SR III of all things had more impact than GTA IV because GTA IV was neither fun nor engaging so there wasn't any real tie to the characters.
What an unfun mess.
You never finished it. Remember the choices Niko made? Roman or the wedding? Killing or sparing Ivan? The Holland Play? Darko? Derrick McReary? V is a joke. IV had heft. Its like comparing HBO vs Cinemax. GTA V is an abortion and I won't give Rockstar a dollar for VI which likely won't have a single player campaign online just multiplayer mush.
You never finished it. Remember the choices Niko made? Roman or the wedding? Killing or sparing Ivan? The Holland Play? Darko? Derrick McReary? V is a joke. IV had heft. Its like comparing HBO vs Cinemax. GTA V is an abortion and I won't give Rockstar a dollar for VI which likely won't have a single player campaign online just multiplayer mush.
Because I think that game is a trick. I think its a trap. I think it exists only to push new hardware and windows 10 by creating a buzz regarding performance increases under DX12. The game is a sales and marketing tool IMO. I feel we are being tricked.
Of course. Mantle worked just fine under Widows 8.1 right? If Mantle worked under 8.1, and DX12 is a mantle ripoff, then why must someone use windows 10 to use DX12? Oh, that's right. Its because Microsoft wants you to jump on their latest monopoly driven OS.
Mantle was seen as a threat and it was murdered and replaced with a ripoff version. Now if you want the benefits of Mantle, you must use DX12 and windows 10. DX12 games will only run properly on new hardware. DX12 games will only run on windows 10. And of course, DX12 games will only run on the DX12 API. Soon they will be DX12 only so you will be forced to use windows 10, use DX12, use new expensive mid range hardware etc etc.
This really is a trap.
That's why I trash AOTS, DX12 and Nvidia.
Get over it people,low level APIs where made for consoles not high end desktop rigs.
Running "the driver stuff" on multiple threads only makes sense if your core is too weak to run the driver as a single thread. (like in the ~1Ghz console cores)
or if you have a low core count and the driver has to share a core with some other high usage thread.
Looking at benchmarks with monster PCs will always be a disappointment if you want to see Dx12 benefits.
You won't see any improvement over Dx11 as long as your CPU is fast enough to drive your GPU.
Because I think that game is a trick. I think its a trap. I think it exists only to push new hardware and windows 10 by creating a buzz regarding performance increases under DX12. The game is a sales and marketing tool IMO. I feel we are being tricked.
Of course. Mantle worked just fine under Widows 8.1 right? If Mantle worked under 8.1, and DX12 is a mantle ripoff, then why must someone use windows 10 to use DX12? Oh, that's right. Its because Microsoft wants you to jump on their latest monopoly driven OS.
Mantle was seen as a threat and it was murdered and replaced with a ripoff version. Now if you want the benefits of Mantle, you must use DX12 and windows 10. DX12 games will only run properly on new hardware. DX12 games will only run on windows 10. And of course, DX12 games will only run on the DX12 API. Soon they will be DX12 only so you will be forced to use windows 10, use DX12, use new expensive mid range hardware etc etc.
This really is a trap.
That's why I trash AOTS, DX12 and Nvidia.
Its also why I praise the hell out of DOOM. DOOM is badass and the best thing about DOOM is that gamers can actually play DOOM and have a good DOOM experience. DOOM DOOM DOOM.
Oh? Mantle had async compute and multi engine?
Mantle was low level = had no driver thread, but that's about it.
No you don't need any new hardware to run Dx12 games, (most)console ports just run like crap no matter what API they use,same goes for old games that you slap a new API on top off (like BF4 with mantle in the beginning(still) ) .
Yes atots is a tech demo and you have to pair a very sucky CPU with a huge GPU to get any kind of CPU bottleneck since the game almost completely runs on the GPU.
A) It can't run faster if your GPU is maxing out in dx11 (you can't go over 100% )This is very short sited. Removing CPU overhead will help all systems, if nothing else your high end system will have less work to do and either A) run even faster, or B) save on heat/power since it doesn't need to run 100% anymore or C) can add more to the game to render, more effects, more units, better / more complex AI.
Ashes of the Singularity can use upto.. 16? cores well, what do you mean it doesn't utilize good CPUs?
A) It can't run faster if your GPU is maxing out in dx11 (you can't go over 100% )
B) Yup that's achievable (also with vsync/frame limiter)
C) Nope,almost all games are made for consoles and those have a finite amount of resources.If devs slap some filters on top of the console port people count themselves lucky.
And what's short sighted about being able to game better with weaker CPUs?
Show me Aots gameplay using 16 threads in some program that shows threads (process explorer/hacker) and how many FPS it achieves...and most important with which GPU.
There are a lot of gamers who will try to achieve XXX FPS, such as 120 FPS. They will turn down graphical settings so they can achieve those FPS, but unfortunately, CPU bottlenecks often prevent us from getting there.A) It can't run faster if your GPU is maxing out in dx11 (you can't go over 100% )
There are a number of games which add more effects and settings for the PC gamer. They may share a lot, but many of these games do have more things added on for us.C) Nope,almost all games are made for consoles and those have a finite amount of resources.If devs slap some filters on top of the console port people count themselves lucky.
You are mixing up all the architectures and technologies now?A)
Just because your GPU says its at 100% doesn't mean it actually is using all parts, hence the point of async compute which lets you run otherwise unutilized parts of the chip at the same time. Using the resources more efficiently = better performance, how else would a driver update increase performance? Are you saying that before drivers are correct for games they only run @ 80% in Rivatuner? Course not, it shows 100% and yet drivers can still increase performance. Same thing here, lower overhead = GPU can do more work and less talking about doing work.
Yes exactly,if the GPU runs at 100% you can turn down settings until it's not running at 100% anymore.There are a lot of gamers who will try to achieve XXX FPS, such as 120 FPS. They will turn down graphical settings so they can achieve those FPS, but unfortunately, CPU bottlenecks often prevent us from getting there.
Yes, there is a thread for Mantle driver.Mantle was low level = had no driver thread, but that's about it.
Yup exactly what I was talking about.B)
I wasn't talking about frame limiting, as that doesn't let the system run faster with less resources, just using less and lowered performance.
See this video for an example of what I'm talking about - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_I8an8jXuM
Gnome Horde runs under Android on a consumer device available now on the market; it uses the latest prototype Vulkan API driver for PowerVR GPUs (final performance may differ).
You are mixing up all the architectures and technologies now?
I said that if your GPU runs at 100% (like in you have nvidia and super fast cores) then it can't run any higher.
If you have a GCN that you can not use 100% under dx11 because it has a lot of aces and each one of them needs to be "talked to" by a separate thread then sure, async is going to help.
Driver updates are like software updates in general,someone finds a way to do something with less calculations so you implement it,you are still at 100% but now do something with less calculations so you do more stuff with the same 100% usage.
We might see some of this benefit in some time of dx12 commands being faster then dx11 ones even on high end systems but right now we are still far away from that.
And I am saying IFWhat I was asking is how do you know your Nvidia card is running @ 100% all the time? Rivatuner? Then how do driver improvements improve performance while it stays @ 100%? Impossible? No, because they are talking to the GPU more efficiently.
See those two things are completely different, driver overhead is the amount of CPU you need to drive your card, the higher the overhead the faster the CPU you need to drive your card.Same reason why DX12/Vulkan can still increase performance even if the game shows @ 100% now. Because Dx12 and Vulkan are more efficient and will let developers increase the actual work that the GPU does instead of overhead from drivers.
You like GTA IV over GTA V? Wow, that's a first.
And I am saying IF
(And I do know because every benchmark people are talking about in this forum is made with top of the line intel CPUs that are faster in dx11 mode (if the GPU allows) because they have a very high IPC)
See those two things are completely different, driver overhead is the amount of CPU you need to drive your card, the higher the overhead the faster the CPU you need to drive your card.
API efficiency is the amount of commands,context switches or whatever else a API might need to control a card.
Yes agreed,we might see some benefits of API efficiency ... in a couple of years.
Agreed, it shouldn't,but until Dx12 has the years of optimization Dx11 had, it does.DX12/Vulkan should never be slower than DX11/OpenGL. They should always be (at least a little) faster.
I know that none of the other parts work at all when the graphics cores are running under Dx11,still the copy engine (or any other part of the GPU) is not going to provide any additional FPS,it only might prevent fps drops or smooth out frame rate,which is a very good thing, before anybody comments on me saying this.Again I ask, how do you know your card is running @ 100% currently? Are you sure that all the different parts of the GPU are 100% utilized all the time? How are you measuring that it is being used 100%? We've already established that afterburner / rivatuner can't accurately measure it.
Nope, it's not working like this.Compute is being done on the same shaders as graphics are,so async compute (compute+graphics) is only helpful if you can't drive all of your card with only graphics workload,then you can fill out the rest with compute work,or vice versa.
Played IV at least thrice. Played V once. Will never ever ever ever ever play it again. It was sheer trash. Cookie cutout characters. IV and III are still the only GTAs I prefer playing. Not San Andreas or Vice City or V. I HATE V.
V had way better combat mechanics than IV, though.
So if DX12 isn't a problem, why does total war run like total garbage on everything except a new 1080? Is that a coincidence? If all DX12 does is affect the CPU, then why do current GPU's trip over their shoe laces and land face first in the toilet regarding performance? It seems all DX12 does is give us is a reason to buy more GPU hardware if you want it to run acceptably. It also gives gamers a reason to jump on the Windows 10 crap wagon.
All of the crap going on lately has been HORRIBLE for PC gamers. I mean absolutely terrible in terms of price for hardware and features delivered in game. ROTTEN GARBAGE. Hot, smelly, sun baked trash is what we have been getting and DX12 is just more of that sniffing pile.
DX12 is not for gamers. DX12 is for hardware manufacturers and Microsoft so they can remain on top of their sales. That's is. That's all it does. The old hardware and OS's simply won't work. WILL NOT WORK.
Also, I am correct. The reason? Because DOOM exists. DOOM is proof that you can make an incredible game that looks stunning, runs amazing and happens to be fun at the same time, all without requiring new hardware or stupid API's that make current hardware obsolete. Other developers can do that too, but why should they follow the DOOM model when they can get in bed with the evil doers and grab our money from our left hand and then shake it with their slimey fingers while putting a steaming pile in our other hand at the same time?
Ashes doesn't deserve anyone's hate. It's a PC exclusive that pushes the limits of PC hardware and software - it should be something that us PC enthusiasts really love. This is a game that runs fluently, across nearly any hardware, with 30,000 discrete units at once, each with their own adaptive, situationally-aware AI routines. It also supports mixed-vendor multi-GPU (with sizable gains), good old MSAA, and strong performance even at 4K.
Unfortunately, the game itself isn't great. It's not a tech demo as some would claim, but it is straddling that line, like Crysis 3 (which is actually pretty fun). If it just had better flavor and more distinct factions, it could be a real winner. Mod support would be a huge asset; it's a great foundation for crafting a really interesting RTS.
Nope, it's not working like this.
We have a scheduler to assign tasks/queues to CUs with different type of queues (compute+graphics) at the same time.