RTG3rd March – Will Discuss Polaris, Fury X2, VR, DirectX 12 and More

[railven]

I understand your position and realize being short-sighted can be hard to overcome. I recommend you read the following if you have a few minutes.

http://psycheducation.org/treatment...sual-rap/human-decision-making-a-scary-thing/

I'm cool. I got no issues with my buying habits

I don't think that's quite accurate. AMD could only be considered to be offering less if and only if you look day one performance on Gameworks games. On Gaming Evolved or neutral games the performance is pretty much equal for equivalent cards. Other things that it could be said that AMD offers with its cards are better long term performance compared to equivalent NV cards at launch, comparable game performance some time after a Gameworks game launches (weeks to a month or two), and a better long term PC gaming ecosystem by way of open source effects and tools.

One of the advantages that NV has had for a while now is a better resale value, because of the perception of better performance. However, now with the broader knowledge that older AMD cards tend to get better with age while older NV cards comparatively do worse, that seems to be changing.

When I bought my GPU Fury X and 980 Ti were relatively fresh on the market. I had the money, and was at the register. The Fury X under performed on most benches, cost the same, used more power, and had less memory.

 

[sontin]

Everyone can use HBAO+. It is free to use. Otherwise games like Hitman or Ashes are not neutral either because they got sponsored by AMD...

The game is not sponsored by nVidia.

 

[thesmokingman]

Everyone can use HBAO+. It is free to use. Otherwise games like Hitman or Ashes are not neutral either because they got sponsored by AMD...

The game is not sponsored by nVidia.

Ignore the crux of the issue much?

 

[Bacon1]

Everyone can use HBAO+. It is free to use. Otherwise games like Hitman or Ashes are not neutral either because they got sponsored by AMD...

The game is not sponsored by nVidia.

Its using Gameworks HBAO+ thats completely broken in DX12 on AMD hardware.

 

[Magee_MC]

Gears of War is neutral and look how this plays out for AMD.

As has been pointed out, it's not a genuinely neutral game. From what I've seen how this is playing out for AMD is that people have noticed that the game itself is a complete trainwreck and that it has nothing to do with AMD's hardware or drivers, but instead, it is the result of a poor job done by the developers and problems on AMD hardware with NV's first implementation of HBAO+ on DX12.

The first, the horrible optimization by the developers can hopefully be resolved by them. Since this is a DX12 game, it's not something that AMD can fix in the drivers. The second, the graphical glitches on AMD hardware while running NV code, is unfortunately not surprising. The real question here is whether NV will do something to remedy this, or if, since it's GW code it's something that Microsoft might be able to fix. Or, phrased another way, will this give NV more ability to hurt AMD hardware with Gameworks code in the games.

For me, that will be the answer to the real question that comes out of this. Since problems with DX12 game code can't be fixed after the fact in the drivers, how easy will it be for Devs to fix problems with GW code since it is closed source and NV will not allow Devs to work with AMD to optimize for AMD hardware with the source code.

 

[sontin]

Its using Gameworks HBAO+ thats completely broken in DX12 on AMD hardware.

This game is broken on AMD hardware. HBAO+ has nothing to do with it - except it is producing graphical glitches: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYmBu5VJK7s

For me, that will be the answer to the real question that comes out of this. Since problems with DX12 game code can't be fixed after the fact in the drivers, how easy will it be for Devs to fix problems with GW code since it is closed source and NV will not allow Devs to work with AMD to optimize for AMD hardware with the source code.

Coalition has announced that they are working with AMD on the problem.

 

[Mahigan]

This game is broken on AMD hardware. HBAO+ has nothing to do with it - except it is producing graphical glitches: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYmBu5VJK7s



Coalition has announced that they are working with AMD on the problem.

You said the game was neutral. But now you say that coalition will work with AMD, post release, on the issues in GoW. So why didn't they work with AMD beforehand?

And since NV had a driver ready on launch, then evidently they work with NVIDIA.

So neutral to you means working with one IHV and not the other? This appears logical to you?

 

[Mahigan]

And then you claim that Oxide is biased when Oxide works with both IHVs. So working with both IHVs, but having a marketing agreement with one, is biased but working with only one IHV is not biased?

Do you understand why, what you're saying, raises quite a few eyebrows?

 

[Magee_MC]

Coalition has announced that they are working with AMD on the problem.

I don't see that they said that they are working with AMD on the problems associated with HBAO+, just that they are "readying a fix to be deployed in the coming days."

https://gearsofwar.com/en-us/forums...es/9aa87281-98f1-4203-aed5-95ddb54420db/posts

That verbiage, compared to what they say about the AMD performance issues, "AMD is an important partner bringing the promise of DirectX 12 to life for gamers everywhere. We are working closely with them to address a few issues encountered in Gears of War: Ultimate Edition for Windows 10 on AMD cards using GCN 1.1/GCN 1.2, and expect they will be addressed quickly in an upcoming update." is particularly clear.

AMD performance issues in the game - the Devs are working closely with AMD

AMD issues with HBAO+ - the Devs are working on their own because they can't work with AMD on closed source NV Gameworks code.

An interesting point is that since going forward in DX12, Devs will have to do most of the fixes for performance problems in the games, the GPU manufacturers won't be able to fix problems in the games with driver updates for the Devs.

This may lead to Gameworks being significantly less appealing to Devs since they'll be on their own to fix all problems caused by GW closed source code on AMD cards, and may make AMD's GPU Open program more appealing.

 

[Silverforce11]

This is an interesting discussion so far.

I also think because DX12 is very dev reliant on doing things right, NV/AMD is not in a position to simply fix poor coding with their drivers as they've been doing with DX11 with so called "Game Ready" optimized drivers.

DX12/Vulkan is going to really expose the bad developers.

 

[Mahigan]

This is an interesting discussion so far.

I also think because DX12 is very dev reliant on doing things right, NV/AMD is not in a position to simply fix poor coding with their drivers as they've been doing with DX11 with so called "Game Ready" optimized drivers.

DX12/Vulkan is going to really expose the bad developers.

And biased ones as well.

 

[Bacon1]

This game is broken on AMD hardware. HBAO+ has nothing to do with it - except it is producing graphical glitches

lol... nothing to do with it, except for the massive graphically issues.

The game is not sponsored by nVidia.

Hmm right, not sponsored by Nvidia...

"the PC edition's graphical fidelity is improved through the introduction of NVIDIA HBAO+ Ambient Occlusion shadowing, higher-quality visual effects, and the option to use higher-rendering resolutions, up to and including 4K."

Nvidia is great at improving the quality of games.

 

[Magee_MC]

Everyone can use HBAO+. It is free to use. Otherwise games like Hitman or Ashes are not neutral either because they got sponsored by AMD...

The game is not sponsored by nVidia.

It's not a question of sponsorship, or whether or not it's free to use, but whether the devs are able to work with AMD to optimize for their hardware. NV Gameworks code is closed source, and while the devs, if they go through a separate process than the one to use GW can look at the source code they are prohibited from either modifying that source code in any way, or using the source code to work with AMD to improve performance on AMD cards.

In the case of Ashes, Oxide is providing their latest code to both AMD and NV and either IHV is allowed to suggest improvements. That kind of situation where both IHVs work with the devs to improve the game on each of their cards is an impossibility on anything that contains GW code.

 

[3DVagabond]

Against better Geometry rate, Tesselation, DX12_1 features. You never know what really matters. Kepler was a shitty architecture and the games changed in favour of gcn because of the console wins. But will it go on? I'm not so sure. Anyway it's not only about longterm. I'm happy i missed Kepler but instead i got a 7970 which needed 1 year to get acceptable drivers and gave me the biggest driver problems i ever had.



I like new technology too, which is given to me by both companies. Sometimes more open, sometimes more closed. It's always the case, that the underdog tries to accomplish more by pushing open standards because he has no possibility of pushing stuff differently. I don't care for this, i just want the hardware which gives me the best experience. Actually it's even annoying me that amd and it's fans are always whining and it's pushing me more into buying Nv than the other way around. But i will look into the new generation and buy what gives me best value.

Buy what you like. I certainly don't buy or not buy because I find a brands fans annoying. I find the complete lack of sense in that mind boggling.

 

[3DVagabond]

No its not, it uses Gameworks HBAO+ which is completely broken on AMD cards.

And you can't just drop the DLL in the game folder and it works. The render path needs to be optimized to run it. So, in reality, you can't completely remove gameworks from the render path.

Ignore the crux of the issue much?

It's called "Spin".

 

[airfathaaaaa]

This game is broken on AMD hardware. HBAO+ has nothing to do with it - except it is producing graphical glitches: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYmBu5VJK7s



Coalition has announced that they are working with AMD on the problem.

if hbao+ is only broken on amd how do you explain this?
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=387114

 

[Magee_MC]

if hbao+ is only broken on amd how do you explain this?

http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=387114

It looks like that is only referring to the original version. From the Gears of War Link in the first post.

Default 07-26-2014, 20:36 | posts: 85

Gears of War

Despite testing all official and truckload of custom flags, I didn't found one without flickering or heavy bleeding, neither for DX9 or DX10

 

[boozzer]

Read this and just predicted the forth coming responses. I was not wrong.

When I went form Red to Green a few long time posters here that never noticed me suddenly didn't like me. The brand fights here are serious business. Welcome to the unwashed neutral party heads up, you will be catching a lot of flack.

My years of own AMD/ATI cards meant nothing when my sig got updated.

I don't understand the camps I also don't understand how someone can hate a brand they loved just because of a missing port

a missing port

my only metric, perf/$ no matter how rich I am, I always want the most out of my monies that is how you get rich and stay rich. never waste money. never.

the hate because of a missing port, ahahahahaaaa, so ridiculous . FYI I do understand where you are coming from, but I still find it rediculous.

Of course you also end up proving that state enforcements lead to oligarchies, monopolies etc (which they do).

Free markets can only exist if:
1. There is no state.
2. The State has a very limited role and its role as a "private property enforcement unit" is seriously curtailed.

Big Governments lead to market monopolization.

Small Governments with IP/Patent enforcement lead to market oligarchies.

Honest people turn to Mutualist market principles. Meaning "Anarchism". But honest people are rare. Most humans are selfish creatures whose greed can be amplified over 9000 fold through the use of hierarchical state granted privileges.

how feasible is this? the anarchism. because the current IP system is set up so the west retains the tech edge over countries like china and russia. oligarchs gaining more wealth at the same time is just another bird with the same arrow. I don't understand much about this. the conclusions I have drawn are just my own best guesses.

 

[MrTeal]

Read this and just predicted the forth coming responses. I was not wrong.

When I went form Red to Green a few long time posters here that never noticed me suddenly didn't like me. The brand fights here are serious business. Welcome to the unwashed neutral party heads up, you will be catching a lot of flack.

My years of own AMD/ATI cards meant nothing when my sig got updated.

It is kind of funny, it was a pretty simple reply to a question. I haven't even switched companies yet; if the scuttlebutt around the cooler is wrong and it's not ~110mm² and 232mm² AMD GPUs launching around the same time as GP104 it could very well be another Radeon in my sig. Rumours are just pointing to the other camp at the current time.

Either way, my reply to Silverforce's comment still stands. While laudable, IMO AMD's actions providing open source initiatives won't translate to more goodwill and sales. The net result is that if Purehair works great on both systems, but a number of GW titles just suck on AMD GPUs, it does not help much with sales.

As an aside, I wonder how many of the people questioning someone's ethics for their choice of IHVs in the face of some uncompetitive behaviour from one camp have chosen to use an FX-9590 in their primary gaming system rather than support a CPU from a questionable supplier?

 

[Arachnotronic]

Just a random thought. Has it ever occurred to anybody that GameWorks isn't intentionally "gimping" performance but that a "drop in" quick 'n dirty solution written by an IHV is never going to be as efficient as a solution written by the engine developer themselves and made to integrate seamlessly w/ said engine?

Just something to consider.

 

[Arachnotronic]

DX12/Vulkan is going to really expose the bad developers.

That's, like, terrible for games. It's just going to mean more broken crap at launch & game development timelines pushed out further. It may even completely discourage developers from developing PC games altogether because the potential ROI is just not worth it.

Yeah, there will be some strong devs who put a lot of work into wringing the most out of DX12 but the vast majority of deadline-having, budget-constrained developers will just put out crap that will further weaken the appeal of PC gaming vis-a-vis console gaming.

But yeah, sure, DX12 is great and super because the IHVs won't have to do as much work optimizing drivers for specific games....yep.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I don't understand the camps I also don't understand how someone can hate a brand they loved just because of a missing port

The user in question gets some attention now because he is very vocal lately.
I also switched to NV, i do it all the time if i believe my money will be well applied. I don't see red or green when i use my Visa
With that said, i will gladly buy a top end Polaris if the performance is there since i never buy games on release day and don't mind waiting for AMD to work around GW issues

 

[Silverforce11]

Just a random thought. Has it ever occurred to anybody that GameWorks isn't intentionally "gimping" performance but that a "drop in" quick 'n dirty solution written by an IHV is never going to be as efficient as a solution written by the engine developer themselves and made to integrate seamlessly w/ said engine?

Just something to consider.

Ofc a drop in, quick and dirty middle-ware is not going to be as optimized.

It's even worse when such libraries are obfuscated and locked to prevent optimizations. If you recall, the normal GameWorks license do not allow modification to the libraries. If developers want access to it, they have to get a "special" license. They don't specify what this "special" license entails, but one could speculate $$ is involved.

This is why developers only use GameWorks when NV sign them up with marketing agreements. They don't go out of their way to implement black boxes in their games that they can't optimize.

We've seen the reverse for AMD's tech, Rise of the Tomb Raider, an NV GameWorks sponsored title, is built using TressFX3.0 branch of PureHair. Because it's open source, devs are enabled to optimize it as they see fit, and behold, on release, this feature barely hurts performance. Certainly if we compare to HairWorks, where it was tanking Maxwell by 30% or more (and twice as much on AMD before it was eventually fixed). Ref: http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/1006/bench/HairWorks.png

Why would you lock your feature to prevent optimization? The only benefit would be to secure an advantage over your competitor. Thus, the major purpose of GameWorks is to gimp AMD and it's why I and MANY people refer to it as GimpWorks.

 

[Game_dev]

And biased ones as well.

Who is biased. Oxide?

 

[Arachnotronic]

It's even worse when such libraries are obfuscated and locked to prevent optimizations. If you recall, the normal GameWorks license do not allow modification to the libraries. If developers want access to it, they have to get a "special" license. They don't specify what this "special" license entails, but one could speculate $$ is involved.

NVIDIA isn't developing this technology for charitable reasons, there is a clear business rationale. Developing this stuff costs money and requires man-hours and the company wants to see a return.

Surely you wouldn't do work for somebody just for "funsies" right?

This is why developers only use GameWorks when NV sign them up with marketing agreements. They don't go out of their way to implement black boxes in their games that they can't optimize.

So you object to "business"?

We've seen the reverse for AMD's tech, Rise of the Tomb Raider, an NV GameWorks sponsored title, is built using TressFX3.0 branch of PureHair. Because it's open source, devs are enabled to optimize it as they see fit, and behold, on release, this feature barely hurts performance. Certainly if we compare to HairWorks, where it was tanking Maxwell by 30% or more (and twice as much on AMD before it was eventually fixed). Ref: http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/1006/bench/HairWorks.png

That's great, but how does this help AMD sell more GPUs?

Why would you lock your feature to prevent optimization? The only benefit would be to secure an advantage over your competitor. Thus, the major purpose of GameWorks is to gimp AMD and it's why I and MANY people refer to it as GimpWorks.

Yes, both AMD and NVIDIA should be working tirelessly to secure as many advantages over one another as possible. They owe their shareholders nothing less.