moinmoin
Diamond Member
- Jun 1, 2017
- 5,158
- 8,266
- 136
Right, to the stock market lower margins are even worse than losses.less margins doesn't mean a loss.
Right, to the stock market lower margins are even worse than losses.less margins doesn't mean a loss.
That's a DG2-128 competitor, but there's also DG2-512
Bit of an understatement given it's 16CUs vs 28CUs you're comparing there.Guess it depends on how much slower Navi 24 is versus the 6600. It does look pretty crippled so it might actually be that slow.
Bit of an understatement given it's 16CUs vs 28CUs you're comparing there.
N24 has 64 bit bus, with Infinity cache. ALU count, is the same as DG2.Navi 24 is probably around 1650 Super to GTX 1660. GTX1650 non-super is probably 12CU RMB territory.
DG2-128 and Navi 24 are likely to go toe to toe.
DG2-512 absolutely will beat the 6600.Right but I don't think DG2 512 is going to come close to the 6600 in actual games.
DG2-512 absolutely will beat the 6600.
Why - we have no idea how performant the drivers will be. It could be the same issue as with ATi years ago - better hardware delivering lower FPS. Hardware capabilities are only 1/2 the equation.DG2-512 absolutely will beat the 6600.
DG2-128 won't come close.
Why - we have no idea how performant the drivers will be. It could be the same issue as with ATi years ago - better hardware delivering lower FPS. Hardware capabilities are only 1/2 the equation.
The 6600 is slightly lower performance than a 3060.Why - we have no idea how performant the drivers will be. It could be the same issue as with ATi years ago - better hardware delivering lower FPS. Hardware capabilities are only 1/2 the equation.
Lets remember that drivers are far less important these days than it was in the ATI days with just high level APIs.
DX11 performance will be 100% Intel responsability, but Vulkan and DX12 is more of a 40/60 with the developers. With the devs being the 60.
devs have little reason (outside of being directly paid by Intel) to bother with optimizations...
Lets remember that drivers are far less important these days than it was in the ATI days with just high level APIs.
DX11 performance will be 100% Intel responsability, but Vulkan and DX12 is more of a 40/60 with the developers. With the devs being the 60.
The 6600 is slightly lower performance than a 3060.
You genuinely think DG2-512 is going to be even weaker than that? Because I certainly don't.
Lets remember that drivers are far less important these days than it was in the ATI days with just high level APIs.
DX11 performance will be 100% Intel responsability, but Vulkan and DX12 is more of a 40/60 with the developers. With the devs being the 60.
Intel is more than capable of putting money hats on engine developers' heads.
You are just wrong.DX11 was left to rot and DX12/Vulkan have these issues that should be resolved on the game side... thats the problem of using these kind of APIs. We already have games that were designed/optimised for the first gen of DX12 GPUs that are likely to start having issues with newer hardware after a significant arch change.
GPU vendors can try to workaround it on the driver side, but that end up adding overhead. Its the price to pay for having low level apis in this kind of enviroment.
You are just wrong.
Directx 12 games work across Nvidia, AMD, and Intel's* historical product stack, including ancient out of support hardware like HD7000s, GTX600, and Haswell* generation iGPUs ( Iris Pro and Intel HD ).
Believe me, the developers are not testing all that ancient hardware.
*although, horrifyingly with Intel they intentionally nerfed the drivers for DX12:
DirectX 12 Applications No Longer Working on 4th Generation...
Article describing why applications based on DirectX 12 no longer work on 4th generation Intel graphics (codename Haswell)www.intel.com
It seems after Jan 20th 2020 they stopped caring if users of their older iGPU's had working DX12, and removed it from the feature set. Exactly the kind of support we do not want to see in a potential GPU provider.
Anyway, Intel has made DX12 run just fine in the past with their iGPUs. This is not a developer problem, not a DX12 problem, it is just an Intel problem.
Thing is, developers typically optimize for one brand. The brand that sponsored their game.Sure, but how WELL did those games run? Were they hobbled by weird performance issues, because the developers didn't optimise for Intel?
I know Riot optimise specifically for Intel integrated graphics, but most games don't.
Capable and willing are two different things, especially if the shareholders also have their hands out.
You'd think since everything is developed console-first, that at least engine devs would actually spend more time concentrating on there console.Except the developers will be optimizing their DX12 code for Nvidia first, AMD second, and Intel a distant third (if at all). They've got a serious uphill battle. They can't just optimize their drivers now, they need to convince every major game developer to care about performance on Intel.