It makes perfect sense, he said "we know for a fact that several performance enhancing features are not operating at present" and i asked him to prove it with independent benchmarks.
he stated as fact that there are several disabled features that are performance enhancing. I just want proof of his statement, as all the reviews i have seen that try and benchmark with any of these features enabled do not have any good things to say about performance. The gamestar.de review of HBCC for example has this to say about it(it is google translated):
"In Doom, however, the fps decline comparatively strongly, on average, it is about nine percent. The title is, however, clearly the exception, on the average of all measurements the performance with activated HBCC decreases instead only by about four to five percent. In the case of the minimal fps, we also arrive at largely identical results; here, too, HBCC does not offer any advantages in the course of our previous tests.
Either way, HBCC does not usually make a big difference to the game performance of Vega. It may be curious whether this changes with increasing VRAM requirements in games or by new drivers in the future - further HBCC measurements at a later date are in any case firmly fixed."
I have no doubt these features are disabled, i do however have doubt that they are all going to be performance enhancing in a meaningful amount.
HBCC should not have any significant impact for data that can fit within the 8GB and it's not representative of DSBR capabilities. No one has tested the capabilities of the DSBR. I'm going on the whitepaper. They aren't implemented presently, so none of it's benefits are available or can be tested by the public. This is a driver level feature. If you believe they're outright lying, then so be it.
One function is this from the whitepaper. AMD has always suffered from poor utilization vs Nvidia. One reason why it took many more AMD shaders to equal GeForce GPUs. This can close the gap. There was an AMD patent discussed here several years ago with variable shader clusters for different sized wavefronts. This appears to have the same end result in packing a full 64 wavefront with different instances instead of breaking up the wavefronts into smaller values.
"Another innovation of “Vega’s” NGG is improved load balancing across multiple geometry engines. An intelligent workload distributor (IWD) continually adjusts pipeline settings based on the characteristics of the draw calls it receives in order to maximize utilization. One factor that can cause geometry engines to idle is context switching. Context switches occur whenever the engine changes from one render state to another, such as when changing from a draw call for one object to that of a different object with different material properties. The amount of data associated with render states can be quite large, and GPU processing can stall if it runs out of available context storage. The IWD seeks to avoid this performance overhead by avoiding context switches whenever possible. Some draw calls also include many small instances (i.e., they render many similar versions of a simple object). If an instance does not include enough primitives to fill a wavefront of 64 threads, then it cannot take full advantage of the GPU’s parallel processing capability, and some proportion of the GPU's capacity goes unused. The IWD can mitigate this effect by packing multiple small instances into a single wavefront, providing a substantial boost to utilization."
With that said, look at this posted earlier. Another site found a HBCC gain.
https://translate.google.tt/transla...ls/HBCC-Gaming-Benchmark-1236099/&prev=search
""Let's look at the benchmarks. We took some titles from the current PCGH-Parcours to the chest and partly used other settings, as for example with The Talos Principle, which we also tried with powerful, but imaginative 4x Supersample-Antialiasing. This was followed by a test from our old Parcours: Metro Last Light Redux (see
benchmark how-to ) with our standard settings for the benchmark "The Crossing" - not the integrated performance test, but a real play scene. This was all the more surprising, as the Radeon RX Vega 64 was able to grow by an impressive 11 or 14%, depending on the driver used."