[Nvidia.com] Nvidia GameWorks unleashed at GDC.

[VulgarDisplay]

Where? In what game(s)?
By the way, this thread is pretty much about Nvidia Gameworks. Just FYI. I kinda would like all participants to remember that and stay on track and don't let yourselves get drawn into the usual thread locking off topic posting.

Tressfx works in tomb raider performs fine on nvidia GPUs after patches and provides a great increase to the graphics albeit kinda funky at times. Forward+ works in one of those racing games, dirt maybe? It allows msaa to function like it should. Being applied to the entire scene unlike deferred rendering engines.

People forget that forward+ was designed to fix msaa and not cripple nvidia performance.

 

[Keysplayr]

Tressfx works in tomb raider performs fine on nvidia GPUs after patches and provides a great increase to the graphics albeit kinda funky at times. Forward+ works in one of those racing games, dirt maybe? It allows msaa to function like it should. Being applied to the entire scene unlike deferred rendering engines.

People forget that forward+ was designed to fix msaa and not cripple nvidia performance.

While I can't say that that isn't good, is it really needed? Nvidia has it's own resources, like HairWorks. Not to mentions other "hair" technologies that go back for years. Remember the Werewolf? Wow seems like ages ago. And both companies have enough AA selections to last a lifetime.

 

[f1sherman]

GameWorks in UE4, Mantle in CryEngine

GameWorks (and even PhysX part of it) still get to be in some CryEngine games (Star Citizen, Warface).

Of course, that doesn't mean that every game developer will include GW/Mantle in their UE4/CryE game. But it looks like both NV and AMD are on the hunt.
So we could see something like an avalanche, where more and more game devs are compelled to integrate GW/Mantle in order to be more competitive.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7882/...ce-new-game-dev-partnerships-crytek-epic-more

 

[piesquared]

Isn't Game works proprietary and closed? nv seems to be going down the wrong path, this will probably end up the same as all of the rest of nv's proprietary stuff; minimal impact and use. and if it's only used in a couple games, it'll likely die quickly. we'll see in a year or so if more than a 1 or 2 developers are interested, but they seem to be backing the open and flexible solutions like Mantle.

 

[sontin]

Yes, Mantle is "open and flexible". Running only on a fraction of the market and has no public SDK and documentation makes Mantle the golden child of "open and flexible".

You sound like the marketing guy who gave forbes an interview where he praised AMD's "open" mentality unlike nVidia which is going the opposite way...

GameWorks in UE4, Mantle in CryEngine

GameWorks (and even PhysX part of it) still get to be in some CryEngine games (Star Citizen, Warface).

Of course, that doesn't mean that every game developer will include GW/Mantle in their UE4/CryE game. But it looks like both NV and AMD are on the hunt.
So we could see something like an avalanche, where more and more game devs are compelled to integrate GW/Mantle in order to be more competitive.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7882/...ce-new-game-dev-partnerships-crytek-epic-more

More games will use nVidia's Gamworks libaries than Mantle. Look at HBAO+: Splinter Cell, AC4, Batman, Call of Duty, Daylight, Titanfall...

 

[f1sherman]

Unreal Engine 4 - GDC 2014 Features Trailer

0:45

Looks like somone took PhysX and decided to call it:
GPU PARTICLE SIMULATION & COLLISION

More games will use nVidia's Gamworks libaries than Mantle. Look at HBAO+: Splinter Cell, AC4, Batman, Call of Duty, Daylight, Titanfall...

I love HBAO+. It's easily the best AO implementation out there.
Imagine Far Cry 3 with HBAO+ and no flickering!

Flickering is by far the worst immersion killer, even worse than pixel crawling.
But you know what... sitting right next or above it is stuttering. And thats where Mantle/low-CPU-overhead can help.

 

[zlatan]

Unreal Engine 4 - GDC 2014 Features Trailer

0:45

Looks like somone took PhysX and decided to call it:
GPU PARTICLE SIMULATION & COLLISION

They built an own particle system for DirecCompute. They can name it as they want.

 

[sontin]

Sparks are only a small subset of PhysX.

 

[f1sherman]

They built an own particle system for DirecCompute. They can name it as they want.

That's even better!

Means NV will need to justify PhysX with something better than sparks

Sparks are only a small subset of PhysX.

Yeah, but not all that smaller LOL.
GameWorks... now thats much bigger and more comprehensive set of visuals/libs.

 

[Keysplayr]

Isn't Game works proprietary and closed? nv seems to be going down the wrong path, this will probably end up the same as all of the rest of nv's proprietary stuff; minimal impact and use. and if it's only used in a couple games, it'll likely die quickly. we'll see in a year or so if more than a 1 or 2 developers are interested, but they seem to be backing the open and flexible solutions like Mantle.

Believe me when I tell you that current Nvidia hardware users, which make up more than 60% of the discrete GPU market, actually does appreciate Nvidia's efforts to improve and enhance performances on that very hardware. Let AMD users worry about what AMD can do for them, and let them do it in another thread to boot.

 

[Silverforce11]

There is always something sacrificed. I bet you the dev team, dev time, QA etc didnt expand at the same size, or at all, in proportion with the added features. So the resources, QA and time is now more thin spread to cover more.

We dont exactly lack examples on how heavy vendor feature titles have fallen flat on their face lately.

I don't normally agree with ShintaiDK but this is spot on.

Any extra hardware exclusive feature that gets added onto a game detracts from the overall game budget of manpower, time, money etc.

We would all as gamers appreciate it more if both AMD and NV stuck with open standards for their feature innovations, but its not realistic to expect that fierce competitors to share their innovation willingly. Handling your hard work to your rival is not a natural thing.

Until then, just be happy they both are continuing to push the GPU landscape ahead at such a good pace. Every new gen brings along massive performance increases, plenty of new and useful features.

 

[SirPauly]

That's where developer relations helps with their resources and tools, imho. Obviously, developers appreciate the help from nVidia and AMD, imho!

 

[SirPauly]

Soon we will have GPU brand exclusive games - just like on the consoles.

Imho,

This is so extreme and fear mongering to me! Why on Earth would a developer only offer their title to one vendor?! These are a few settings that simply offer fidelity enhancements but don't effect core game-play!

 

[AnandThenMan]

Why on Earth would a developer only offer their title to one vendor?!

It's called money.

 

[tviceman]

I don't normally agree with ShintaiDK but this is spot on.

Any extra hardware exclusive feature that gets added onto a game detracts from the overall game budget of manpower, time, money etc.

We would all as gamers appreciate it more if both AMD and NV stuck with open standards for their feature innovations, but its not realistic to expect that fierce competitors to share their innovation willingly. Handling your hard work to your rival is not a natural thing.

Until then, just be happy they both are continuing to push the GPU landscape ahead at such a good pace. Every new gen brings along massive performance increases, plenty of new and useful features.

If nvidia and AMD stuck with open standards, pc games would be stuck being straight up console ports with higher res textures. GPU particle, smoke, hair, and cloth simulation wouldn't be happening and DX12 may not have been developed within the same time frame.

Sorry but I don't want to wait on not-for-profit consortiums and console-centric Microsoft to push innovation in the PC space. You sound like a good candidate to be a console-first user.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

If nvidia and AMD stuck with open standards, pc games would be stuck being straight up console ports with higher res textures. GPU particle, smoke, hair, and cloth simulation wouldn't be happening and DX12 may not have been developed within the same time frame.

Sorry but I don't want to wait on not-for-profit consortiums and console-centric Microsoft to push innovation in the PC space. You sound like a good candidate to be a console-first user.

Both companie companies could still innovate. I think what most people would like to see is amd and nvidia concentrate on making their hardware run their innovation better instead of locking out optimization from the competition.

It is lame to come across as better at something the other guy can't even do. It's like challenging a quadriplegic to a foot race and then rubbing it in their face when you win. Both companies should stop it.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

wtf...

sent a text message to my wife and it appeared here....

 

[sontin]

Both companie companies could still innovate. I think what most people would like to see is amd and nvidia concentrate on making their hardware run their innovation better instead of locking out optimization from the competition.

It is lame to come across as better at something the other guy can't even do.

You mean like Tessellation? D:
AMD hasn't been able to design proper hardware for it so they whine about it when nVidia is inventing new ways to use it.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

You mean like Tessellation? D:
AMD hasn't been able to design proper hardware for it so they whine about it when nVidia is inventing new ways to use it.

Not sure why you feel the need to make this about AMD whining. I said both companies need to stop. You should too.

 

[piesquared]

Believe me when I tell you that current Nvidia hardware users, which make up more than 60% of the discrete GPU market, actually does appreciate Nvidia's efforts to improve and enhance performances on that very hardware. Let AMD users worry about what AMD can do for them, and let them do it in another thread to boot.

60% was their market share. That's falling fast. The fact of the matter is, nv is pumping yet another set of proprietary tech demos to their dwindling user base. I like AMD's open and flexible solution, as apparantley do developers. Just thought i'd point out the hypocrisy of some people, including reviewers, pertaining to the situation. No mention of Game works being proprietary and closed, yet they were falling all over themselves trying to drive home some fallacy that Mantle is a closed API. And on top of that, they were driving the narrative that Mantle will hopelessly fail unless it's adopted industry wide. Here we have a closed solution from NV, in a single game engine. Obviously it's a failure.


You can have the next 3 days off for continued thread crapping and trolling users. This isn't an AMD Mantle thread either.

-Rvenger

 

[Keysplayr]

60% was their market share. That's falling fast. The fact of the matter is, nv is pumping yet another set of proprietary tech demos to their dwindling user base. I like AMD's open and flexible solution, as apparantley do developers. Just thought i'd point out the hypocrisy of some people, including reviewers, pertaining to the situation. No mention of Game works being proprietary and closed, yet they were falling all over themselves trying to drive home some fallacy that Mantle is a closed API. And on top of that, they were driving the narrative that Mantle will hopelessly fail unless it's adopted industry wide. Here we have a closed solution from NV, in a single game engine. Obviously it's a failure.

How does this matter to an Nvidia gpu owner?
Look, I'm very happy for you, and AMD, and Mantle. I hope your days and nights are filled with endless joy. But would you kindly take your crapping Mantle bombs out of this Nvidia GameWorks thread?
It would be appreciated.

 

[BrightCandle]

60% was their market share. That's falling fast. T

Last data from the quarterlys was that Nvidia sales are up, along with its market share. This isn't even remotely true, we got the news only 2 weeks ago that Nvidia had gained market share.

 

[Stuka87]

Last data from the quarterlys was that Nvidia sales are up, along with its market share. This isn't even remotely true, we got the news only 2 weeks ago that Nvidia had gained market share.

Have you actually seen any reports that show what discrete GPU market share is? I have not, only whats its change was.

I know one of the reasons AMD's discrete market share is down is because they do not put discrete GPU's in the majority of their APU equipped laptops. Overall GPU market share shows AMD way ahead of nVidia, but well behind Intel (Which is at 60+%)

But even without these numbers, proprietary technologies are bad for all gamers, period. Fragmentation of the game market is bad.

And to answer the response I know will come, Mantle is AMD only currently, and windows only currently. But AMD has stated it will be moving to Linux, and there is no technical reason it cannot work on GPU's from other manufaturers provided they support the base feature set. Which newer nVidia GPU's do. Mantle is simply too young to be fully opened up. So time will tell what happens there.

Gameworks however is nVidia only, and nVidia never opens any technology up for others to use. They are vehemently against openness. This is whats bad for gamers.

 

[Keysplayr]

I disagree. I think it promotes initiative and pushes competition. Its not bad for gamers at all.

 

[destrekor]

But even without these numbers, proprietary technologies are bad for all gamers, period. Fragmentation of the game market is bad.

It's only bad in the short-term. In the long run, it benefits us greatly. The more they feel like they actually have to make significant grabs for market share with big bets, as opposed to coasting through a generation, the more we win in the long term.

That is the only way the market can successfully innovate in the strides that we consumers deserve. They can innovate at a slower pace and play peacefully with each other in the name of openness... but we will pay more for less, as we have been doing the past few generations. Why would you want that?

Top-end parts used to be significant leaps.

Now, let's put it another way: AMD has been making some significant strides with their new architecture, and have themselves made those big leaps. But comparatively, they have only matched a more-or-less "coasting" effort from Nvidia. Nvidia had such significant gains already that they haven't felt significantly threatened by AMD's gains.

It's much like AMD and Intel... except AMD hasn't made significant leaps in the CPU market. They've played up and succeeded with their APU model, which in that specific sub-market is forcing Intel to wake up with their integrated GPU efforts; they, however, haven't really forced Intel to out-innovate on the CPU efforts.

As AMD gets comfortable with the new architecture, and sees success from Mantle, hopefully Nvidia is only relying on these new features for the interim while they work on hardware that will better line up with DirectX 12 and out-pace AMD's architecture (though they do feel the current architecture like Fermi and Kepler are already DX12-compatible).

I only root for Nvidia to make those significant leaps, because in the end that will keep AMD on their toes and force competitive leaps to maintain or grow in market share.
Also, don't let market share dominate the conversation. It may be well to compare discrete GPU market share, but historically AMD has always captured the value end while they were unable to compete with Nvidia's high-end. As I stated, things have changed some and AMD is producing cards (limited availability) that can compete or out-pace Nvidia's current top hardware for less money.