computerbaseAshes of the Singularity Beta1 DirectX 12 Benchmarks

[Silverforce11]

Rather than debating why NV under-performs in a DX12 game using Async Compute (because their hardware is incapable, /end), you should ask why NV is under-performing in games they actually sponsor with GameWorks, like The Division, where the gap is even bigger than Ashes.

Or games from their long-time partner like Far Cry Primal. These are all DX11 too, where NV supposedly has better drivers. -_-

I mean Hitman, I can understand, it's AMD sponsored so it runs better... but the others?

Even Rise of the Tomb Raider where NV sponsors, why is the 390 so much faster than the 970 in the release build?!

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...Performance-Results/Adding-GTX-970-and-R9-390

 

[maddie]

Really Mahigan? You are hyping a turd low budget episode game just because it has DX12?

Seriously this game on DX11 cannot maintain 60fps on Fury X or GTX 980 Ti on 1080p. You are just making look AMD bad by promoting this game.

I know Nvidia is not good at AC then how will you tell 70% of DGPU user to buy this turd game which is not even giving 60fps on ultra end cards?

What is this obsession with 60fps? I hope you realize that with Freesync/Gsync, you can have smooth gaming with less.

Also, do you really expect a min of 60fps for all games. I thought the benefit of PC gaming was finding your personal sweetspot, and by personal, you don't get to tell others what is best.

 

[Mahigan]

What is this obsession with 60fps? I hope you realize that with Freesync/Gsync, you can have smooth gaming with less.

Also, do you really expect a min of 60fps for all games. I thought the benefit of PC gaming was finding your personal sweetspot, and by personal, you don't get to tell others what is best.

It's a strategy game, it doesn't require 60FPS like say an FPS shooter would...but shhh don't tell him that

 

[Mercennarius]

Rather than debating why NV under-performs in a DX12 game using Async Compute (because their hardware is incapable, /end), you should ask why NV is under-performing in games they actually sponsor with GameWorks, like The Division, where the gap is even bigger than Ashes.

Or games from their long-time partner like Far Cry Primal. These are all DX11 too, where NV supposedly has better drivers. -_-

I mean Hitman, I can understand, it's AMD sponsored so it runs better... but the others?

Even Rise of the Tomb Raider where NV sponsors, why is the 390 so much faster than the 970 in the release build?!

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...Performance-Results/Adding-GTX-970-and-R9-390

I honestly think AMD has really started improving their DX11 drivers as well, especially for the newer games.

 

[Silverforce11]

I honestly think AMD has really started improving their DX11 drivers as well, especially for the newer games.

Well, those game performance didn't get AMD "game ready" drivers. Far Cry Primal, Hitman, Rise of Tomb Raider, The Division benchmarks were done before AMD releasing a specific driver for it. Even back further, IIRC, Rainbow Six and COD Black Ops 3 were benched without AMD optimized drivers (which came a few days later, adding CF etc).

So this isn't game-specific, it's more like something deeper, wider about these next-gen games and their game engine, is optimized for GCN by default.

Edit: Another next-gen game coming soon, Need for Speed on the 17th. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0xo6NRQdbw
I'm expecting it to be a repeat with GCN powering through.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Rather than debating why NV under-performs in a DX12 game using Async Compute (because their hardware is incapable, /end), you should ask why NV is under-performing in games they actually sponsor with GameWorks, like The Division, where the gap is even bigger than Ashes.

Or games from their long-time partner like Far Cry Primal. These are all DX11 too, where NV supposedly has better drivers. -_-

I mean Hitman, I can understand, it's AMD sponsored so it runs better... but the others?

Even Rise of the Tomb Raider where NV sponsors, why is the 390 so much faster than the 970 in the release build?!

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...Performance-Results/Adding-GTX-970-and-R9-390

I'm rather curious of this myself. Did the Crimson driver expose new features to the developers that were, perhaps, only on the FirePro cards?

 

[IEC]

Rather than debating why NV under-performs in a DX12 game using Async Compute (because their hardware is incapable, /end), you should ask why NV is under-performing in games they actually sponsor with GameWorks, like The Division, where the gap is even bigger than Ashes.

Or games from their long-time partner like Far Cry Primal. These are all DX11 too, where NV supposedly has better drivers. -_-

I mean Hitman, I can understand, it's AMD sponsored so it runs better... but the others?

Even Rise of the Tomb Raider where NV sponsors, why is the 390 so much faster than the 970 in the release build?!

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...Performance-Results/Adding-GTX-970-and-R9-390

Because they are running into the hardware limitations of the 970. You can't optimize what isn't there. A 390 simply has more horsepower. I would expect the gap to increase as the hardware ages, though I don't expect to own anything 28nm beyond 2016 personally so it doesn't make any difference to me.

Whether I go Pascal or Polaris remains to be seen, but it would be nice to finally have compelling reason to upgrade from my 290s.

 

[tential]

Really Mahigan? You are hyping a turd low budget episode game just because it has DX12?

Seriously this game on DX11 cannot maintain 60fps on Fury X or GTX 980 Ti on 1080p. You are just making look AMD bad by promoting this game.

I know Nvidia is not good at AC then how will you tell 70% of DGPU user to buy this turd game which is not even giving 60fps on ultra end cards?

Nvidia should optimize their drivers for AC then. Why is Nvidia so bad at AC? It's pretty sad that Nvidia is worse at AC than AMD I thought Nvidia had the best card?

 

[Silverforce11]

I'm rather curious of this myself. Did the Crimson driver expose new features to the developers that were, perhaps, only on the FirePro cards?

It's more to do with game engines moving on finally, as an example:

http://www.gamewatcher.com/news/201...4-launching-this-year-for-pc-ps4-and-xbox-one

Rebellion say it's the first game in the series built without the constraints of older hardware..

Games coming out now, would have taken at least 2 years to develop (or more, depends on scope), so they would have been started in early 2014. The game engines themselves may even pre-date that.

Thus games that were released in 2014-2015, were built on engines dating back from 2010-2012 etc.

There is a time-lag when it comes to game development.

I think we're seeing the result of game engines that ditched older consoles/hardware gen, focusing on optimizing for Xbone/PS4 architecture. This in turn is optimized for GCN on the PC. It's no coincidence I don't think, for GCN to perform so well in all the AAA 2016 titles so far without even AMD releasing "Game Ready" drivers.

Last month I was predicting a GCN victory for Far Cry Primal due to this reason. I'm predicting a GCN win in Need for Speed coming in two weeks, with or without AMD "Game Ready" drivers.

The console-GCN-effect is finally here big-time.

 

[thesmokingman]

The console-GCN-effect is finally here big-time.

If you said that on ocn last year they would kick and ban you. Thank heavens for anand lol.

 

[Mahigan]

If you said that on ocn last year they would kick and ban you. Thank heavens for anand lol.

Yeah,

That's 100% true. I went through that for making those exact claims.

 

[Jaydip]

It's one review of one extreme model that was only available for a short time. It doesn't prove overall that the 680 was faster than the 7970 when both were O/C'd.

It proves that Lightning 680 using the LN2 bios was the faster card and people here seems to forget that very easily. Remember both cards were oced here to the max.

 

[thesmokingman]

It proves that Lightning 680 using the LN2 bios was the faster card and people here seems to forget that very easily. Remember both cards were oced here to the max.

No it's not. My 7970s ate 680s on dice and ln2 for lunch while being on water.



Look:

#1 WR for 770

http://hwbot.org/submission/2602848_perica_barii_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_770_10459_marks

vs

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4282003


That's a 4960x@6ghz with 770@1713mhz on LN2 vs a 3930@5.2ghz with 7970@1400mhz on water. End result, Graphics score of 11444 for 770 vs 11487 for 7970.

lol, regular joe's watercooled rig with tess on note the validation vs pro overclocker on ln2.

 

[TheELF]

Rather than debating why NV under-performs in a DX12 game using Async Compute (because their hardware is incapable, /end), you should ask why NV is under-performing in games they actually sponsor with GameWorks, like The Division, where the gap is even bigger than Ashes.

Or games from their long-time partner like Far Cry Primal. These are all DX11 too, where NV supposedly has better drivers. -_-

I mean Hitman, I can understand, it's AMD sponsored so it runs better... but the others?

Even Rise of the Tomb Raider where NV sponsors, why is the 390 so much faster than the 970 in the release build?!

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...Performance-Results/Adding-GTX-970-and-R9-390

Because i7-5960X ... try running these games on a more common CPU
or even at a resolution where you would not drop below 60FPS.

 

[showb1z]

Soooo... whenever a game runs better on AMD it's a low budget turd nobody should bother playing now?
Also relevant.

Ashes is perfectly playable on Nvidia cards. Some people need to do some soul-searching around here, this is getting beyond ridiculous.

 

[airfathaaaaa]

Soooo... whenever a game runs better on AMD it's a low budget turd nobody should bother playing now?
Also relevant.

Ashes is perfectly playable on Nvidia cards. Some people need to do some soul-searching around here, this is getting beyond ridiculous.

give them enough time they will fall back to the good old arguments
"amd is hotter"
"amd draws much wattage"
"amd does lots of noise"

 

[Silverforce11]

Soooo... whenever a game runs better on AMD it's a low budget turd nobody should bother playing now?
Also relevant.

Ashes is perfectly playable on Nvidia cards. Some people need to do some soul-searching around here, this is getting beyond ridiculous.

Well, I guess Far Cry Primal is low budget, The Division is low budget... soon, Need for Speed is low budget and if my theory of the "console-GCN-effect" is true, so will most AAA titles in 2016.. -_-

The performance gap in Ashes is quite small in fact when you compare both GPUs with Async Compute disabled. It clearly shows Oxide optimizes DX12 extremely well for both GPU architectures. It just so happens that GCN gains a lot with AC on and that blame should be entirely on NVIDIA and not Oxide.

So to the Oxide haters, instead of smearing these developers, why don't some of you guys put in the same amount of effort to demand NVIDIA release this fabled Async Compute drivers.

 

[Jaydip]

No it's not. My 7970s ate 680s on dice and ln2 for lunch while being on water.



Look:

#1 WR for 770

http://hwbot.org/submission/2602848_perica_barii_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_770_10459_marks

vs

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4282003


That's a 4960x@6ghz with 770@1713mhz on LN2 vs a 3930@5.2ghz with 7970@1400mhz on water. End result, Graphics score of 11444 for 770 vs 11487 for 7970.

lol, regular joe's watercooled rig with tess on note the validation vs pro overclocker on ln2.

Now show me some game benches please.

 

[3DVagabond]

Now show me some game benches please.

Against an LN2 680? Yeah, I'm sure that'll be easy to find. :lol:

 

[Jaydip]

Against an LN2 680? Yeah, I'm sure that'll be easy to find. :lol:

My point is 3d mark is a meaningless metric.

 

[Osjur]

As were are completely off-topic in here, here's a interesting review which was posted on january:

The HD 7970 vs. the GTX 680 – revisited 3 years later

 

[stuff_me_good]

do not explain logic and facts to these some poster.

By reading this thread it seems that you are the one who have problem understanding facts and logic.

 

[airfathaaaaa]

By reading this thread it seems that you are the one who have problem understanding facts and logic.

when someone is so full of himself and goes on a superior and degrading mode to others and call them "some poster" arguing with him is just a waste of time
and then they wonder why people troll them

 

[3DVagabond]

As were are completely off-topic in here, here's a interesting review which was posted on january:

The HD 7970 vs. the GTX 680 – revisited 3 years later

ABT and apoppin is the biggest nVidia shill site on the web

 

[Dygaza]

I wonder how much performance this new rendering model that is normally used in movie industry (Object Space Rendering) sacrifices compared to basic rendering modeling? Ofc we can't have direct comparision as there is no version out with basic model.

But the game appears to be quite much compute based as there is very low performance penalty when upping resolutions.

I get:
55fps on Ultra+ 8X MSAA on 1080p
37fps on Ultra+ 8X MSAA on 2160p

So 33% performance penalty when rendering 4x of pixels.

So I would call this game performing very well, Dual cards are getting over 60fps at 4k everyting maxed. How is this any different from any other new games running maxed at 4k?