Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Early Radeon Vulkan Windows vs. AMDGPU PRO Linux Benchmarks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • theriddick
    replied
    Trust me, once developers make their DX12 support and realize that only a small fraction of gamers are using it, they will quickly understand why. (not everyone uses Windows10!) x Infinity

    Leave a comment:


  • johnc
    replied
    Originally posted by Pecisk View Post

    I asked not PR pieces. AMD is blasting "DirectX12" from rooftops for a year, all over the internet, in all ads - together with Microsoft. Of course they will say that.
    I'm just more referring to the fact that in just about any game talk out there it's all DX12. The games being released are DX12. The games that are coming are DX12. This is partly because MS has a lot of sway, especially with the XB1.

    I don't know of any AAA developer that has said they're releasing a game with Vulkan? Maybe Doom 4? Or is that OpenGL?

    Leave a comment:


  • theriddick
    replied
    Seems these forums no longer like me (posts going nowhere), anyway I hope AMD can find the talent to improve those OpenGL results, they are still ~%40 behind NVIDIA on that front. Not sure why developers want to LOCK everyone into Windows10 with DX12 when most gamers are using Windows 8.1/7 where only Vulkan work with.

    Also the Windows vs Linux Vulkan results were not really that different, compared to NVIDIA's they did have decent improvements with the R9 Fury being only JUST faster then the GTX970. Not sure whats going on with NVIDIA under Windows however, seems they have major issue there...
    Last edited by theriddick; 04-09-2016, 04:01 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • theriddick
    replied
    IF you LOVE Windows 10 then you are likely in love with DX12. But any developer who does their homework will realize that most gamers are running OLDER versions of Windows so it makes VERY LITTLE sense to develop DX12 for the game when only a %10-20 of their player base is going to see the improvements.

    I WISH UPON A STAR that more developers would realize this and just go with Vulkan.

    At the end of the day there is only one major issues with using Vulkan, and that is getting you game running on XBONE which is a DX12 platform (does it still do DX11?). BOTH API's still won't run on Mac OS which exclusively locked in METAL as their API (can you still use OpenGL under Mac?).

    I really don't understand how Apple can block Vulkan from their platform, that's like stopping someone develop on your platform for monopoly sakes, can someone explain in detail HOW Apple is able to block Vulkan use? or are they just making sure the drivers don't support it?

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by blackout23 View Post
    The Talos Principle developer thinks it's a bad idea to benchmark highly GPU bound scenarios (4K) at this point.

    http://steamcommunity.com/app/257510...48158145024457



    800x600 would be better.
    Not at this point. That comment was made right after the initial drivers came out, and a lot has happened since then. In particular, you can see for yourself in these benchmarks that AMD's Vulkan driver outperformed DX11 at 4K on 2 of 3 cards, with the Fury a virtual tie. Clearly, whatever bottleneck was slowing things down early on has been solved, at least enough to be competitive.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by haagch View Post
    Of course it's PR, but it's AMD's official PR.

    Here is more PR: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd...tnerships.html


    Why does AMD let them do that if they don't agree?
    You are treating this as a zero-sum game when it isn't. That no one can say anything good about DX12 without then equivalently hating Vulkan.

    There's no reason you can't like both API's, and in fact moving towards one will help you a lot in terms of getting the other one running as well.

    I'm quite certain AMD is pushing devs to start using DX12 instead of DX11 as much as possible, as soon as possible. You only have to take a look at some of the benchmarks to understand why. That doesn't mean they are against Vulkan, or that no one is going to use it.

    Leave a comment:


  • haagch
    replied
    Of course it's PR, but it's AMD's official PR.

    Here is more PR: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd...tnerships.html
    "DirectX 12 is a game-changing low overhead API for both developers and gamers," said Bryan Langley, Principal Program Manager, Microsoft. "AMD is a key partner for Microsoft in driving adoption of DirectX 12 throughout the industry,
    Why does AMD let them do that if they don't agree?

    Leave a comment:


  • Pecisk
    replied
    I asked not PR pieces. AMD is blasting "DirectX12" from rooftops for a year, all over the internet, in all ads - together with Microsoft. Of course they will say that.

    Leave a comment:


  • haagch
    replied
    Originally posted by Pecisk View Post
    Can you quote anyone specific with not being tied with Microsoft PR built around Build 2016?
    http://www.tomshardware.com/news/int...-vr,30957.html
    But I do believe that, and what I most am concerned about is our ISVs, the ISV community, where they gain the greatest benefit. You know, there are some people developing on Linux, all different flavors of life – so it’s a difficult question as to which [API] should we be focused on, which one is better. My opinion is that Windows as a platform, as an OS, is far better and far more evolved today than some of the previous generations, and that’s to be expected. DX12 and its integration into Windows is a great experience, is a great development environment, and has great compatibility. Does that mean that Vulkan doesn’t have a place? No. I think that answer really has to come from the development community, not from us.
    Back to topic: Some results for lower end GPUs would have been nice to have.

    Originally posted by blackout23 View Post
    The Talos Principle developer thinks it's a bad idea to benchmark highly GPU bound scenarios (4K) at this point.

    Vulkan (and OpenGL, for that matter) are much slower at higher resolutions and visual qualities than DXs.
    But... it isn't. Vulkan on windows was the winner for 2 gpus and the fury was only 1 fps behind. So what are we to make of that?

    Leave a comment:


  • devius
    replied
    Originally posted by atomsymbol View Post
    I don't understand it.
    I believe the technical term is "click bait".

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X