Does GameWorks influences AMD's Cards game performance?

[DooKey]

That already highlights a problem. Was an PC title called "AMD game", "Intel game" or "NV game"? That's not how PC gaming came about. I think you forgot what PC roots are all about. By calling a game a "GW Title" (aka NV game), already highlights a problem in the industry.

There is nothing inherently wrong about the gameplay or graphics of PC games which have GW sponsorship. The problem is the GW's platform itself. Why in the world would any PC gamer desire for AAA PC gaming to be altered by closed-source code provided by some hardware manufacturer to favour its products only, whether its Matrox, AMD, Intel, NV, Asus, MSI, EVGA, etc.



Translation: It doesn't affect me, so I don't care. It's not my problem. Got it. Just more proof that PC gaming is becoming a segregated community that doesn't care for the greater good of PC gaming as a whole unless in your view hardware monopoly is what you desire. Today it's all about siding with the popular brands, who cares about unethical business practices, and who cares about long-term consequences. I guess we should all suck it up then and accept $1K Titan Xs as the new norm for high-end flagships like you have done. I guess the 1% of PC gamers who pay $2000 for Titan Xs might not care if there is competition in the GPU industry at all. I am sure you'd readily buy $1500 Titan Y Pascal edition in pairs so naturally poor game optimization in AAA titles for Intel/AMD GPU users is something you could care less about. Got it.

I buy cards from both companies when they come out since I like to play with new tech. I'm not a fps/$ buyer when it comes to games or video cards. I expect my 390X CF rig to do very well in the next round of AAA games regardless if they are GW or not.

I don't see where you get the monopoly wish from.

 

[RussianSensation]

I buy cards from both companies when they come out since I like to play with new tech. I'm not a fps/$ buyer when it comes to games or video cards. I expect my 390X CF rig to do very well in the next round of AAA games regardless if they are GW or not.

I don't see where you get the monopoly wish from.

Fair enough, but how would you expect a 390X CF rig to do well when things like HBAO+ are locked in games (The Crew), when CF in GW titles requires patches from the developer (FC4)?

There is no doubt that AMD does have driver issues in a lot of games, including GW titles, but we still have the examples provided in the thread (DX10.1 AC, over-tessellation in GW titles like Batman or Crysis 2) that are all kinda strange, don't you think?

For example, in Project CARs, AMD's performance goes up 40%+ by simply disabling the HUD and moving the power tune to +20% also increases FPS by 20-30%. So clearly, not all problems for AMD's products stem from GWs. However, it think it seems strange that Kepler bombs in many GW titles but performs extremely well in vendor agnostic games (780Ti vs. 970) and how AMD cards perform so much worse in GW games, whereupon the performance is often solved by a post-launch developer patch (AC Unity, Shift 2, FC4). The developers are for sure to blame too.

Do you think when a developer works so closely with NV on a game, they neglect optimizing the game for AMD cards? If so, why is it when the developer works closely with AMD on GE titles, NV cards perform well? That's another inconsistency. I suppose you can say that NV spends more time optimizing AMD GE titles than AMD does because NV has more computer programming / software engineer resources. But how can AMD optimize NV GW titles when they have no access to the GW code? See that's another problem related to GWs that's not at all common with AMD GE where all the code is shared and can be optimized by NV.

Just the very idea that NV inserts any proprietary closed-source code that can't be altered by the developer without their permission or ever shared with the competition is already a red flag. Essentially NV is taking on the role of a software developer for AAA games.

 

[5150Joker]

Instead of crying about it, maybe AMD should shore up some funds to create their own program like GameWorks? And perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to also have better dev relations as their rep is pretty poor throughout the industry. But nope, that won't happen, AMD will just keep crying--welcome to capitalism, it's not easy and may the top dog win.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

They promote free to consumer standards to push their products, not pigeonhole markets. Havok, OpenCL, Mantle, DX, and others that AMD promotes pushes the consumer market forward. TWIMTBP/Gameworks pigeonholes the market and stunts innovation entirely.

If you can see the difference then you're the problem.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Instead of crying about it, maybe AMD should shore up some funds to create their own program like GameWorks? And perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to also have better dev relations as their rep is pretty poor throughout the industry. But nope, that won't happen, AMD will just keep crying--welcome to capitalism, it's not easy and may the top dog win.

What you are saying is AMD/Nvidia should have exclusive games that only work on their hardware. This is absolutely useless and the exact opposite of what PC gaming is all about. Also people are not "crying" they are bringing up 100% valid points (see the poll results?).

If you can see the difference then you're the problem.

The ironic aspect is Nvidia has succeeded because of the open PC platform and now people want that to go away or don't care simply because of brand preference. This is extremely short sighted.

 

[5150Joker]

What you are saying is AMD/Nvidia should have exclusive games that only work on their hardware. This is absolutely useless and the exact opposite of what PC gaming is all about. Also people are not "crying" they are bringing up 100% valid points (see the poll results?).

The ironic aspect is Nvidia has succeeded because of the open PC platform and now people want that to go away or don't care simply because of brand preference. This is extremely short sighted.

Show me a single GameWorks title that doesn't work on an AMD video card. It works but NVIDIA just has exclusive code that helps it and that's great for NVIDIA putting in the time and resources to accomplish that. I see NOTHING wrong with them locking out AMD from accessing their GameWorks code, that's the nature of competition. If it helps NVIDIA bury AMD and AMD can do nothing but whine, then too bad so sad.

 

[bowler484]

What you are saying is AMD/Nvidia should have exclusive games that only work on their hardware. This is absolutely useless and the exact opposite of what PC gaming is all about. Also people are not "crying" they are bringing up 100% valid points (see the poll results?).

Why does everybody keep jumping to the conclusion of specific hardware only games? That's not what Gameworks does.

He's saying, and I agree, that it would benefit PC gaming more for AMD to create their own Gameworks rather than seeing Nvidia dump theirs.

If it ever went to the point of exclusive games then yeah, I'd be against that with you but that's an awfully big conclusion to jump to.

The more exclusive features PC gets vs consoles doesn't nothing but help.

 

[ocre]

That already highlights a problem. Was an PC title called "AMD game", "Intel game" or "NV game"? That's not how PC gaming came about. I think you forgot what PC roots are all about. By calling a game a "GW Title" (aka NV game), already highlights a problem in the industry.

There is nothing inherently wrong about the gameplay or graphics of PC games which have GW sponsorship. The problem is the GW's platform itself. Why in the world would any PC gamer desire for AAA PC gaming to be altered by closed-source code provided by some hardware manufacturer to favour its products only, whether its Matrox, AMD, Intel, NV, Asus, MSI, EVGA, etc.



Translation: It doesn't affect me, so I don't care. It's not my problem. Got it. Just more proof that PC gaming is becoming a segregated community that doesn't care for the greater good of PC gaming as a whole unless in your view hardware monopoly is what you desire. Today it's all about siding with the popular brands, who cares about unethical business practices, and who cares about long-term consequences. I guess we should all suck it up then and accept $1K Titan Xs as the new norm for high-end flagships like you have done. I guess the 1% of PC gamers who pay $2000 for Titan Xs might not care if there is competition in the GPU industry at all. I am sure you'd readily buy $1500 Titan Y Pascal edition in pairs so naturally poor game optimization in AAA titles for Intel/AMD GPU users is something you could care less about. Got it.

You always have something to say, especially if it is anything to do with nvidia. Every game nvidia sponsors and every move they make.

But let me ask you a serious question. Can you list the games you have bought in the last year? You seem to be very critical of others decisions and I think it would be only be fair of you.

How about hardware. Can you list the HW you bought in the last year.

How about in the last 18months?

You are always more than willing to go after others and what they like but it seems strange to me coming from a person who completely boycotted PC entirely for so long yourself.
Why are you so driven to try to tell everyone else what they should do?

I mean, I always wonder that. Not that I am judging you or putting you on trial.

Don't take it the wrong way cause I am not trying to start argument. Just wondering if you bought any games or you have any recent first hand experience on the subject because you have had an awful lot to say about it.

 

[boozzer]

Why does everybody keep jumping to the conclusion of specific hardware only games? That's not what Gameworks does.

He's saying, and I agree, that it would benefit PC gaming more for AMD to create their own Gameworks rather than seeing Nvidia dump theirs.

If it ever went to the point of exclusive games then yeah, I'd be against that with you but that's an awfully big conclusion to jump to.

The more exclusive features PC gets vs consoles doesn't nothing but help.

you do realize once amd gets it's own gw style crapware, pc gaming will be effectively split? alot of console gamers are forced to buy both consoles. you want to buy both gpus everytime you want to upgrade your computer? not to mention drivers wipes n re-installation, just the constant swapping of the gpu would make me want to quit gaming.

buy 2 gpus or 4 for the sli/cf folks every time pc gamers want to upgrade. you want that super :wub: up future?

if you defend gameworks, I really don't know how to respond without the mod hammer hitting me bloody.

 

[SimianR]

Show me a single GameWorks title that doesn't work on an AMD video card. It works but NVIDIA just has exclusive code that helps it and that's great for NVIDIA putting in the time and resources to accomplish that. I see NOTHING wrong with them locking out AMD from accessing their GameWorks code, that's the nature of competition. If it helps NVIDIA bury AMD and AMD can do nothing but whine, then too bad so sad.

Time and resources to sabotage the competitors performance isn't really time that serves the pc gamer very well. If in the end it drives that market to an even more unbalanced market share then I'm sure you'll enjoy overpaying for mid-range NVIDIA cards when AMD is no longer around.

 

[bowler484]

you do realize once amd gets it's own gw style crapware, pc gaming will be effectively split? alot of console gamers are forced to buy both consoles. you want to buy both gpus everytime you want to upgrade your computer? not to mention drivers wipes n re-installation, just the constant swapping of the gpu would make me want to quit gaming.

buy 2 gpus or 4 for the sli/cf folks every time pc gamers want to upgrade. you want that super :wub: up future?

if you defend gameworks, I really don't know how to respond without the mod hammer hitting me bloody.

They buy both consoles because each one has exclusive games.

Gameworks doesn't have exclusive games. An AMD version wouldn't either.

Not a valid comparison at all. Adding a feature like hbao+ or soft shadows to one version isn't NOT the same as not being able to the play the game with the other guys hardware. Apples and oranges.

For the record, I play with the majority of Gameworks features off. The only thing I usually turn on is hbao+ because it does a good job. I just don't see the point in being one of those users creating negative scenarios just to take a crap on Gameworks.

 

[Stormflux]

Giving an inch to this sort of practice in the PC segment is how it all starts. Towards the end; with it's legacy in shambles. You say now that Gameworks doesnt make hardware specific games, but that's just NOW. First comes the perks, then comes the exclusivity. It's capitalism, inevitable. nVidia doesn't have to dump Gameworks, it's great technology, that could benefit the entire industry. But it's closed, they should just open it up. And prove with their prowess that they are better on even grounds. Can you imagine a world where GDDR5 and HBM were exclusive to AMD? They helped make it and nVidia has/will greatly benefit from it. Same can be said for Mantle now going forward.

Show me a single GameWorks title that doesn't work on an AMD video card. It works but NVIDIA just has exclusive code that helps it and that's great for NVIDIA putting in the time and resources to accomplish that. I see NOTHING wrong with them locking out AMD from accessing their GameWorks code, that's the nature of competition. If it helps NVIDIA bury AMD and AMD can do nothing but whine, then too bad so sad.

Why does everybody keep jumping to the conclusion of specific hardware only games? That's not what Gameworks does.

He's saying, and I agree, that it would benefit PC gaming more for AMD to create their own Gameworks rather than seeing Nvidia dump theirs.

If it ever went to the point of exclusive games then yeah, I'd be against that with you but that's an awfully big conclusion to jump to.

The more exclusive features PC gets vs consoles doesn't nothing but help.

Gameworks doesn't have exclusive games. An AMD version wouldn't either.

 

[3DVagabond]

Instead of crying about it, maybe AMD should shore up some funds to create their own program like GameWorks? And perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to also have better dev relations as their rep is pretty poor throughout the industry. But nope, that won't happen, AMD will just keep crying--welcome to capitalism, it's not easy and may the top dog win.

That would be the worse thing that could happen to gamers.

 

[5150Joker]

you do realize once amd gets it's own gw style crapware, pc gaming will be effectively split? alot of console gamers are forced to buy both consoles. you want to buy both gpus everytime you want to upgrade your computer? not to mention drivers wipes n re-installation, just the constant swapping of the gpu would make me want to quit gaming.

buy 2 gpus or 4 for the sli/cf folks every time pc gamers want to upgrade. you want that super :wub: up future?

if you defend gameworks, I really don't know how to respond without the mod hammer hitting me bloody.

AMD could create their own program but it would not split the market because AMD doesn't own half the market. They are a minor 20% share player and are shrinking more and more everyday to the point of being irrelevant. That's why I don't see GameWorks or NVIDIA exclusivity mattering in the long run because at the end of the day, there can only be one and it will be NVIDIA. Anyone that doesn't have blinders on can see this clear as day, I'm not saying this because I prefer NVIDIA but rather based on the reality of the market.

You always have something to say, especially if it is anything to do with nvidia. Every game nvidia sponsors and every move they make.

But let me ask you a serious question. Can you list the games you have bought in the last year? You seem to be very critical of others decisions and I think it would be only be fair of you.

How about hardware. Can you list the HW you bought in the last year.

How about in the last 18months?

You are always more than willing to go after others and what they like but it seems strange to me coming from a person who completely boycotted PC entirely for so long yourself.
Why are you so driven to try to tell everyone else what they should do?

I mean, I always wonder that. Not that I am judging you or putting you on trial.

Don't take it the wrong way cause I am not trying to start argument. Just wondering if you bought any games or you have any recent first hand experience on the subject because you have had an awful lot to say about it.

I've often wondered the same thing.

Giving an inch to this sort of practice in the PC segment is how it all starts. Towards the end; with it's legacy in shambles. You say now that Gameworks doesnt make hardware specific games, but that's just NOW. First comes the perks, then comes the exclusivity. It's capitalism, inevitable. nVidia doesn't have to dump Gameworks, it's great technology, that could benefit the entire industry. But it's closed, they should just open it up. And prove with their prowess that they are better on even grounds. Can you imagine a world where GDDR5 and HBM were exclusive to AMD? They helped make it and nVidia has/will greatly benefit from it. Same can be said for Mantle now going forward.

The fallacy is that people think AMD disappearing from the market would have a meaningful impact on NVIDIA or prices. If you observe the PC notebook discrete graphics market which NVIDIA completely dominates, the prices have stayed the same and performance has scaled considerably without AMD around. So why would the desktop be any different? NVIDIA has investors it must answer to by creating growth and driving increased profits each quarter. They can't do the latter by slowing down innovation and driving up end consumer costs, it would hurt their bottom line and cause massive losses--the kind that Intel is seeing right now. The difference is that NVIDIA is not in a position to absorb losses like Intel does so if they slowed the pace of innovation down or drove prices too high to where consumers stopped upgrading, they'd sink. So rest assured, the market won't change much without AMD and I'd contend that it might even be better without it around.

 

[AnandThenMan]

AMD could create their own program but it would not split the market because AMD doesn't own half the market. They are a minor 20% share player and are shrinking more and more everyday to the point of being irrelevant. That's why I don't see GameWorks or NVIDIA exclusivity mattering in the long run because at the end of the day, there can only be one and it will be NVIDIA. Anyone that doesn't have blinders on can see this clear as day, I'm not saying this because I prefer NVIDIA but rather based on the reality of the market.

What? Since when is it in the stars where there can be only one GPU vendor? I think you're arguments have started jumping sharks right and left.

 

[Stormflux]

@5150Joker

The year is 2020. The new consoles are all out with Semi-Custom AMD APUs that have a clause that Publishers and Developers that create games on Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony platforms can not share source code outside of their respective domain of hardware and software partners. IE Screw you nVidia and Intel.

Or something like that.

Part of me does want to watch the world burn... I'm not entirely disagreeing with you.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

So rest assured, the market won't change much without AMD and I'd contend that it might even be better without it around.

Remember the GTX 280 and HD 4870 launches? Without competition we consumers will get shafted.

 

[Final8ty]

Instead of crying about it, maybe AMD should shore up some funds to create their own program like GameWorks? And perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to also have better dev relations as their rep is pretty poor throughout the industry. But nope, that won't happen, AMD will just keep crying--welcome to capitalism, it's not easy and may the top dog win.

AMD Named to CR Magazine's 100 Best Corporate Citizens List
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/am...s-100-best-corporate-citizens-list-2015-05-04

 

[bowler484]

Giving an inch to this sort of practice in the PC segment is how it all starts. Towards the end; with it's legacy in shambles. You say now that Gameworks doesnt make hardware specific games, but that's just NOW. First comes the perks, then comes the exclusivity. It's capitalism, inevitable. nVidia doesn't have to dump Gameworks, it's great technology, that could benefit the entire industry. But it's closed, they should just open it up. And prove with their prowess that they are better on even grounds. Can you imagine a world where GDDR5 and HBM were exclusive to AMD? They helped make it and nVidia has/will greatly benefit from it. Same can be said for Mantle now going forward.

I say now because all we see is right now. You're making the choice to see the future only in a negative scenario. Maybe you're right but maybe you're wrong.

And the comparison with gddr5 and hbm vs gameworks just doesn't work. AMD helped develop it but would there even be a viable market for the product without Nvidia being sold the product once developed? And without selling it to Nvidia, Nvidia would be forced to seek another solution with a partner of their own.

Mantle is different and AMD deserves credit for that. But AMD knew Mantle was going to force MS into DX12. They made the right choice by letting it go at this point.

AMD Named to CR Magazine's 100 Best Corporate Citizens List
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/am...s-100-best-corporate-citizens-list-2015-05-04

Interesting. MS is #1 and Intel is #7. AMD is #91.

 

[Final8ty]

Interesting. MS is #1 and Intel is #7. AMD is #91.

And nvidia is not on there at all.

 

[boozzer]

They buy both consoles because each one has exclusive games.

Gameworks doesn't have exclusive games. An AMD version wouldn't either.

Not a valid comparison at all. Adding a feature like hbao+ or soft shadows to one version isn't NOT the same as not being able to the play the game with the other guys hardware. Apples and oranges.

For the record, I play with the majority of Gameworks features off. The only thing I usually turn on is hbao+ because it does a good job. I just don't see the point in being one of those users creating negative scenarios just to take a crap on Gameworks.

what do you call a game that allows a 960 to perform 10 to 20% better than a 290x? I call games like that :wub: you call games like that gameworks.

that is no different than exclusive turds.

 

[Azix]

Their mobile business depends on their discrete business. Additionally they are competing with intel in that market as well as AMD. I've no familiarity with the mobile numbers though.

AMDs 20% is measured in recent sales isnt it? Have you or anyone done research into how many of these GPUs are actually already in user's hands? from APUs to discrete GPUs? AMD is not some silly 20%, to even begin to claim that you would need far more than recent sales/shipments. AMD hasn't released a new chip for a while so even if their current ones are competitive, they'll fall behind.

Nvidia is not a company I want to have to rely on for gaming. Few can afford an nvidia monopoly.

AMD could create their own program but it would not split the market because AMD doesn't own half the market. They are a minor 20% share player and are shrinking more and more everyday to the point of being irrelevant. That's why I don't see GameWorks or NVIDIA exclusivity mattering in the long run because at the end of the day, there can only be one and it will be NVIDIA. Anyone that doesn't have blinders on can see this clear as day, I'm not saying this because I prefer NVIDIA but rather based on the reality of the market.



I've often wondered the same thing.




The fallacy is that people think AMD disappearing from the market would have a meaningful impact on NVIDIA or prices. If you observe the PC notebook discrete graphics market which NVIDIA completely dominates, the prices have stayed the same and performance has scaled considerably without AMD around. So why would the desktop be any different? NVIDIA has investors it must answer to by creating growth and driving increased profits each quarter. They can't do the latter by slowing down innovation and driving up end consumer costs, it would hurt their bottom line and cause massive losses--the kind that Intel is seeing right now. The difference is that NVIDIA is not in a position to absorb losses like Intel does so if they slowed the pace of innovation down or drove prices too high to where consumers stopped upgrading, they'd sink. So rest assured, the market won't change much without AMD and I'd contend that it might even be better without it around.

 

[boozzer]

Their mobile business depends on their discrete business. Additionally they are competing with intel in that market as well as AMD. I've no familiarity with the mobile numbers though.

AMDs 20% is measured in recent sales isnt it? Have you or anyone done research into how many of these GPUs are actually already in user's hands? from APUs to discrete GPUs? AMD is not some silly 20%, to even begin to claim that you would need far more than recent sales/shipments. AMD hasn't released a new chip for a while so even if their current ones are competitive, they'll fall behind.

Nvidia is not a company I want to have to rely on for gaming. Few can afford an nvidia monopoly.

I am 100% sure I would switch to consoles if nvidias ends up being the only pc gpu company. pc gaming by that point would be dead. both cpu n gpu would be getting 5 to 10% max improvements per year/cycle. there is no longer any point in building gaming pcs if that becomes the case.

 

[Azix]

I say now because all we see is right now. You're making the choice to see the future only in a negative scenario. Maybe you're right but maybe you're wrong.

And the comparison with gddr5 and hbm vs gameworks just doesn't work. AMD helped develop it but would there even be a viable market for the product without Nvidia being sold the product once developed? And without selling it to Nvidia, Nvidia would be forced to seek another solution with a partner of their own.

Mantle is different and AMD deserves credit for that. But AMD knew Mantle was going to force MS into DX12. They made the right choice by letting it go at this point.



Interesting. MS is #1 and Intel is #7. AMD is #91.

Dude.... Guy... person... stop. Nvidia is not a deity. Please, if you have a shrine... get help. If AMD starts doing things like that, nvidia could well die. Because AMDs tech is simply better. I don't know how it would make sense though since right now they are so open with everything.

eg. tressfx.. hairworks does not look good on human characters and I would bet AMDs fur tech looks better as well. If tomb raiders hair could not be used on nvidia cards, that's damage to nvidias rep (based on the way a lot of people seem to think). Some would realize its AMD being mean, but A LOT would think "oh nvidia sucks." Freesync is another. If it costs nothing much for manufacturers to put it in, it would overtake g-sync to no end. And if only AMD could be used with it.... over 9000 damage to nvidia reputation (based on how a lot of people seem to think).

HBM is another thing.

How many years has nvidia had physx? who really cares about physx? (they didn't even make it, they just bought it). Nvidia is not as good as some people want to think. Could they even make a good graphics performing chip that also had good compute without blowing up your house?

I wouldn't mind if nvidia was replaced by another company like AMD but I wouldn't want there to be one company. I like being able to choose the best option like I thought I did when I got a 970.

 

[3DVagabond]

Their mobile business depends on their discrete business. Additionally they are competing with intel in that market as well as AMD. I've no familiarity with the mobile numbers though.

AMDs 20% is measured in recent sales isnt it? Have you or anyone done research into how many of these GPUs are actually already in user's hands? from APUs to discrete GPUs? AMD is not some silly 20%, to even begin to claim that you would need far more than recent sales/shipments. AMD hasn't released a new chip for a while so even if their current ones are competitive, they'll fall behind.

Nvidia is not a company I want to have to rely on for gaming. Few can afford an nvidia monopoly.

The 20% first off is an exaggeration. That market share figure though (actually 28% IIRC) is product shipped by AMD in the prior qtr. We have already been told that they aren't shipping product to clear old inventories already out there. It in no way represents AMD's user base. But the haters will throw it out there because it helps their agenda and it's something negative they can say about AMD. It's like complaining about their drivers or throwing in Bulldozer comments. It's just spreading any negativity they can.