AdoredTV had a very fascinating and in-depth look at how with the upcoming patch 1.3 in Fallout 4 and how nVidia's performance is now below that of AMD GPU's. For example the author states when Fallout 4 came out the Fury X was losing to the 980 Ti:
But now with the newer patch AMD was able to optimize their GPU's despite it being a Gameworks title and essentially working blind as nVidia has prohibited them from seeing Gameworks code they are now somehow was able to optimize for Fallout 4 and the Fury X is now pulling ahead of the 980 Ti by a significant margin.
What's even more troubling is that thanks to Gamworks performance is actually worse now then before and is especially hitting Kepler owners (GTX 6XX/7XX) series who play Fallout 4 who sees an astonishing level of performance decline.
As you can see GTX 9XX series is losing performance with the Kepler series being hit hard with the GTX 780 Ti, Titan and GTX 770/680 is now losing performance by 30% whereas AMD GPU saw performance increase of of 24%-30% with the Fury X is getting an astonishing 30% boost in performance. Which is pretty significant even when compared to an overclocked 980 Ti.
The author puts the lack of optimization of nVidia GPU's to what he calls nVidia's "planned obsolescence" where as he later points out when Pascal comes out and the benchmarks for Pascal come out the owners of the GTX 7XX or the GTX 9XX series will only look at the benchmarks of Pascal and compare that to their current GPU's so if nVidia can gimp or not optimize their current GPU's it will give them more incentive to buy new GPU's where as they will completely ignore the fact that AMD GPU's had significant improvement in performance as when they launched. As the author points, nVidia obviously won't optimize for Fallout 4 anymore and don't give a damn if the performance decreased by 35% as they want people to buy their next gen Pascal GPU's.
Other channels like TechAvenue have also pointed this out:
This also happened with the previous generation where the R9 290X was behind the 780 Ti but later on it's ahead of the 780 Ti so people who brought the 780 Ti for $150 MORE got screwed.
Unfortunately, as the author points out no one is going to look up this information from a small Russian website like GPUGuru or channels like AdoredTV and TechAvenue. Mainstream sites like Anandtech or Tom's Hardware aren't going to re-bench their games again and compare it to when said GPU's launched and actually do an analysis where it will show this kinds of things and the effects of Gameworks on older/current nVidia GPU's as well as older AMD GPU's.
So, what do you guys think? Is the author right about nVidia is intentionally throwing current GTX 9XX and especially 6XX/7XX series owners under the bus so current nVidia owners buys their upcoming GPU's?
So, what do you guys think? nVidia is intentionally throwing current GTX 9XX and especially 6XX/7XX series owners under the bus so current nVidia owners buys their upcoming GPU's?
of course they do.
Nvidia has been pulling stuff like this since always
So, what do you guys think? nVidia is intentionally throwing current GTX 9XX and especially 6XX/7XX series owners under the bus so current nVidia owners buys their upcoming GPU's?
of course they do.
Nvidia has been pulling stuff like this since always
Well, I try to be fair and rational in my argument. But the evidence put forth in this video (which I think was very well made) is clearly damning. -30% drop in performance for a nVidia GPU that cost's $700 only two years ago where as AMD got a 30% boost in performance. I am not much of a conspiracy theorists but it seems like they are using Gameworks shadily. As the author points out why in the world would you over tessellate like hell on Witcher 3 or on the dog in the other game (both are Gameworks) title when you don't need to, unless it was to damage performance so older nVidia owners upgrade or to damage AMD GPU's.
The best is when you have more FPS for less money. Both companys have good models, but AMD runs hotter and louder, nVidia runs cooler but costs more. It really depends on your budget when it comes to building PC, AMDs high end cards are much higher in price due to mining, where Nvidia has the highest performance for high end.
My 970 absolutely wrecks every game I throw at it, so if they are ''throwing my gpu under the bus', they are doing a terrible job at it.
On the other side, my AMD friends were having nothing but problems on the software side of things for months on end because AMD is slow as **** when it comes to that thing.
It's not all sunshine and rainbows for any large corporation. AMD isn't the good guy and neither is Nvidia.
Good to see AMD no laying down in this fight. I don't support Nvidia in spirit with their shameful practices of sabotaging game code to run bad on AMD hardware. Good to see AMD come out ahead for once. Nvidia should focus on being better by simply making a better product and not try to sabotage the competition.
Nvidia's GPU's tend to be better optimised for most games and are less prone to error. My last AMD GPU (R9 280x) had huge artifacts so I decided to give up on AMD and go for Nvidia's GTX 970 about 4 months ago. You pay more for Nvidia's products, but they are generally more reliable, but AMD provides amazing price-to-performance ratio. But seriously, both Co. aren't friendly, so it's totally up to you who's the real enemy here.
Depends on the price range. I would say on the mid to low range AMD rules.
@davillain- said:
@flyincloud1116 said:
So should I go AMD?
The best is when you have more FPS for less money. Both companys have good models, but AMD runs hotter and louder, nVidia runs cooler but costs more. It really depends on your budget when it comes to building PC, AMDs high end cards are much higher in price due to mining, where Nvidia has the highest performance for high end.
True. It's best to get more FPS for less money. That's why I would recommend AMD for the mid to low range. As for the AMD "runs hotter and louder" not if you buy from 3rd party board partners. And the mining issue has since been resolved over a year and half ago.
My 970 absolutely wrecks every game I throw at it, so if they are ''throwing my gpu under the bus', they are doing a terrible job at it.
On the other side, my AMD friends were having nothing but problems on the software side of things for months on end because AMD is slow as **** when it comes to that thing.
It's not all sunshine and rainbows for any large corporation. AMD isn't the good guy and neither is Nvidia.
Well throwing under the bus would mostly apply to Kepler owners. Maxwell owners doesn't see a huge performance drop like Kepler owners.
But as the author of the video alluded to that in the future Maxwell owners may end up in the situation as Kepler owners where they see a huge drop in performance in Gameworks titles, hence his theory that nVidia is practicing "planned obsolescence". You have to give credit to AMD at least they are not allowing their competitor to view code for effects such as TressFX so they can't properly optimize their GPU's like nVidia is doing for GameWorks.
AMD is trying to get the best possible performance out of games with codes that they can't even see!
Depends on the price range. I would say on the mid to low range AMD rules.
@davillain- said:
@flyincloud1116 said:
So should I go AMD?
The best is when you have more FPS for less money. Both companys have good models, but AMD runs hotter and louder, nVidia runs cooler but costs more. It really depends on your budget when it comes to building PC, AMDs high end cards are much higher in price due to mining, where Nvidia has the highest performance for high end.
True. It's best to get more FPS for less money. That's why I would recommend AMD for the mid to low range. As for the AMD "runs hotter and louder" not if you buy from 3rd party board partners. And the mining issue has since been resolved over a year and half ago.
Yeah he's right, bitcoin mining moved to FPGA's and ASIC's about 2 years ago. It's not worth mining on GPU's anymore.
AMD at the high end offers the cooler and quieter cards as they are closed loop water cooled also.
The 295x2 which is sitting still at the top of the performance table is also water cooled and canbe had for around $600.
Fallout 4's improvement for AMD side is similar to Far Cry 4's improvements which is another NVIDIA Gameworks title. AMD should create their Gameworks clone library that contains AMD's Gameworks optimisations.
While AMD GPUopen is similar to NVIDIA Gameworks, it's not compatible with complied Gameworks game.
nVidia's planned obsolescence for Kelper is good for business, hence it's good for shareholder value. Kelper is in legacy driver support status. As for drivers, doing an alt-tab switch on SW:TOR would result with occasional BSOD (Blue Screen of Death) on NVIDIA GPU, hence why I haven't fully transferred towards NVIDIA GPUs.
Kelper design is too dissimilar from Maxwell and NVIDIA can only sustain a single GPU architecture optimizations.
I plan to continue running two gaming PCs with each having dissimilar GPUs.
AMD's Polaris *is* still Graphics Core Next (GCN) in it's 4th improvement revision, hence older GCN owners can continue benefit from Polaris' optimisations.
It's unknown if NVIDIA Pascal would dump Maxwellv2 design but based from the following DX12 feature list
There's a larger functional gap between MS Warp12 reference GPU and NVIDIA Maxwell v2.
If NVIDIA's Pascal is MS Warp12 compliant, it would cause Maxwell v2 to be placed into legacy status..
My 970 absolutely wrecks every game I throw at it, so if they are ''throwing my gpu under the bus', they are doing a terrible job at it.
On the other side, my AMD friends were having nothing but problems on the software side of things for months on end because AMD is slow as **** when it comes to that thing.
It's not all sunshine and rainbows for any large corporation. AMD isn't the good guy and neither is Nvidia.
AMD doesn't have access to NVIDIA's Gameworks source code.
Fallout 4's improvement for AMD side is similar to Far Cry 4's improvements which is another NVIDIA Gameworks title. AMD should create their Gameworks clone library that contains AMD's Gameworks optimisations.
While AMD GPUopen is similar to NVIDIA Gameworks, it's not compatible with complied Gameworks game.
nVidia's planned obsolescence for Kelper is good for business, hence it's good for shareholder value. Kelper is in legacy driver support status. As for drivers, doing an alt-tab switch on SW:TOR would result with occasional BSOD (Blue Screen of Death) on NVIDIA GPU, hence why I haven't fully transferred towards NVIDIA GPUs.
Kelper design is too dissimilar from Maxwell and NVIDIA can only sustain a single GPU architecture optimizations.
I plan to continue running two gaming PCs with each having dissimilar GPUs.
AMD's Polaris *is* still Graphics Core Next (GCN) in it's 4th improvement revision, hence older GCN owners can continue benefit from Polaris' optimisations.
It's unknown if NVIDIA Pascal would dump Maxwellv2 design but based from the following DX12 feature list
There's a larger functional gap between MS Warp12 reference GPU and NVIDIA Maxwell v2.
If NVIDIA's Pascal is MS Warp12 compliant, it would cause Maxwell v2 to be placed into legacy status..
"nVidia's planned obsolescence for Kelper is good for business, hence it's good for shareholder value..." Pretty much this. As the video author stated toward the end where it shows nVidia's stock has gone up.
I would like to see GPUOpen in more games. As posted in the video that AMD's tech doesn't hamper competitors performance. As stated in the video that TressFX is getting great average and minimum framerates on both GPU vendor whereas Hairworks is not.
Question is how many game developers will start using GPUOpen? My hope is that we get descent number of developers. There were several titles like Battlefield 4, Thief and even Crytek was on board with Mantle. I hope to see AT LEAST those number of developers on board with GPUOpen.
But I have a feeling that nVidia will bribe/pay developers to only use Gameworks.
Now that R9 nano has had a price drop to $499, its the best small size card out there right now. Perfect for an mATX or ITX build. It bests the GTX 980 in most games even.
It is highly unlikely that I will switch to AMD in the foreseeable future. Nvidia is still the best option. If that changes, then I will consider it. For now, I will enjoy GameWorks, G-Sync, better driver support, better efficiency and all other things that Nvidia brings to the table.
I appreciate all those who make the sacrifice and buy AMD. Keep fighting the good fight and helping keep Nvidia in check. I may not like a lot of what Nvidia is doing, but I like having the best option. :)
Not to be a AMD fanboy, but it was quite obvious some years back when they bought PhysX what they were doing.
It was so much more than getting PhysX running on a GPU to gain performance, all the new games at the time when you enabled physx you got a slideshow so the games were gimped to not have any proper physics if you didn't have an nvidia card even though in many cases the physics were not even that impressive and had been done before using the CPU just fine.
All nvidia do is gimp games on older hardware for little to no benefit.
@EJ902: A marketing ploy, and to say a game runs best on (some) nvidia cards by ensuring it is not optimised for non nvidia cards.
I wouldn't mind if devs optimised for both using all that each hardware maker had to offer. Why not for example implement both hairs physics techs and let the consumer choose which to use. I wouldn't be surprised if AMDs optimisations worked better than nvidias on their own hardware at this point.
AMD has shit drivers. I stay clear of them at all costs.
Nvidia also has shit drivers.
vista? This really doesn't mean anything you know that right?
Yeah but so does the comment "AMD has Shit Drivers". AMD drivers have been fine for ages. Nvidia are having more trouble with there own from what i've been noticing. Downgrading there own GPU's after every other driver release, buggy as hell gameworks features.
AMD has shit drivers. I stay clear of them at all costs.
Nvidia also has shit drivers.
vista? This really doesn't mean anything you know that right?
Yeah but so does the comment "AMD has Shit Drivers". AMD drivers have been fine for ages. Nvidia are having more trouble with there own from what i've been noticing. Downgrading there own GPU's after every other driver release, buggy as hell gameworks features.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
As somebody who is a developer, amd drivers are absolute shit and have been for a long time. If you want to be in denial, that's all you.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
I don't really care about articles, what matters is execution. AMD doesn't have the option to control any of the technology. They've become a pretty bad company, They released mantle and it never matured into anything and gave gave it to a 3rd party. In fact mantle is a good example of them being extremely douchy. They only ever intended to make the API public but they'd retain ownership of the API and pretty much own all design choices. If you bought in to the hype all you got pretty much a dead end product that was never fully realized. Now a third party vendor is making the API general enough for NVidia/intel and developer support will be much better.
I under stand there are always problems with games. But NVidia releases fixes for game extremely fast or have profiles ready release day for major games.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
As somebody who is a developer, amd drivers are absolute shit and have been for a long time. If you want to be in denial, that's all you.
K, assuming you are a developer fair enough. I'm hardly in denial though, been using AMD since there 9800 SE. Only problem i ever ran into was the 4870X2 had some flicker on crysis 2. Patched within a week.
Looks like Nvidia is having a lot of crashes to desktop and shadow play issues of late though O_o.
Oh for the record I'm a nuclear cowboy scientist in that order. Everyone should listen to my internet credentials.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
I don't really care about articles, what matters is execution. AMD doesn't have the option to control any of the technology. They've become a pretty bad company, They released mantle and it never matured into anything and gave gave it to a 3rd party. In fact mantle is a good example of them being extremely douchy. They only ever intended to make the API public but they'd retain ownership of the API and pretty much own all design choices. If you bought in to the hype all you got pretty much a dead end product that was never fully realized. Now a third party vendor is making the API general enough for NVidia/intel and developer support will be much better.
I under stand there are always problems with games. But NVidia releases fixes for game extremely fast or have profiles ready release day for major games.
Control the technology?? What like how Nvidia locks out everyone from the tech they develop?? Yeah what a bunch of champions.
So what if Mantle didn't make it, was it not a step in the right direction. AIn the end it has gone to people who will be using that tech to move the industry forward. Better than the deathgrip Nvidia has had on PhysX for the last decade. Or hey better yet, let's all pay extra fro G-Sync because "reasons" when free sync is being toted as better and free. Who were those evil b@stards who were giving that away again?
Wait if AMD are douchey for not relinquishing control of Mantle while still making it free to use, what does that make Nvidia who don't relinquish control and make you pay licensing? I'm picturing someone with a black coat and an evil moustache.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
As somebody who is a developer, amd drivers are absolute shit and have been for a long time. If you want to be in denial, that's all you.
K, assuming you are a developer fair enough. I'm hardly in denial though, been using AMD since there 9800 SE. Only problem i ever ran into was the 4870X2 had some flicker on crysis 2. Patched within a week.
Looks like Nvidia is having a lot of crashes to desktop and shadow play issues of late though O_o.
Oh for the record I'm a nuclear cowboy scientist in that order. Everyone should listen to my internet credentials.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
As somebody who is a developer, amd drivers are absolute shit and have been for a long time. If you want to be in denial, that's all you.
K, assuming you are a developer fair enough. I'm hardly in denial though, been using AMD since there 9800 SE. Only problem i ever ran into was the 4870X2 had some flicker on crysis 2. Patched within a week.
Looks like Nvidia is having a lot of crashes to desktop and shadow play issues of late though O_o.
Oh for the record I'm a nuclear cowboy scientist in that order. Everyone should listen to my internet credentials.
That's one hell of a job!
It's true, i'm deathly ill from all forms of radiation.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
I don't really care about articles, what matters is execution. AMD doesn't have the option to control any of the technology. They've become a pretty bad company, They released mantle and it never matured into anything and gave gave it to a 3rd party. In fact mantle is a good example of them being extremely douchy. They only ever intended to make the API public but they'd retain ownership of the API and pretty much own all design choices. If you bought in to the hype all you got pretty much a dead end product that was never fully realized. Now a third party vendor is making the API general enough for NVidia/intel and developer support will be much better.
I under stand there are always problems with games. But NVidia releases fixes for game extremely fast or have profiles ready release day for major games.
Control the technology?? What like how Nvidia locks out everyone from the tech they develop?? Yeah what a bunch of champions.
So what if Mantle didn't make it, was it not a step in the right direction. AIn the end it has gone to people who will be using that tech to move the industry forward. Better than the deathgrip Nvidia has had on PhysX for the last decade. Or hey better yet, let's all pay extra fro G-Sync because "reasons" when free sync is being toted as better and free. Who were those evil b@stards who were giving that away again?
Wait if AMD are douchey for not relinquishing control of Mantle while still making it free to use, what does that make Nvidia who don't relinquish control and make you pay licensing? I'm picturing someone with a black coat and an evil moustache.
NVidia doesn't though. Companies pay for support and source code from NVidia. They are completely free to work with AMD sorting out their game for AMD hardware, NVidia has even stated they are licensed to share the source code. Secondly NVidia is not being evil. They are just doing what's best for them and their customers which include Developers and end users. NVidia made an cool technology that wasn't supported via hardware so they used their own hardware. Now AMD made an alternative that... wouldn't have gotten support at all if they didn't work it into display port standards.
Mantle was probably just rushed to the market first. We are entering a age of technology where low power CPU's were becoming prevalent. Apple's metal, DX12, and OpenGL looking for solutions were all going to happen with or without mantle. I'm not arguing the technology wasn't a step in the right direction but AMD's rush to get it out first without support were more at the cost of their customers. It's good that they at least gave it to another company to become an open standard. AMD's just not in a position to make it closed source. NVidia probably won't touch it, if intel makes their own and continues the path that they've been on, AMD could be in trouble for a lot of low/mid range gaming. They really need people to adopt their middlewear.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
I don't really care about articles, what matters is execution. AMD doesn't have the option to control any of the technology. They've become a pretty bad company, They released mantle and it never matured into anything and gave gave it to a 3rd party. In fact mantle is a good example of them being extremely douchy. They only ever intended to make the API public but they'd retain ownership of the API and pretty much own all design choices. If you bought in to the hype all you got pretty much a dead end product that was never fully realized. Now a third party vendor is making the API general enough for NVidia/intel and developer support will be much better.
I under stand there are always problems with games. But NVidia releases fixes for game extremely fast or have profiles ready release day for major games.
Control the technology?? What like how Nvidia locks out everyone from the tech they develop?? Yeah what a bunch of champions.
So what if Mantle didn't make it, was it not a step in the right direction. AIn the end it has gone to people who will be using that tech to move the industry forward. Better than the deathgrip Nvidia has had on PhysX for the last decade. Or hey better yet, let's all pay extra fro G-Sync because "reasons" when free sync is being toted as better and free. Who were those evil b@stards who were giving that away again?
Wait if AMD are douchey for not relinquishing control of Mantle while still making it free to use, what does that make Nvidia who don't relinquish control and make you pay licensing? I'm picturing someone with a black coat and an evil moustache.
NVidia doesn't though. Companies pay for support and source code from NVidia. They are completely free to work with AMD sorting out their game for AMD hardware, NVidia has even stated they are licensed to share the source code. Secondly NVidia is not being evil. They are just doing what's best for them and their customers which include Developers and end users. NVidia made an cool technology that wasn't supported via hardware so they used their own hardware. Now AMD made an alternative that... wouldn't have gotten support at all if they didn't work it into display port standards.
Mantle was probably just rushed to the market first. We are entering a age of technology where low power CPU's were becoming prevalent. Apple's metal, DX12, and OpenGL looking for solutions were all going to happen with or without mantle. I'm not arguing the technology wasn't a step in the right direction but AMD's rush to get it out first without support were more at the cost of their customers. It's good that they at least gave it to another company to become an open standard. AMD's just not in a position to make it closed source. NVidia probably won't touch it, if intel makes their own and continues the path that they've been on, AMD could be in trouble for a lot of low/mid range gaming. They really need people to adopt their middlewear.
NVIDIA Gameworks is not transparent as per Ashes of Singularity's standard i.e. no equal source code access to non-NVIDIA GPU vendors e.g. Intel or AMD.
AMD's Mantle API spec was given to Khronos Group and it was modified to improve cross-vendor compatibility.
From http://wccftech.com/fallout-4-nvidia-gameworks/2/
I also have to point out an important distinction here between a regular GameWorks-developer partnership and a source license. By default Nvidia provides GameWorks features in binary only builds without source code. The license to gain access to source code is not automatically given to Nvidia GameWorks partners. If the developer wants access to the source code they have to specifically request a source license and are required to pay a fee. Unfortunately, Nvidia has not shared with us or any other publication what this fee is. However Nvidia has told us that they can choose to wave the fee in a case by case basis.
And this is where things get quite complicated and a few points of contention arise; both from AMD’s perspective and some game developers’ perspective. The first of which is that this puts some limits on the developers’ control over their game. Because it’s not their own code, rather it is Nvidia’s code that they’ve merely licensed. So they have to follow the guidelines set forth by the licensor. And this creates a different dynamic where some decisions – that would traditionally be made by the developer – would now be delegated to Nvidia instead
Since NVIDIA Gameworks source code is a close source licensed product, the developer can not show the Gameworks source code to other 3rd parties e.g. Intel or AMD.
Doing it by "case by case basis" is discriminatory by nature.
To quote NVIDIA's Brian Burke
Licensees just can’t redistribute our source code to anyone who does not have a license
The developer doesn't have the rights to sub-license Gameworks source code to 3rd parties.
GPUOpen's MIT license enables the developer to show source code to 3rd parties e.g. a non-AMD GPU vendor.
From http://www.dsogaming.com/news/the-witcher-3-developer-its-up-to-nvidia-to-let-amd-users-enjoy-physx-hair-and-fur-effects/
The contract between NVIDIA and CDPR stops AMD from being involve with The Witcher 3 PC's development.
John Kloetzli is graphics programmer at Firaxis.
Bart Wronski is graphics programmers at UbiSoft Montreal!
Timothy Lottes is ex-NVIDIA and now works at Epic (the author of TXAA).
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
I don't really care about articles, what matters is execution. AMD doesn't have the option to control any of the technology. They've become a pretty bad company, They released mantle and it never matured into anything and gave gave it to a 3rd party. In fact mantle is a good example of them being extremely douchy. They only ever intended to make the API public but they'd retain ownership of the API and pretty much own all design choices. If you bought in to the hype all you got pretty much a dead end product that was never fully realized. Now a third party vendor is making the API general enough for NVidia/intel and developer support will be much better.
I under stand there are always problems with games. But NVidia releases fixes for game extremely fast or have profiles ready release day for major games.
Control the technology?? What like how Nvidia locks out everyone from the tech they develop?? Yeah what a bunch of champions.
So what if Mantle didn't make it, was it not a step in the right direction. AIn the end it has gone to people who will be using that tech to move the industry forward. Better than the deathgrip Nvidia has had on PhysX for the last decade. Or hey better yet, let's all pay extra fro G-Sync because "reasons" when free sync is being toted as better and free. Who were those evil b@stards who were giving that away again?
Wait if AMD are douchey for not relinquishing control of Mantle while still making it free to use, what does that make Nvidia who don't relinquish control and make you pay licensing? I'm picturing someone with a black coat and an evil moustache.
NVidia doesn't though. Companies pay for support and source code from NVidia. They are completely free to work with AMD sorting out their game for AMD hardware, NVidia has even stated they are licensed to share the source code. Secondly NVidia is not being evil. They are just doing what's best for them and their customers which include Developers and end users. NVidia made an cool technology that wasn't supported via hardware so they used their own hardware. Now AMD made an alternative that... wouldn't have gotten support at all if they didn't work it into display port standards.
Mantle was probably just rushed to the market first. We are entering a age of technology where low power CPU's were becoming prevalent. Apple's metal, DX12, and OpenGL looking for solutions were all going to happen with or without mantle. I'm not arguing the technology wasn't a step in the right direction but AMD's rush to get it out first without support were more at the cost of their customers. It's good that they at least gave it to another company to become an open standard. AMD's just not in a position to make it closed source. NVidia probably won't touch it, if intel makes their own and continues the path that they've been on, AMD could be in trouble for a lot of low/mid range gaming. They really need people to adopt their middlewear.
So AMD, despite them saying in all manner of press releases are completely free to give Nvidia a licensing fee then utilize the source code for all of the gameworks tech, that sounds like something they would have done upon gameworks inception. Can you provide a link or something for that cause i'm having trouble believing this.
I really don't think Nvidia is doing anything for the benefit of their customers right now. Their stock holders maybe, but they are certainly bleeding their customers of cash if that's what you mean.
So you are chastising AMD for releasing Mantle, to early in your opinion. But Nvidia get's a free pass for releasing...nothing???
If you were refering to PhysX with Nvidia making cool stuff, they did not make Physx they bought it completely pre-established then incorporated it into there GPU's. They did however make G-Sync, then charged everyone for it. While AMD made Free Sync and gave it away, AMD also gave away there Open 3d spec and now open GPU.
If there is a good and a bad guy from the perspective of gamers, it should be clear AMD is not the bad guy right now.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
As somebody who is a developer, amd drivers are absolute shit and have been for a long time. If you want to be in denial, that's all you.
How's NVIDIA's Async compute feature status? Has NVIDIA fixed Alt-tab from full screen = BSOD for SW-TOR (not just SW TOR)?
A long time you say?
YOU don't have a monopoly with being a developer in this forum.
I'm enjoying my NVidia card, I bought and replace after using a 270x for a few months... it had fine performance but the drivers were pretty shit.
I always end up looking on reddit to see the current state of drivers and support for both AMD and Nvidia, not the only source of info but they seem pretty vocal. For the past 6 months or so, it seems all you see are drivers keep crashing xyz or this update gives me BSOD from the Nvidia camp. AMD you get a quite a lot less, more praising the performance increases from the updates and articles talking about upcoming tech.
If i had to choose a product that was trustworthy I would be going with AMD GPU's, at least you won't be supporting a douche bag of a company.
As somebody who is a developer, amd drivers are absolute shit and have been for a long time. If you want to be in denial, that's all you.
How's NVIDIA's Async compute feature status? Has NVIDIA fixed Alt-tab from full screen = BSOD for SW-TOR (not just SW TOR)?
A long time you say?
Dude just switch to fullscreen windowed mode, the game wasn't designed well for alt tab. It has to reload when at full screen which is far more likely the culprit that a developer fucked something up.
I don't really care about articles, what matters is execution. AMD doesn't have the option to control any of the technology. They've become a pretty bad company, They released mantle and it never matured into anything and gave gave it to a 3rd party. In fact mantle is a good example of them being extremely douchy. They only ever intended to make the API public but they'd retain ownership of the API and pretty much own all design choices. If you bought in to the hype all you got pretty much a dead end product that was never fully realized. Now a third party vendor is making the API general enough for NVidia/intel and developer support will be much better.
I under stand there are always problems with games. But NVidia releases fixes for game extremely fast or have profiles ready release day for major games.
Control the technology?? What like how Nvidia locks out everyone from the tech they develop?? Yeah what a bunch of champions.
So what if Mantle didn't make it, was it not a step in the right direction. AIn the end it has gone to people who will be using that tech to move the industry forward. Better than the deathgrip Nvidia has had on PhysX for the last decade. Or hey better yet, let's all pay extra fro G-Sync because "reasons" when free sync is being toted as better and free. Who were those evil b@stards who were giving that away again?
Wait if AMD are douchey for not relinquishing control of Mantle while still making it free to use, what does that make Nvidia who don't relinquish control and make you pay licensing? I'm picturing someone with a black coat and an evil moustache.
NVidia doesn't though. Companies pay for support and source code from NVidia. They are completely free to work with AMD sorting out their game for AMD hardware, NVidia has even stated they are licensed to share the source code. Secondly NVidia is not being evil. They are just doing what's best for them and their customers which include Developers and end users. NVidia made an cool technology that wasn't supported via hardware so they used their own hardware. Now AMD made an alternative that... wouldn't have gotten support at all if they didn't work it into display port standards.
Mantle was probably just rushed to the market first. We are entering a age of technology where low power CPU's were becoming prevalent. Apple's metal, DX12, and OpenGL looking for solutions were all going to happen with or without mantle. I'm not arguing the technology wasn't a step in the right direction but AMD's rush to get it out first without support were more at the cost of their customers. It's good that they at least gave it to another company to become an open standard. AMD's just not in a position to make it closed source. NVidia probably won't touch it, if intel makes their own and continues the path that they've been on, AMD could be in trouble for a lot of low/mid range gaming. They really need people to adopt their middlewear.
So AMD, despite them saying in all manner of press releases are completely free to give Nvidia a licensing fee then utilize the source code for all of the gameworks tech, that sounds like something they would have done upon gameworks inception. Can you provide a link or something for that cause i'm having trouble believing this.
I really don't think Nvidia is doing anything for the benefit of their customers right now. Their stock holders maybe, but they are certainly bleeding their customers of cash if that's what you mean.
So you are chastising AMD for releasing Mantle, to early in your opinion. But Nvidia get's a free pass for releasing...nothing???
If you were refering to PhysX with Nvidia making cool stuff, they did not make Physx they bought it completely pre-established then incorporated it into there GPU's. They did however make G-Sync, then charged everyone for it. While AMD made Free Sync and gave it away, AMD also gave away there Open 3d spec and now open GPU.
If there is a good and a bad guy from the perspective of gamers, it should be clear AMD is not the bad guy right now.
Right NVidia made G-Sync, designed specific hardware for it and worked with monitor vendors to get that tech into monitors. AMD went the route to hopefully get a higher adoption rate, if people have monitors they can already use...
I didn't say they'll NVidia will give AMD the source code, I said companies that work with nvidia on game works are free to work with AMD to make sure their games work well with AMD cards. I was also wrong about that, but the game companies are completely free to work with AMD to fix performance issues and even edit the source code of game works to make it work better with AMD. Granted if their hairworks technology is designed around tesselation and their video cards are good at that... they don't really have to care that ATI's cards are not good at that. AMD should probably improve tessellation performance on their cards...
Mantle was horribly supported and fell flat. It was completely AMD's fault. They worked on it without nvidia/intel involvement so it would have been a special API designed around their hardware that may/may not work well for nvidia/intel. They were planning on making the API public but that's not the same as making an open standard everyone can contribute to. That's kind of the same boat with TressFx
Neither of them are bad guys, they are just doing what's best for their business and the hardware they build. AMD doesn't have a choice, they're market share is down, they absolutely need developer support so they don't charge for it. At the end of the day developers are choosing to use technologies like tressfx vs hairworks and incorporating them into the games. If there is a problem with performance on AMD's cards with particular software it's really important for a developer to sort it out or work with AMD to fix the issue.
edit:
Also AMD's claim they need source code is a bit ridiculous. If you're driver is under performing than you need to analyse you're own source to find the bottle necks...
It's fairly hypocritical to get mad at NVidia for locking amd out, AMD has locked nvidia out while developing bf4/tombraider with mantle/trueaudio.
Control the technology?? What like how Nvidia locks out everyone from the tech they develop?? Yeah what a bunch of champions.
So what if Mantle didn't make it, was it not a step in the right direction. AIn the end it has gone to people who will be using that tech to move the industry forward. Better than the deathgrip Nvidia has had on PhysX for the last decade. Or hey better yet, let's all pay extra fro G-Sync because "reasons" when free sync is being toted as better and free. Who were those evil b@stards who were giving that away again?
Wait if AMD are douchey for not relinquishing control of Mantle while still making it free to use, what does that make Nvidia who don't relinquish control and make you pay licensing? I'm picturing someone with a black coat and an evil moustache.
NVidia doesn't though. Companies pay for support and source code from NVidia. They are completely free to work with AMD sorting out their game for AMD hardware, NVidia has even stated they are licensed to share the source code. Secondly NVidia is not being evil. They are just doing what's best for them and their customers which include Developers and end users. NVidia made an cool technology that wasn't supported via hardware so they used their own hardware. Now AMD made an alternative that... wouldn't have gotten support at all if they didn't work it into display port standards.
Mantle was probably just rushed to the market first. We are entering a age of technology where low power CPU's were becoming prevalent. Apple's metal, DX12, and OpenGL looking for solutions were all going to happen with or without mantle. I'm not arguing the technology wasn't a step in the right direction but AMD's rush to get it out first without support were more at the cost of their customers. It's good that they at least gave it to another company to become an open standard. AMD's just not in a position to make it closed source. NVidia probably won't touch it, if intel makes their own and continues the path that they've been on, AMD could be in trouble for a lot of low/mid range gaming. They really need people to adopt their middlewear.
So AMD, despite them saying in all manner of press releases are completely free to give Nvidia a licensing fee then utilize the source code for all of the gameworks tech, that sounds like something they would have done upon gameworks inception. Can you provide a link or something for that cause i'm having trouble believing this.
I really don't think Nvidia is doing anything for the benefit of their customers right now. Their stock holders maybe, but they are certainly bleeding their customers of cash if that's what you mean.
So you are chastising AMD for releasing Mantle, to early in your opinion. But Nvidia get's a free pass for releasing...nothing???
If you were refering to PhysX with Nvidia making cool stuff, they did not make Physx they bought it completely pre-established then incorporated it into there GPU's. They did however make G-Sync, then charged everyone for it. While AMD made Free Sync and gave it away, AMD also gave away there Open 3d spec and now open GPU.
If there is a good and a bad guy from the perspective of gamers, it should be clear AMD is not the bad guy right now.
Right NVidia made G-Sync, designed specific hardware for it and worked with monitor vendors to get that tech into monitors. AMD went the route to hopefully get a higher adoption rate, if people have monitors they can already use...
I didn't say they'll NVidia will give AMD the source code, I said companies that work with nvidia on game works are free to work with AMD to make sure their games work well with AMD cards. I was also wrong about that, but the game companies are completely free to work with AMD to fix performance issues and even edit the source code of game works to make it work better with AMD. Granted if their hairworks technology is designed around tesselation and their video cards are good at that... they don't really have to care that ATI's cards are not good at that. AMD should probably improve tessellation performance on their cards...
Mantle was horribly supported and fell flat. It was completely AMD's fault. They worked on it without nvidia/intel involvement so it would have been a special API designed around their hardware that may/may not work well for nvidia/intel. They were planning on making the API public but that's not the same as making an open standard everyone can contribute to. That's kind of the same boat with TressFx
Neither of them are bad guys, they are just doing what's best for their business and the hardware they build. AMD doesn't have a choice, they're market share is down, they absolutely need developer support so they don't charge for it. At the end of the day developers are choosing to use technologies like tressfx vs hairworks and incorporating them into the games. If there is a problem with performance on AMD's cards with particular software it's really important for a developer to sort it out or work with AMD to fix the issue.
edit:
Also AMD's claim they need source code is a bit ridiculous. If you're driver is under performing than you need to analyse you're own source to find the bottle necks...
It's fairly hypocritical to get mad at NVidia for locking amd out, AMD has locked nvidia out while developing bf4/tombraider with mantle/trueaudio.
To quote NVIDIA's Brian Burke
Licensees just can’t redistribute our source code to anyone who does not have a license
The developer doesn't have the rights to sub-license Gameworks source code to 3rd parties.
GPUOpen's MIT license enables the developer to show source code to 3rd parties e.g. a non-AMD GPU vendor.
For Tomb Raider 2013, NVIDIA has access to TressFX 1.0 source code.
For Ashes of Singularity, NVIDIA has access to the game's source code and they are allowed to create their own code path, but without impacting other GPU vendors.
@waahahah said:
It's fairly hypocritical to get mad at NVidia for locking amd out, AMD has locked nvidia out while developing bf4/tombraider with mantle/trueaudio.
Has NVIDIA listened to EA-DICE for creating a new light weight API? NVIDIA's solution was OpenGL kit-bash that Khronos Group rejected.
AMD also has OpenGL kit-bash with Mantle like extensions and it was also rejected.
How would NVIDIA handle Async compute feature with Kelper GPUs?
Again, AMD's Mantle API spec was given to Khronos Group and it was modified to improve cross-vendor compatibility.
AMD's TrueAudio is based from Cadence Tensilica HiFi EP DSP with Tensilica Xtensa SP Fload support. NVIDIA is welcome to license HiFi EP DSP from Cadence.
Plug-in for Audiokinetic's Wwise or GenAudio's AstoundSound with FMod Studio middleware are use to access AMD's TrueAudio (aka Cadence Tensilica HiFi EP DSP with Tensilica Xtensa SP Fload).
Control the technology?? What like how Nvidia locks out everyone from the tech they develop?? Yeah what a bunch of champions.
So what if Mantle didn't make it, was it not a step in the right direction. AIn the end it has gone to people who will be using that tech to move the industry forward. Better than the deathgrip Nvidia has had on PhysX for the last decade. Or hey better yet, let's all pay extra fro G-Sync because "reasons" when free sync is being toted as better and free. Who were those evil b@stards who were giving that away again?
Wait if AMD are douchey for not relinquishing control of Mantle while still making it free to use, what does that make Nvidia who don't relinquish control and make you pay licensing? I'm picturing someone with a black coat and an evil moustache.
NVidia doesn't though. Companies pay for support and source code from NVidia. They are completely free to work with AMD sorting out their game for AMD hardware, NVidia has even stated they are licensed to share the source code. Secondly NVidia is not being evil. They are just doing what's best for them and their customers which include Developers and end users. NVidia made an cool technology that wasn't supported via hardware so they used their own hardware. Now AMD made an alternative that... wouldn't have gotten support at all if they didn't work it into display port standards.
Mantle was probably just rushed to the market first. We are entering a age of technology where low power CPU's were becoming prevalent. Apple's metal, DX12, and OpenGL looking for solutions were all going to happen with or without mantle. I'm not arguing the technology wasn't a step in the right direction but AMD's rush to get it out first without support were more at the cost of their customers. It's good that they at least gave it to another company to become an open standard. AMD's just not in a position to make it closed source. NVidia probably won't touch it, if intel makes their own and continues the path that they've been on, AMD could be in trouble for a lot of low/mid range gaming. They really need people to adopt their middlewear.
So AMD, despite them saying in all manner of press releases are completely free to give Nvidia a licensing fee then utilize the source code for all of the gameworks tech, that sounds like something they would have done upon gameworks inception. Can you provide a link or something for that cause i'm having trouble believing this.
I really don't think Nvidia is doing anything for the benefit of their customers right now. Their stock holders maybe, but they are certainly bleeding their customers of cash if that's what you mean.
So you are chastising AMD for releasing Mantle, to early in your opinion. But Nvidia get's a free pass for releasing...nothing???
If you were refering to PhysX with Nvidia making cool stuff, they did not make Physx they bought it completely pre-established then incorporated it into there GPU's. They did however make G-Sync, then charged everyone for it. While AMD made Free Sync and gave it away, AMD also gave away there Open 3d spec and now open GPU.
If there is a good and a bad guy from the perspective of gamers, it should be clear AMD is not the bad guy right now.
Right NVidia made G-Sync, designed specific hardware for it and worked with monitor vendors to get that tech into monitors. AMD went the route to hopefully get a higher adoption rate, if people have monitors they can already use...
I didn't say they'll NVidia will give AMD the source code, I said companies that work with nvidia on game works are free to work with AMD to make sure their games work well with AMD cards. I was also wrong about that, but the game companies are completely free to work with AMD to fix performance issues and even edit the source code of game works to make it work better with AMD. Granted if their hairworks technology is designed around tesselation and their video cards are good at that... they don't really have to care that ATI's cards are not good at that. AMD should probably improve tessellation performance on their cards...
Mantle was horribly supported and fell flat. It was completely AMD's fault. They worked on it without nvidia/intel involvement so it would have been a special API designed around their hardware that may/may not work well for nvidia/intel. They were planning on making the API public but that's not the same as making an open standard everyone can contribute to. That's kind of the same boat with TressFx
Neither of them are bad guys, they are just doing what's best for their business and the hardware they build. AMD doesn't have a choice, they're market share is down, they absolutely need developer support so they don't charge for it. At the end of the day developers are choosing to use technologies like tressfx vs hairworks and incorporating them into the games. If there is a problem with performance on AMD's cards with particular software it's really important for a developer to sort it out or work with AMD to fix the issue.
AMD has their own tesselation hairworks equivalent TressFX, again open and free for anyone to use including Nvidia. Nvidia's hairworks was for quite a while rumored to be deliberately tailored to not run well on AMD cards. I believe the test was that an AMD card could run TressFX at a very near equivalent level of tesselation (AMD Introduced this btw) and Nvidia could also run it. But when AMD runs Hairworks it runs terribly on every implementation of it. I'm not sure of the status of this rumor anymore however. Some onus onto the games developer for sure, another big heap on Nvidia for being douches.
So AMD, they start working on Mantle and it's completely known that they were going to allow anyone to use it for free, including intel and Nvidia. Mantle doesn't end up beign well received so they GIVE it away to a group who use it well and we are now getting Vulkan. Yet you are somehow trying to spin this into a negative on AMD???? What about Nvidia. I'll fill it in a bit: So Nvidia, start developing no solution for asyncronous compute, make no head way on any solutions whatsoever, give nothing away to anyone to be re-implemented by anybody.*whistle's* Yep, douches.
Yes, both company's are acting in their best interest, even so, when has Nvidia released any tech development into the open for free use. AMD seem to be doing this all the time from the beginning. And AMD have been doing this even when they were around equal market share.
A developer can only work with AMD so much when AMD is forbidden from working with gameworks source code and I'll bet my bottom dollar that developers are restricted from implementing optimisations of gameworks source code for competitor cards. <---- Just checked last part of this paragraph, they are restricted via cost of the source code from Nvidia.
Control the technology?? What like how Nvidia locks out everyone from the tech they develop?? Yeah what a bunch of champions.
So what if Mantle didn't make it, was it not a step in the right direction. AIn the end it has gone to people who will be using that tech to move the industry forward. Better than the deathgrip Nvidia has had on PhysX for the last decade. Or hey better yet, let's all pay extra fro G-Sync because "reasons" when free sync is being toted as better and free. Who were those evil b@stards who were giving that away again?
Wait if AMD are douchey for not relinquishing control of Mantle while still making it free to use, what does that make Nvidia who don't relinquish control and make you pay licensing? I'm picturing someone with a black coat and an evil moustache.
NVidia doesn't though. Companies pay for support and source code from NVidia. They are completely free to work with AMD sorting out their game for AMD hardware, NVidia has even stated they are licensed to share the source code. Secondly NVidia is not being evil. They are just doing what's best for them and their customers which include Developers and end users. NVidia made an cool technology that wasn't supported via hardware so they used their own hardware. Now AMD made an alternative that... wouldn't have gotten support at all if they didn't work it into display port standards.
Mantle was probably just rushed to the market first. We are entering a age of technology where low power CPU's were becoming prevalent. Apple's metal, DX12, and OpenGL looking for solutions were all going to happen with or without mantle. I'm not arguing the technology wasn't a step in the right direction but AMD's rush to get it out first without support were more at the cost of their customers. It's good that they at least gave it to another company to become an open standard. AMD's just not in a position to make it closed source. NVidia probably won't touch it, if intel makes their own and continues the path that they've been on, AMD could be in trouble for a lot of low/mid range gaming. They really need people to adopt their middlewear.
So AMD, despite them saying in all manner of press releases are completely free to give Nvidia a licensing fee then utilize the source code for all of the gameworks tech, that sounds like something they would have done upon gameworks inception. Can you provide a link or something for that cause i'm having trouble believing this.
I really don't think Nvidia is doing anything for the benefit of their customers right now. Their stock holders maybe, but they are certainly bleeding their customers of cash if that's what you mean.
So you are chastising AMD for releasing Mantle, to early in your opinion. But Nvidia get's a free pass for releasing...nothing???
If you were refering to PhysX with Nvidia making cool stuff, they did not make Physx they bought it completely pre-established then incorporated it into there GPU's. They did however make G-Sync, then charged everyone for it. While AMD made Free Sync and gave it away, AMD also gave away there Open 3d spec and now open GPU.
If there is a good and a bad guy from the perspective of gamers, it should be clear AMD is not the bad guy right now.
Right NVidia made G-Sync, designed specific hardware for it and worked with monitor vendors to get that tech into monitors. AMD went the route to hopefully get a higher adoption rate, if people have monitors they can already use...
I didn't say they'll NVidia will give AMD the source code, I said companies that work with nvidia on game works are free to work with AMD to make sure their games work well with AMD cards. I was also wrong about that, but the game companies are completely free to work with AMD to fix performance issues and even edit the source code of game works to make it work better with AMD. Granted if their hairworks technology is designed around tesselation and their video cards are good at that... they don't really have to care that ATI's cards are not good at that. AMD should probably improve tessellation performance on their cards...
Mantle was horribly supported and fell flat. It was completely AMD's fault. They worked on it without nvidia/intel involvement so it would have been a special API designed around their hardware that may/may not work well for nvidia/intel. They were planning on making the API public but that's not the same as making an open standard everyone can contribute to. That's kind of the same boat with TressFx
Neither of them are bad guys, they are just doing what's best for their business and the hardware they build. AMD doesn't have a choice, they're market share is down, they absolutely need developer support so they don't charge for it. At the end of the day developers are choosing to use technologies like tressfx vs hairworks and incorporating them into the games. If there is a problem with performance on AMD's cards with particular software it's really important for a developer to sort it out or work with AMD to fix the issue.
edit:
Also AMD's claim they need source code is a bit ridiculous. If you're driver is under performing than you need to analyse you're own source to find the bottle necks...
It's fairly hypocritical to get mad at NVidia for locking amd out, AMD has locked nvidia out while developing bf4/tombraider with mantle/trueaudio.
To quote NVIDIA's Brian Burke
Licensees just can’t redistribute our source code to anyone who does not have a license
The developer doesn't have the rights to sub-license Gameworks source code to 3rd parties.
GPUOpen's MIT license enables the developer to show source code to 3rd parties e.g. a non-AMD GPU vendor.
For Tomb Raider 2013, NVIDIA has access to TressFX 1.0 source code.
but nvidia only had access to tressfx, not tomb raider until it was released... And I already corrected my mistake.
The situation isn't bad, NVidia/AMD are both making software that caters to their hardware's strengths. Even if NVidia has access to source code it kind of means shit in the end, what matters is the version that gets shipped with the games. NVidia doesn't have to optimize TressFX source so having that source code isn't exactly useful, they only need to profile their driver with it's usage.
And again, it's always a choice for developers to use these libraries. If any one is the bad guy it's software companies that buy into these technologies that aren't standard and are vendor specific. TressFX is MIT license, cool. If NVidia wants to modify it they have to get developers to use their special library that might be implemented better for their hardware and could potentially be worse on AMD hardware. The MIT license is virtually useless for NVIdia, AMD still owns TressFX in the end.
The situation isn't horrible, I think it is bad though. Nvidia could be a bunch of champs and open up their libraries like AMD has and in one swoop, no one would have anything to argue about.
At the moment, only one company is being open, and one company is exploiting this.
The TressFX license was hardly useless, Nvidia made a fix for the TressFx issues there were having with Tomb Raider only because it was open. If AMD was playing the game like Nvidia is then they probably wouldn't have a fix.
So AMD, despite them saying in all manner of press releases are completely free to give Nvidia a licensing fee then utilize the source code for all of the gameworks tech, that sounds like something they would have done upon gameworks inception. Can you provide a link or something for that cause i'm having trouble believing this.
I really don't think Nvidia is doing anything for the benefit of their customers right now. Their stock holders maybe, but they are certainly bleeding their customers of cash if that's what you mean.
So you are chastising AMD for releasing Mantle, to early in your opinion. But Nvidia get's a free pass for releasing...nothing???
If you were refering to PhysX with Nvidia making cool stuff, they did not make Physx they bought it completely pre-established then incorporated it into there GPU's. They did however make G-Sync, then charged everyone for it. While AMD made Free Sync and gave it away, AMD also gave away there Open 3d spec and now open GPU.
If there is a good and a bad guy from the perspective of gamers, it should be clear AMD is not the bad guy right now.
Right NVidia made G-Sync, designed specific hardware for it and worked with monitor vendors to get that tech into monitors. AMD went the route to hopefully get a higher adoption rate, if people have monitors they can already use...
I didn't say they'll NVidia will give AMD the source code, I said companies that work with nvidia on game works are free to work with AMD to make sure their games work well with AMD cards. I was also wrong about that, but the game companies are completely free to work with AMD to fix performance issues and even edit the source code of game works to make it work better with AMD. Granted if their hairworks technology is designed around tesselation and their video cards are good at that... they don't really have to care that ATI's cards are not good at that. AMD should probably improve tessellation performance on their cards...
Mantle was horribly supported and fell flat. It was completely AMD's fault. They worked on it without nvidia/intel involvement so it would have been a special API designed around their hardware that may/may not work well for nvidia/intel. They were planning on making the API public but that's not the same as making an open standard everyone can contribute to. That's kind of the same boat with TressFx
Neither of them are bad guys, they are just doing what's best for their business and the hardware they build. AMD doesn't have a choice, they're market share is down, they absolutely need developer support so they don't charge for it. At the end of the day developers are choosing to use technologies like tressfx vs hairworks and incorporating them into the games. If there is a problem with performance on AMD's cards with particular software it's really important for a developer to sort it out or work with AMD to fix the issue.
edit:
Also AMD's claim they need source code is a bit ridiculous. If you're driver is under performing than you need to analyse you're own source to find the bottle necks...
It's fairly hypocritical to get mad at NVidia for locking amd out, AMD has locked nvidia out while developing bf4/tombraider with mantle/trueaudio.
To quote NVIDIA's Brian Burke
Licensees just can’t redistribute our source code to anyone who does not have a license
The developer doesn't have the rights to sub-license Gameworks source code to 3rd parties.
GPUOpen's MIT license enables the developer to show source code to 3rd parties e.g. a non-AMD GPU vendor.
For Tomb Raider 2013, NVIDIA has access to TressFX 1.0 source code.
but nvidia only had access to tressfx, not tomb raider until it was released... And I already corrected my mistake.
The situation isn't bad, NVidia/AMD are both making software that caters to their hardware's strengths. Even if NVidia has access to source code it kind of means shit in the end, what matters is the version that gets shipped with the games. NVidia doesn't have to optimize TressFX source so having that source code isn't exactly useful, they only need to profile their driver with it's usage.
And again, it's always a choice for developers to use these libraries. If any one is the bad guy it's software companies that buy into these technologies that aren't standard and are vendor specific. TressFX is MIT license, cool. If NVidia wants to modify it they have to get developers to use their special library that might be implemented better for their hardware and could potentially be worse on AMD hardware. The MIT license is virtually useless for NVIdia, AMD still owns TressFX in the end.
Access to the source code enables NVIDIA to have a quick turn around as per Tomb Raider 2013's case.
Ashes of Singularity's equal source code access for Intel, AMD and NVIDIA gives transparency.
MIT License is similar to Simplified BSD license used by FreeBSD. Sony's PS4 OS uses FreeBSD.
3rd party MIT Licensed open source software is used in Intel's server products.
NVIDIA already has optimised TressFX code path. It's pretty easy to run multiple code paths by checking GPU vendor ID.
NVIDIA Hairworks runs fine on AMD hardware if the users/news media remembered the driver settings from Crysis 2 NVIDIA edition (excess tessellation on flat surfaces are just anti-consumer tactic from NVIDIA).
Control the technology?? What like how Nvidia locks out everyone from the tech they develop?? Yeah what a bunch of champions.
So what if Mantle didn't make it, was it not a step in the right direction. AIn the end it has gone to people who will be using that tech to move the industry forward. Better than the deathgrip Nvidia has had on PhysX for the last decade. Or hey better yet, let's all pay extra fro G-Sync because "reasons" when free sync is being toted as better and free. Who were those evil b@stards who were giving that away again?
Wait if AMD are douchey for not relinquishing control of Mantle while still making it free to use, what does that make Nvidia who don't relinquish control and make you pay licensing? I'm picturing someone with a black coat and an evil moustache.
NVidia doesn't though. Companies pay for support and source code from NVidia. They are completely free to work with AMD sorting out their game for AMD hardware, NVidia has even stated they are licensed to share the source code. Secondly NVidia is not being evil. They are just doing what's best for them and their customers which include Developers and end users. NVidia made an cool technology that wasn't supported via hardware so they used their own hardware. Now AMD made an alternative that... wouldn't have gotten support at all if they didn't work it into display port standards.
Mantle was probably just rushed to the market first. We are entering a age of technology where low power CPU's were becoming prevalent. Apple's metal, DX12, and OpenGL looking for solutions were all going to happen with or without mantle. I'm not arguing the technology wasn't a step in the right direction but AMD's rush to get it out first without support were more at the cost of their customers. It's good that they at least gave it to another company to become an open standard. AMD's just not in a position to make it closed source. NVidia probably won't touch it, if intel makes their own and continues the path that they've been on, AMD could be in trouble for a lot of low/mid range gaming. They really need people to adopt their middlewear.
So AMD, despite them saying in all manner of press releases are completely free to give Nvidia a licensing fee then utilize the source code for all of the gameworks tech, that sounds like something they would have done upon gameworks inception. Can you provide a link or something for that cause i'm having trouble believing this.
I really don't think Nvidia is doing anything for the benefit of their customers right now. Their stock holders maybe, but they are certainly bleeding their customers of cash if that's what you mean.
So you are chastising AMD for releasing Mantle, to early in your opinion. But Nvidia get's a free pass for releasing...nothing???
If you were refering to PhysX with Nvidia making cool stuff, they did not make Physx they bought it completely pre-established then incorporated it into there GPU's. They did however make G-Sync, then charged everyone for it. While AMD made Free Sync and gave it away, AMD also gave away there Open 3d spec and now open GPU.
If there is a good and a bad guy from the perspective of gamers, it should be clear AMD is not the bad guy right now.
Right NVidia made G-Sync, designed specific hardware for it and worked with monitor vendors to get that tech into monitors. AMD went the route to hopefully get a higher adoption rate, if people have monitors they can already use...
I didn't say they'll NVidia will give AMD the source code, I said companies that work with nvidia on game works are free to work with AMD to make sure their games work well with AMD cards. I was also wrong about that, but the game companies are completely free to work with AMD to fix performance issues and even edit the source code of game works to make it work better with AMD. Granted if their hairworks technology is designed around tesselation and their video cards are good at that... they don't really have to care that ATI's cards are not good at that. AMD should probably improve tessellation performance on their cards...
Mantle was horribly supported and fell flat. It was completely AMD's fault. They worked on it without nvidia/intel involvement so it would have been a special API designed around their hardware that may/may not work well for nvidia/intel. They were planning on making the API public but that's not the same as making an open standard everyone can contribute to. That's kind of the same boat with TressFx
Neither of them are bad guys, they are just doing what's best for their business and the hardware they build. AMD doesn't have a choice, they're market share is down, they absolutely need developer support so they don't charge for it. At the end of the day developers are choosing to use technologies like tressfx vs hairworks and incorporating them into the games. If there is a problem with performance on AMD's cards with particular software it's really important for a developer to sort it out or work with AMD to fix the issue.
AMD has their own tesselation hairworks equivalent TressFX, again open and free for anyone to use including Nvidia. Nvidia's hairworks was for quite a while rumored to be deliberately tailored to not run well on AMD cards. I believe the test was that an AMD card could run TressFX at a very near equivalent level of tesselation (AMD Introduced this btw) and Nvidia could also run it. But when AMD runs Hairworks it runs terribly on every implementation of it. I'm not sure of the status of this rumor anymore however. Some onus onto the games developer for sure, another big heap on Nvidia for being douches.
So AMD, they start working on Mantle and it's completely known that they were going to allow anyone to use it for free, including intel and Nvidia. Mantle doesn't end up beign well received so they GIVE it away to a group who use it well and we are now getting Vulkan. Yet you are somehow trying to spin this into a negative on AMD???? What about Nvidia. I'll fill it in a bit: So Nvidia, start developing no solution for asyncronous compute, make no head way on any solutions whatsoever, give nothing away to anyone to be re-implemented by anybody.*whistle's* Yep, douches.
Yes, both company's are acting in their best interest, even so, when has Nvidia released any tech development into the open for free use. AMD seem to be doing this all the time from the beginning. And AMD have been doing this even when they were around equal market share.
A developer can only work with AMD so much when AMD is forbidden from working with gameworks source code and I'll bet my bottom dollar that developers are restricted from implementing optimisations of gameworks source code for competitor cards. <---- Just checked last part of this paragraph, they are restricted via cost of the source code from Nvidia.
TressFX is not based on tessellation, its direct compute. AMD has pretty poor tessellation performance. The fact that NVidia has good tessellation performance and made a library for it doesn't make them the enemy or bad...
Again, mantle's openness came about because of amd's failure to gain developer support. Being for public use vs open standard are two totally different things. One allows nvidia to use it but they have no authority for modifications to the API. AMD's intention to keep it so they have authority in the API is just as damaging to customers as a proprietary library that is designed to work well on nvidia hardware. Remember mantle is a specification, it has no source code. NVIdia could implement their drivers but again if ATI decides to implement some new hardware and extend the specification for that hardware, NVidia has to follow or users with nvidia cards will suffer. It's neither open or truely free. AMD would be in a position to develop the specification with their hardware at the same time always leaving nvidia behind. While a good thing happened for mantle becoming an open standard... amd originally didn't plan that. You wouldn't ignore a bank robber that walks into a bank with a shotgun, see's a cop and walks out. Cool he didn't rob the bank but he's still guilty of planning and intention. Similarly, you can't ignore AMD's intent.
Again profiling driver performance does not require source code of a 3rd party library. The developers are not restricted from modifying game works code either if they have source licensing. Even if AMD has the source code and makes changes... again it's up to the developer to actually incorporate them.
AMD has their own tesselation hairworks equivalent TressFX, again open and free for anyone to use including Nvidia. Nvidia's hairworks was for quite a while rumored to be deliberately tailored to not run well on AMD cards. I believe the test was that an AMD card could run TressFX at a very near equivalent level of tesselation (AMD Introduced this btw) and Nvidia could also run it. But when AMD runs Hairworks it runs terribly on every implementation of it. I'm not sure of the status of this rumor anymore however. Some onus onto the games developer for sure, another big heap on Nvidia for being douches.
So AMD, they start working on Mantle and it's completely known that they were going to allow anyone to use it for free, including intel and Nvidia. Mantle doesn't end up beign well received so they GIVE it away to a group who use it well and we are now getting Vulkan. Yet you are somehow trying to spin this into a negative on AMD???? What about Nvidia. I'll fill it in a bit: So Nvidia, start developing no solution for asyncronous compute, make no head way on any solutions whatsoever, give nothing away to anyone to be re-implemented by anybody.*whistle's* Yep, douches.
Yes, both company's are acting in their best interest, even so, when has Nvidia released any tech development into the open for free use. AMD seem to be doing this all the time from the beginning. And AMD have been doing this even when they were around equal market share.
A developer can only work with AMD so much when AMD is forbidden from working with gameworks source code and I'll bet my bottom dollar that developers are restricted from implementing optimisations of gameworks source code for competitor cards. <---- Just checked last part of this paragraph, they are restricted via cost of the source code from Nvidia.
TressFX is not based on tessellation, its direct compute. AMD has pretty poor tessellation performance. The fact that NVidia has good tessellation performance and made a library for it doesn't make them the enemy or bad...
Again, mantle's openness came about because of amd's failure to gain developer support. Being for public use vs open standard are two totally different things. One allows nvidia to use it but they have no authority for modifications to the API. AMD's intention to keep it so they have authority in the API is just as damaging to customers as a proprietary library that is designed to work well on nvidia hardware. Remember mantle is a specification, it has no source code. NVIdia could implement their drivers but again if ATI decides to implement some new hardware and extend the specification for that hardware, NVidia has to follow or users with nvidia cards will suffer. It's neither open or truely free. AMD would be in a position to develop the specification with their hardware at the same time always leaving nvidia behind. While a good thing happened for mantle becoming an open standard... amd originally didn't plan that. You wouldn't ignore a bank robber that walks into a bank with a shotgun, see's a cop and walks out. Cool he didn't rob the bank but he's still guilty of planning and intention. Similarly, you can't ignore AMD's intent.
Again profiling driver performance does not require source code of a 3rd party library. The developers are not restricted from modifying game works code either if they have source licensing. Even if AMD has the source code and makes changes... again it's up to the developer to actually incorporate them.
No the development of their hairworks tesselation tech does not make them bad, it's how they appear to be wielding it that makes them bad.
So Nvidia develops no solutions (like Mantle) and is the good guy.
AMD develops a solution that it was going to remain in control of, but still allow everyone to use for FREE and implement updates based on developer input is the bad guy.
Yes, TressFX doesn't use tessellation, bad reference on my part, but it is the competing tech to Hairworks, works as well and in cases better than Hairworks and is open. Hairworks, only works better on Nvidia, and is not open for AMD to optimise.
I have an idea, Nvidia (AMD) developed Hairworks (Mantle) and is in full control of Hairworks (Mantle). Nvidia (AMD) has no forseable intention to ever release Hairworks (Mantle) to open source.Can you not see the double standard. Feel free to replace Hairworks with G-Sync, Gameworks or Physx if you like.
Developers have to pay an undisclosed extra amount for access to gameworks source code, IF the source code has been flagged for release. I have been noticing that articles refer to Nvidia keeping the source code under wraps for some time but allowing the use within gameworks. I'll see if I can find the link again.
I know, i know, it's wccftech. But it contains a lot of the links to the articles that show Nvidia didn't initially allow access to their source code or for developers to work with AMD to optimise gameworks code.
I take issue with you bank robber analogy. As it paints the competitor with no solution or development as a bystander and by proxy innocent of a crime.
Log in to comment