the entire DGPU market share maybe ~70-30% nvidia but that doesnt mean cdpr customer base skews this way although it is more likely.
AMD is not in finical position to pay for 74% DGPUs user protection money to developers.Majority always speaks and with 20% share left with AMD put them in a very tight position .
Game is not out yet.the entire DGPU market share maybe ~70-30% nvidia but that doesnt mean cdpr customer base skews this way although it is more likely.
AMD is not in finical position to pay for 74% DGPUs user protection money to developers.Majority always speaks and with 20% share left with AMD put them in a very tight position .
No i am not saying what i am saying is that AMD cannot do anything like Gamework even if they want to and it is impossible for them to counter Gamework because majority of DGPU share and finical investment.So now AMD can't afford to sponsor games. lol
No i am not saying what i am saying is that AMD cannot do anything like Gamework even if they want to and it is impossible for them to counter Gamework because majority of DGPU share and finical investment.
Can Developers risk 74% DGPU user for the sake of 26%(AMD) or dont provide source code to nvidia?and you saying it makes it so?
Can Developers risk 74% DGPU user for the sake of 26%(AMD) or dont provide source code to nvidia?
That's too bad, and sad to see. Without AMD not able to optimize may hurt their customers even though the feature is brand agnostic.
Can Developers risk 74% DGPU user for the sake of 26%(AMD) or dont provide source code to nvidia?
1. AMD won't do the same thing as GW because they stand for open-source PC game development.
2. It's hilarious how NV fans think AMD will always remain at 26% GPU market share. Next thing you know we'll start hearing how AMD disappears from the discrete GPU market in 12 months.
That's not the saddest part. The saddest part of all is on various forums online and discussions, NV card owners who have bought NV GPUs exclusively for the last 5-15 years keep saying: "Oh No, we really need competition. I hope AMD remains in business and people buy their cards to keep the GPU market competitive and NV prices in check." <<<All while these gamers have not bought a single ATI/AMD card in 5-15 years!!!>>>>
So who are these "mythical" consumers who are supposed to keep buying AMD cards? LOL.
I mean I can't possibly imagine how in the world can anyone keep buying only NV cards for the last decade? It's impossible for anyone objective to have owned only NV cards in the last 10 years. Let's face it now HD6950 2GB unlocked was an incredible deal and 5850/5870 were amazing cards uncontested for 6 months. HD4850/4870/4890 were also awesome. About the only type of gamer who is *excused* is someone who only bought the best (8800GTX/280/285/480/580/780Ti/Titan/Titan X). Everyone else who only bought NV? hmmm....
And let's not even get started on GeForce 5 and GeForce 7. Those 2 series were inferior to ATI.
AMD needs to deliver good products with 300, 400 and 500 series to try to get market share back to 35-40% to balance the market. This is getting pretty ridiculous. NV is making sales with the turd that is the 960 and is getting gamers to pay $200-250 extra over the $280 R9 290X for the 980. It's gotten truly pathetic where gamers buy a 980 over an R9 295X2. That's basically LOL!
Ask yourself an honest question: How many gamers would have bought an ATI or an NV setup for the same price if the competitor's cards outperform the other by 50-70%? In the past, NO one objective would have bought a card as slow as a 980 when an R9 295X2 walks all over it. If ATI had a card 59-67%, NV would be in panic mode. With today's perf/watt driven marketing and NV brand name, NV is chillin'.
$550 R9 295X2 vs. $515 GTX980
59% faster at 1440P
67% faster at 4K
http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/20216-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-i-sli/16#content
The more market share nV has, the more profits they make, the more they'll have influence over GWs and the closer that gets us to a GPU monopoly. Raise your hand if you want permanent $550 prices for mid-range GPUs and $1K for flagships and those prices will remain that way for a LONG time without AMD. I sure don't want that type of PC gaming world!
==================
"As far as performance TressFX is much better than Nvidia's own Hairworks running on Nvidia hardware. The performance hit is exactly the same on AMD and Nvidia hardware too. Why? Because AMD made TressFX open source (as with nearly all their stuff actually) allowing developers and even Nvidia themselves to optimize for it. On the other hand Hairworks and anything else in Nvidia's gameworks is a closed proprietary black box that developers can't optimize for."
Version 2.0 added grass support plus great performance optimizations for both AMD and Nvidia hardware.
AMD TressFX 2.0 Demo - Direct3D 11 - GTX 780 Ti
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAWJAe8k8sQ
^ For crying out loud, AMD demonstrated 780TI running Tress FX2.0. How much evidence do people need about how AMD and NV perceive the PC gaming market? AMD is all about helping the eco-system and keeping graphical features open for ever gamer (Android model) while NV is all about locking down the eco-system and making graphical features run best on its hardware ONLY (the Apple business model). Even FreeSync vs. GSync shows how the 2 companies think.
TressFX 3.0 - added fur simulation as well - Full library open source code - NO BLACK BOX - open for Intel, AMD, NV, Matrox.
TressFX has similar effects to HairWorks but it isn't closed-source.
Why doesn't NV adopt the open source TressFX so that all gamers worldwide benefit from it, huh? If they really cared about making PC games look better for everyone so that they are genuinly interested in promoting PC gaming over console gaming, there is no way NV would introduce NV specific closed-source game code into AAA games knowing it cripples performance on Intel/AMD graphics. To them GW isn't about making PC gaming superior to console gaming and improving the PC gaming community. It's because NV doesn't care about PC gaming as its #1 priority - they just care about $ and market share.
Aren't HD5870 Crossfire uses around the same power as a single GTX 480?1.The 5870/50 were good cards for sure but people waited for NV's answer and surely they took the sgpu crown with ease.I also would like to remind people who talk about vram advantage of 7970 so many times, 480/470 had similar advantage over the 5870/50(albeit in 250 and 500 Mb respectively).
Aren't HD5870 Crossfire uses around the same power as a single GTX 480?
Nobody remembers them, while people continuously blasting the perf/watt on the maxwell cards.
Not to mention that GTX480 launches 6 months late, with $500 price tag vs HD5870's $380...
Titan XSo Nvidia is just a money grab company and is taking its customers for a fool based on that logic Jaydip. They are purposefully gimping their cards to see what AMD comes out with, releasing a ti version with a fair bit of performance boost over its predecessor just to charge you (anyone) another arm and leg. A very deceitful and genius tactic which seems to work flawlessly. But my question is why not release the best once, charge a premium while ensuring the competition have a very hard time matching it? They know the 980 which has a large premium over a not much slower card the 970 is going to be trounced easily by an amd offering in all but power consumption. Both of which are not much faster than AMD's current offering.
So Nvidia is just a money grab company and is taking its customers for a fool based on that logic Jaydip. They are purposefully gimping their cards to see what AMD comes out with, releasing a ti version with a fair bit of performance boost over its predecessor just to charge you (anyone) another arm and leg. A very deceitful and genius tactic which seems to work flawlessly. But my question is why not release the best once, charge a premium while ensuring the competition have a very hard time matching it? They know the 980 which has a large premium over a not much slower card the 970 is going to be trounced easily by an amd offering in all but power consumption. Both of which are not much faster than AMD's current offering.
Let's face it now HD6950 2GB unlocked was an incredible deal and 5850/5870 were amazing cards uncontested for 6 months. HD4850/4870/4890 were also awesome. About the only type of gamer who is *excused* is someone who only bought the best (8800GTX/280/285/480/580/780Ti/Titan/Titan X). Everyone else who only bought NV? hmmm....
Gameworks is cancer.
nVidia really does a nice job supporting their customers over-all. Constructive nit-pick, I really like to see nVidia rethink GW and allow their competitors to optimize for brand agnostic features. Reason: nVidia creates some world class technologies and would like to see developers take advantage of it more and simply have more adoption. Do no harm, but if the competitor isn't performing as well ya don't even allow them to compete to at least optimize for their customers on a brand agnostic feature. Strongly disagree with nVidia.
Gameworks is cancer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwL9C4WS0SI
tressfx working perfectly fine on 7770. Low end stuff. I would imagine it would be better than hairworks. Might even work well on consoles. Meanwhile gameworks is making everything look unoptimized when its in effect.
http://www.redgamingtech.com/tomb-raider-definitive-edition-playstation-4-vs-pc-graphics-analysis/Crystal Dynamics enabled the PC version to use AMD’s TressFX technology, but it was the first iteration. The Playstation 4 version of Tomb Raider uses TressFX 2.0, which has a few advantages over the original. The first is that it drastically reduces the performance penalty that’s associated with AMD’s TressFX by using a myriad of optimizations. TressFX 2.0 is also more accurate, with the original TressFX sometimes causing major issues with the hair (going off in the wrong direction and generally a little glitchy for example). It can also better react with what’s happening in the environment, and be used for other ‘things’ now other than just hair, for example hair and grass. For more on TressFX technology
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwL9C4WS0SI
tressfx working perfectly fine on 7770. Low end stuff. I would imagine it would be better than hairworks. Might even work well on consoles. Meanwhile gameworks is making everything look unoptimized when its in effect.
Or perhaps some people just like better image quality, features, and functionality. :hmm:
5800 series for example had a hardware issue that affected texture filtering, causing very poor transitions between mipmaps which can be seen here. Textures also shimmered in motion.
Transparency MSAA and Transparency SSAA (AdaptiveAA in AMD lingo) did not work in DX10 or over. This still wasn't resolved until after 7970 launch!
5800 series was a shimmering mess in games like BC2, because of both shimmering textures and lack of transparency AA (think foliage and grass), AND add to that the mipmap banding as shown in picture above -that stays static relative to camera position - all made for a truly horrendous image in motion.
There was no option for full screen SSAA or ambient occlusion either, plus Nv offered PhysX and 3dvision. Don't get me started on the state of crossfire at the time either.
Between all those factors, plus a few I probably forgot by now, you could get a dramatically superior experience and image quality with Nv hardware over a number of generations, plain and simple.
I owned a 3-way 5800 system btw (and 4870 CFX before that). Far from being the awesome products you seem to remember, the 5800 series actually made me switch to Nvidia.
I went from 3-way 5800's to 3-way 580's, and OMG was the difference astounding. I went from AMD's poor IQ and poor support poverty pack, to super clean visuals with an array of extra options and features plus great support.
There's also the issue of reference cooling. Don't get started on your 3rd party cooler spiel because reference blowers are better for scenarios like 3-way. I actually lol'd at the 3-way pic you posted in another thread as an example of superior cooling, obviously you lack experience with such builds. I was just too polite to point it out at the time.
Moral of the story? There are many factors that contribute to a video cards value and appeal beyond simply fps per $. I hope you keep that in mind in future.