Also: there are 19 games tested, not 16.
Joker 2016 games
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s12S74umruY
Not your fault at all, though strangely they did label the final chart correctly.Doh you are right, I was basing it off their Title (16 new games)
If a game runs faster on NVidia using DX11 than it does using DX12, then the reviewer should test the game in DX11 for NVidia. A lot of reviewers don't do this however, which gives an inaccurate estimate. I also found it strange that Hardware Unboxed didn't do DX11 benchmarking for Total War Warhammer.
Like Ashes of the Singularity Total War WArhammer is another game I feel should be tested using the DX12 API for both AMD and Nvidia hardware. That being the case I've tested all graphics cards using the DX12 API with the unlimited video memory option enabled.
The 1060 and 480 trade blows when it's all said and done, but Nvidia still holds a clear technical advantage with a 15% smaller chip, 20% less transistors, and 30% less power consumption. The 1060 is doing the same work with less resources. Of course most of that doe not directly matter to consumers, but ramifications reign galore. Like prices (i.e. 1080 and Titan XP) and missing products (1080 TI).
I mean he addressed that right in the video.
You'll notice that his results are higher for the 1060 than the DX11 HWC testing.
I saw that when I viewed the video. I was just taken aback because every single benchmark I've ever seen of that game shows the DX11 renderer being faster than the DX12 renderer for NVidia. Perhaps things have changed though due to patches and driver updates..
We are now using FCAT for ALL benchmark results in DX11.
DX12 Benchmarking
For DX12 many of these same metrics can be utilized through a simple program called PresentMon. Not only does this program have the capability to log frame times at various stages throughout the rendering pipeline but it also grants a slightly more detailed look into how certain API and external elements can slow down rendering times.
Since PresentMon throws out massive amounts of frametime data, we have decided to distill the information down into slightly more easy-to-understand graphs. Within them, we have taken several thousand datapoints (in some cases tens of thousands), converted the frametime milliseconds over the course of each benchmark run to frames per second and then graphed the results. This gives us a straightforward framerate over time graph. Meanwhile the typical bar graph averages out every data point as its presented.
One thing to note is that our DX12 PresentMon results cannot and should not be directly compared to the FCAT-based DX11 results. They should be taken as a separate entity and discussed as such.
I think it does have ramifications that matter to consumers. The fact that NVidia has such a large lead in performance per watt/mm2, also practically guarantees that NVidia will always have the faster hardware. NVidia hardware does more with less, and since there are limitations on what consumers think is acceptable in regards to power consumption, AMD can only make their GPUs so large and power hungry before people say, "WTF!"
A game should always be tested on each card with the API that delivers the highest performance without compromise to image quality.
The 1060 and 480 trade blows when it's all said and done, but Nvidia still holds a clear technical advantage with a 15% smaller chip, 20% less transistors, and 30% less power consumption. The 1060 is doing the same work with less resources. Of course most of that doe not directly matter to consumers, but ramifications reign galore. Like prices (i.e. 1080 and Titan XP) and missing products (1080 TI).
While I generally agree with this, there's a few things I would like to add which may change things from a value proposition. There was no reference 1060 so power measurements vary a lot depending on the model used. For example some of the aftermarket XFX 480's use around the same amount of energy as some 1060's, while an aftermarket MSI 480 will consume well over 150W. The 1060 lacks SLI capabilities. The RX480 supports Freesync which gives the consumer a lot more choice and savings when they need to purchase a monitor. And while the 1060 may be a more efficient chip in most cases, it's not necessary "doing the same amount of work with less resources". Focus on heavy compute related tasks and the RX480 likely has the edge in performance per watt. And although this is likely negligible, the 480 also has to power an additional 2GB of GDDR5 memory.
But there is a reference gtx 1060. Where did you get your information? The lack of SLI is an artificial factor, one that 98.7% of all consumers don't care about and also one that is mitigated with DX12 multi GPU solution. Also, I've never seen one review where a 1060 consumes more power and/or is less efficient than any 480 variant. I've also never seen a 480 consuming the 110-120 watts a 1060 consumes. Link these reviews if they exist. And do you know how much more power the vram package on the rx 480 consumes than on the 1060? It's negligent just like you said; not at all a determining factor between which chip is more efficient.
LOL at people liking your post which has blatantly wrong information.
My bad, I wasn't aware of any reference cards for sale. Thought those were just sent out to reviewers. Checking NewEgg I see plenty of 1060's but no reference models?
Its quite clear the RX480 has the upper hand in DX12 (but not an outright advantage) and the GTX1060 has the upper hand in DX11. However right now and for upcoming titles, it seems like there is no IQ benefits from using DX12. DX12 right now only seems to either improve performance (mostly on AMD cards and sometimes on nVIDIA cards) or regress performance and/or graphical glitches.
That being said, DX11 is still here to stay, its far more stable and on most titles, provides more performance than DX12. So i think its a wash between the cards because if im a GTX1060 owner, i'd run games mostly on DX11 which might be faster than a RX480 in DX12 on the same game vice versa.
Some might buy the RX480 because of the DX12 mileage, but im thinking by the time DX12 actually provides more benefits other than performance (id actually be more concerned with game stability than performance at this point in time) there will be newer, faster cards out by then.
DX12 multi-gpu is a neat but realistically no major devs are adopting it and I doubt it'll gain much traction going forward.
Just a thought, but I can't see myself being the only one thinking this way.
Just wanted to point out that both Deus Ex MD and ROTTR have excellent MGPU support in DX12.
There are very few reasons to run rx480 crossfire.
Unless you get very cheap deals, multiple gpu should only be considered for high end cards. Since a single gtx 1080 or 1070 can run almost as fast as cfx rx480, why would you risk game cfx support when you cna have simgle gpu solutions at that performance?
Last but not least, american is no the center of the world, many countries in the world had gpus selling at msrp without special sales. For example for the price of two rx480 at my place, you can buy a custom gtx1080, and the 1080 is clearly better... And two rx480 costs 40% more than the performance bargain gtx1070 at here
So saying that rx480 is better than gtx1060 because it can run cfx is a silly statement. You should just go for single high end gpu than running dual mid range cards
Its quite clear the RX480 has the upper hand in DX12 (but not an outright advantage) and the GTX1060 has the upper hand in DX11.