk to Nvidia about PhysX and NV clearly told them go to hell - while at the same time publicly NV keep lying about being open for licensing it to ATI.

Typical example of Nvidia's crooked corporate & business behavior.

If you really believe what you say, I suggest that you do some research on Intel in addition to NV. Compare the complaints, both real and imagined over the years.You seem to use NV's business practices as an excuse to rail against the company and insult anyone else here who disagrees. Yet you use Intel in you rig
Now, I also use and have used Intel in my rigs and have no problem with that company, or any other for that matter. They are in business to make money. But if I cared as much as you profess to about "....crooked corporate & business behavior...." I'd have an all AMD rig.
So what is it? The true courage of your convictions or GUTB-style trolling :\

 

[T2k]

I have no idea what are you talking about... he was talking about PhysX and I replied.

 

[BFG10K]

Making it non-standard. Thank you for proving my point.

You mean like Stalker’s DX10 AA implementation? I guess in that case you feel nVidia should be locked out of it?

Don’t harp on about TWIMTBP; I want to hear it from you whether nVidia should be locked out of Stalker’s DX10 AA.

I’m waiting.

 

[T2k]

you mean like stalker’s dx10 aa implementation? I guess in that case you feel nvidia should be locked out of it?

Don’t harp on about twimtbp; i want to hear it from you whether nvidia should be locked out of stalker’s dx10 aa.

I’m waiting.

rofl

Stop trolling. -DrPizza

 

[Lonbjerg]

Nonsense. Have you heard of Havok (now owned by Intel)? You know, something that's commercial and way more professional than PhysX and used by almost every AAA title - it's IHV-neutral and supported since Radeon 9700 Pro (*EDIT: I'm not exactly sure about this part keep in mind)... PhysX is great to start with because it's free - however Havok is also free for non-commercional use (=you can use it free until you're ready to ship...)

And Huddy (finally!) took an unusual stance and reveled that they (ATI) did talk to Nvidia about PhysX and NV clearly told them go to hell - while at the same time publicly NV keep lying about being open for licensing it to ATI.

Typical example of Nvidia's crooked corporate & business behavior.

Stop Trolling -Admin DrPizza

You stop trolling.

AMD has been talking since 2006.
No games, no applications...nothing is out.

Those are the facts....no matter you spin.

 

[T2k]

You stop trolling.

AMD has been talking since 2006.
No games, no applications...nothing is out.

Those are the facts....no matter you spin.

You stop lying.

Most AAA titles use Havok, supported by ATI.

You stop trolling.