I've been looking for something like this for a long time, that would give me an idea on how DirectX actually works and why AMD cards aren't actually awful. Great read.
5 Likes
In short: AMD 80% Increase in performance and Nvidia a decrease of 12%
Check this:
290X on par with 980 Ti? Absolutely insane.
I love that before win 10 came out nVidia put out a smear campaign saying all their cards back to the 600 series were DX12 ready and the newer ones were fully compliant while deriding AMD for being clearly behind the times. The users did the research and it turns out that in all areas nVidia were once again lying, no surprise, and and were ready on the 200 and more compatible on the previous GCN cards than most of nVidias stuff.
Quick one benchmark came out! Draw all conclusions immediately!
there are actually 2 benchmarks... same thing going on with both.
unreal demo shows same thing...
Do you happen to know where to find some numbers on the results for the Unreal one? I haven't been able to find any.
I was only able to compare my results with the creator of this unreal dx12 demo through google+. Since its not built as benchmarks it doesn't have feature (that i know off) that allows for avg frame rate stats etc. We compared performance/fps on certain scenes on demo. My overclocked 290x was 20-30fps ahead of his overclocked 980ti running in windowed mode and ~15FPS full screen.
Maybe someone can talk Logan into making something about it. He might still have that Fury (maybe it is in Pistol's rig? I don't know). He also has the 980ti, I believe.
From these few benchmarks AMD seems to be the better option to buy right now if you don't immediately upgrade to the new generation dx12 oriented nVidia cards. Also this hopefully puts some pressure on nVidia to develop more powerful cards to be more competitive.
If I had 45 bucks to spend on a game right now I would buy the founders pack for ashes just to benchmark my machine =)
I know right. Such a joke. Great if it works well. But it reminds me of when people where posting early benchmarks of the furyx and everyone was acting like it was going to be the best thing ever and beat Titans blah blah blah. Until there are actual dx12 games out these canned benchmarks mean nothing
1 Like
yeah but this is benchmark is out of actual game thats going to be sold in 2016.
And when it comes out in 2016, we will see what the benchmarks are with the current GPU's and the drivers for them at that point.
Benchmarks of a 2016 game demo with 2015 hardware and drivers doesn't really mean much, no offense.
It shows promise for things on the AMD side and that's something to get excited about, but it's a bit early to be saying Nvidia is done for like some folks are alluding to lol.
1 Like
we'll see. i don't think we'll see much improvements on 900 series... maybe on pascal.
Yup its not a synthetic benchmark. We need more games to do a comprehensive report on directx 12. When Fable comes out and few other games with dx12 we will get a clear picture. By that time I am sure Nvidia will work their magic (Putting money in developers pockets. To gain the top spot.) and they will be on top again.
I agree with Evil_MOBO. The game isn't even out yet lots can change tell then. I'm not trying to down play anything. I think this is awesome and am very excited for DX12. But it is far far far to soon to be drawing some of the conclusions people are.
I'm not a game developer but if they have a benchmark made and the game in or almost in alpha that means the game engine is already built there won't be very many changes unless there are fatal bugs in the code. This could be the MSAA problem or the fact that nvidia cards have a fatal flaw and they are trying to cover it up. /cough 3.5Gigs of ram
1 Like
Oh look another 3.5gb vram joke. I think the joke here is that people still make jokes about that.
Alright, everyone. There is no need to get heated. Last thing we need is to get ourselves into a flame war and have the mods lock the thread down.