Nvidia's future endeavors

[Frag_Maniac]

I officially recant my "want this card" statement regarding the 970, but it's only because Nvidia will again strike gold,...no, PLATINUM, with their next architecture. Maxwell will soon be yesterday's news. "Isn't that coffee?", we'll be saying.

I've decided to hold out for Pascal, which is more than a mere die shrink and added GFLOPS. The feature set and support is unparalleled, as it will included stacked DRAM, NVlink, Dx12 support, and finally, FINALLY, unified memory! YEAH!!!

When the low level Dx12 debuts, Nvidia will be the way to go, as they have been working with MS on it for some time, while AMD have been fixing their Crossfire problems. Seems AMD are always one step behind, in this case, a major one.

 

[RejZoR]

Really? D3D12 is oh yeah, nowhere to be seen. AMD Mantle on the other hand is already operational in quite few titles. In fact, AMD Mantle is the reason why Microsoft got a bright idea to kick out DX12 and do exactly what AMD did with Mantle. And you come up with a statement that AMD is fixing their Crossfire shit and not bothering with the D3D12. LMAO

 

[Solaris17]

GREAT now Icant be a pro gamer because i dont own an nvidia card..I wish someone told me sooner how am i supposed to play competitive counter strike on a 7 year old engine without a 9xx series nvidia card? W/E my hopes are destroyed but I know where im putting all my money in star craft tournaments this year. Every team that has the money to buy all new GTX9xx series cards are going to blow the other teams out of the water. because frame pacing or something.

Also go nvidia

 

[FreedomEclipse]

Man I love you but lets me honest........all you do is play Diablo. lol

I agree it was a crap statement but Diablo can run on a cell phone.

I was in the same boat quite a few times 5850, 6970 crossfire & 680sli and all i ever played was LoL or Guildwars 1. I did play some arma II & battlefield on those setups though so not an entire waste but more or less gw1 would be my game

 

[Naito]

Really? D3D12 is oh yeah, nowhere to be seen. AMD Mantle on the other hand is already operational in quite few titles. In fact, AMD Mantle is the reason why Microsoft got a bright idea to kick out DX12 and do exactly what AMD did with Mantle. And you come up with a statement that AMD is fixing their Crossfire shit and not bothering with the D3D12. LMAO

Yes because Microsoft just stops developing D3D and other DX features every few years, after each major release, and only starts developing again once something else crops up. Three main possibilities why MS is focusing on low-level APIs and lower latency:

1. Their latest console, the Xbox One, needs all the performance it can get out of its already disadvantageous hardware (vs PS4), so the incentive is there to improve the APIs.
2. Perhaps some developers saw what was in Mantle and requested changes to DX APIs.
3. Or it is just the natural progression of technology. Both sides had similar ideas, one just got it to market quicker.

Don't know why there is so many Mantle vs DX12 debates going on. They aren't direct competitors. DX will still always be shipped with Windows, whether or not it is used. Mantle is game dependent and, for the time being, proprietary. If anything was a threat to DX, it would be OpenGL. I would be surprised if it wasn't getting similar features to what is in Mantle and DX12. Really, they all just compliment each other.

Seems AMD are always one step behind, in this case, a major one.

AMD have been behind in hardware since Nvidia launched the GTX 600 series, arguably behind in drivers for much longer. For everyone's sake, Nvidia fan or AMD fan, let's hope AMD can compete better. We all need more fairly priced cards. Having said that, the GTX 970 is rather decently priced.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Really? D3D12 is oh yeah, nowhere to be seen. AMD Mantle on the other hand is already operational in quite few titles. In fact, AMD Mantle is the reason why Microsoft got a bright idea to kick out DX12 and do exactly what AMD did with Mantle. And you come up with a statement that AMD is fixing their Crossfire shit and not bothering with the D3D12. LMAO

The bulk of Mantle's work was done before we even heard Dx12 being announced, so yeah, I'm saying that. Plus much of Mantle's work was actually done by DICE. And we all know from the drivers AMD has released for some time now that they primarily revolve around Crossfire work. So again, yeah, I'm saying that.

And that's coming from someone currently on an AMD GPU whom vehemently supported and defended Mantle, that is, until it launched so poorly. And it's not just that BF4 and Thief 4 had Mantle issues, it's biased toward AMD product, so it starts off only attracting a limited number of developers, and was/is likely doomed to that fate.

I've also gone on record many times stating just what you did, that it wasn't until Mantle drew interest from big name devs that MS took it as a potential API to contend with. I used to even think it motivated them to make Dx low level, but I've since learned that Dx12 being low level was intended and worked on for some time.

Lastly, it became obvious in reading AMD's response to MS' announcement of Dx12 that they were never counting on it catching on big, and content to say they're happy as long as a low level API is made to improve gaming in general. I really think that kind of thing can only be done by a 3rd party, and AMD's very words seemed to concede that.

 

[Naito]

I used to even think it motivated them to make Dx low level, but I've since learned that Dx12 being low level was intended and worked on for some time.

I'd say it was being worked on as far back as early Xbox One development. Features that are coming to DX12 are already found in the DX11 superset on the console.

 

[RejZoR]

And AMD just made Mantle in like 2 weeks before first games were released with it. They worked on it for ages. You people are crazy jokers... And of course DICE did most of the job later on. They make the games, not AMD. AMD just made the API and EA endorsed it. Do you expect it to go any other way?

DX11 doesn't have DX12 features, but since consoles are a locked down fixed hardware set (all consoles are render identical), you can use all the tricks you want and never worry about compatibility. That's why they can pull off stuff no one can on PC because you have too many hardware configurations ranging from different hardware levels of shader models, different performance ranges, different vendors with different rendering techniques etc.

 

[Naito]

And AMD just made Mantle in like 2 weeks before first games were released with it. They worked on it for ages. ?

Just like how MS worked on the Xbox One and it's DX11(.2) superset for years. The API would have been in developers hands for at least 2 years prior to console launch.

DX11 doesn't have DX12 features...

The DX11 superset on the Xbox One does have some features which will be found in DX12. It is described in this video, from memory.

...but since consoles are a locked down fixed hardware set (all consoles are render identical), you can use all the tricks you want and never worry about compatibility. That's why they can pull off stuff no one can on PC because you have too many hardware configurations ranging from different hardware levels of shader models, different performance ranges, different vendors with different rendering techniques etc.

Yes, but some of the API, especially this early in either consoles life, can't always get to the bare metal that quickly (i.e. I remember playing Perfect Dark Zero on the 360 when it first came out, it looked amazing compared to Xbox games, but going back to it now, it looks terrible compared to the later waves of games). A lot of the API still exists on a higher level. Regardless, it still doesn't stop them bringing techniques and improvements that have been made, over to PC.

 

[Stephen.]

If the rumor is true then Nvidia should just release it already there is no reason waiting on competition at this point they should do what Intel does and keep on moving forward till the competition taps out / gets beat into submission and are forced to restructure for the better.

 

[RejZoR]

Well of course, in theory any GPU supporting DX11 also supports DX12. It's just a matter of driver support. Because DX12 doens't bring anything radical new apart from redesigned rendering API which now has less overhead.

 

[Naito]

Well of course, in theory any GPU supporting DX11 also supports DX12. It's just a matter of driver support. Because DX12 doens't bring anything radical new apart from redesigned rendering API which now has less overhead.

It doesn't require any major changes in hardware requirement (just like Mantle), but it does bring a lot more to the table. I think you may want to read this or the watch video I linked in my last post. All things considered, AMD and Microsoft probably gained valuable knowledge from each other on how to improve graphics APIs, considering they both have worked very closely in console development. So Mantle should not be ever considered ammunition for AMD fanboys, which seems to be your main reason for referring to it.

 

[Champ]

If the rumor is true then Nvidia should just release it already there is no reason waiting on competition at this point they should do what Intel does and keep on moving forward till the competition taps out / gets beat into submission and are forced to restructure for the better.

I agree with this completely, but if I'm not mistaken, the high end 9xx series cards are aimed at 4K and AMD still edges I believe. A properly cooled 290(x) is still hell to compete with at that res.

 

[RejZoR]

Yeah, R9-290X is quite brutal at really high resolutions because of its insane raw memory bandwidth. Imagine 290X using framebuffer compression and GCN 1.2 cores while keeping the 512bit bus. It would probably blow GTX 980 quite hard.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

I understand the debate here, but I'm having problems with it right now.

Does Nvidea currently offer an objectively better GPU offering, at the mid-high tier right now? Yes.
Is AMD still offering a very good price-to-performance ratio on 4K monitors right now? Yes.

Nvidea waiting for the 980 ti and whatever the insanely priced offering will be named makes perfect sense. They fire a huge shot at AMD, and for once price their offerings in the realm of reasonable. Sorry, AMD, but right now you've got almost nothing to hold above Nvidea. Once you do fire back, Nvidea gets the bragging rights by busting out the insanely priced top end, and AMD has a PR loss. Unless AMD can pull out some real wizardry, console sales will be their bread and butter for some time.


I say this, while the majority of my systems are AMD based. The 6xxx and 7xxx were not bad, and they did an excellent job of meeting pricing expectations. Looking at the 9xx series from Nvidea though, I'm tempted to try out a new fit. My only real qualm is that if I were AMD, I'd be waiting for Windows 10 to release. Be the first to the plate, and claim DX12 and designed for Windows 10 monikers. Even if you aren't offering an extremely competitive piece of hardware, you can sell it as a gateway into the new features of Windows. It's insanely pessimistic to say this, but maybe that's all AMD is looking for right now.

 

[HumanSmoke]

My only real qualm is that if I were AMD, I'd be waiting for Windows 10 to release. Be the first to the plate, and claim DX12 and designed for Windows 10 monikers. Even if you aren't offering an extremely competitive piece of hardware, you can sell it as a gateway into the new features of Windows. It's insanely pessimistic to say this, but maybe that's all AMD is looking for right now.

AMD can't wait for Win10. The chances are very good that there will be DX12 cards in the channel long before Win10 drops. DX12 isn't a dependant upon the large scale changes of DX10 (unified shader architecture) or DX11 (hull/tessellation/domain shader architecture). The fact that AMD and Nvidia are both confident of in-place architectures being DX 11.3/12 compliant even before the spec is finalized, should be a solid indicator that DX12 capable cards will precede Win10.

What AMD do in the meantime? They're still dependent upon the cadence of TSMC for process and Hynix for HBM for any leap in performance (as is Nvidia). As soon as Bermuda and Fiji are ready for primetime they need to go into the channel. AMD are going to miss the holiday season spending bonanza, and I don't think AMD can sit around playing games with launch dates. The more people who buy GTX 970/980 now means fewer people who would likely buy cards in 6-12 months. These cards are well capable of maxing out most games at most resolutions (esp. if you take into account SLI), so how many people would upgrade again (apart from serial upgraders and benchmarkers) when they already have a solid graphics solution available?

Nvidia originally planned to make a GK100 but it was an epic failure in yield rates so it got scrapped and replaced by the GK110.

You know the only place that I've ever seen that stated is from Charlie Demerjian, and that guy uses the same MO every launch..
1. Run "exclusive" about upcoming Nvidia GPU
2. Run "exclusive" about how it was canned when it doesn't show up.

When the GTX 680 launched there were supply issues for the same reason.

I was under the impression that Nvidia was allocation constrained - exactly the same reason that the 7970 was announced in December but wasn't launched until a couple of weeks later - and even then were in short supply for over a month.

AMD announced that the 3xx series will be 20nm in 2015

Has that been confirmed? Current speculation seems to lean towards 28nm.

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

My problem with mantle is that it's not really anything super special. Rather than the drivers being used to optimize games the game devs have to do it in their patches, which means:

a) more expensive games

b) potentially longer release times for said games

c) GPU pricing drops on mantle supported ones

In the long run, nothing good and nothing terrible will happen, it's simply AMD outsourcing their own work. NVidia is going in the opposite direction, and making already completed systems for game devs to use (physx and gameworks) which arguably are as far from taking off as mantle is. This reduces the load on game devs but adds external costs to the game, or will result in NVidia GPUs becoming more expensive.

note: I'm not arguing for either side, i'm just trying to explain how I think each company is strategising.

 

[Naito]

My problem with mantle is that it's not really anything super special. Rather than the drivers being used to optimize games the game devs have to do it in their patches, which means:

a) more expensive games

b) potentially longer release times for said games

c) GPU pricing drops on mantle supported ones

A little unsure what you mean on the last point, but generally speaking, you are on the right track. Both Mantle and DX12 will require more development work, but also more skilled developers, as they will need to know more of the low-level operations. This does raise the question of game support over multiple PC configurations, which may go with/against your point of patches and drivers: Yes, game developers will probably need to put more resources into patching, but unlike what you stated, GPU drivers may still have to patch games with custom API calls, etc.

It's a fine line between improving performance by opening up low-level resources and still maintaining a level abstraction that doesn't bring about a need for architecture specific code.

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

Last point was that AMD needed to spend less on improving drivers, and implies they are currently spending a lot on it, which might not necessarily be true... Basically it's offloading the optimizations from AMD and NV (if they chose to implement a similar system) to the game devs.

 

[Naito]

Last point was that AMD needed to spend less on improving drivers, and implies they are currently spending a lot on it, which might not necessarily be true... Basically it's offloading the optimizations from AMD and NV (if they chose to implement a similar system) to the game devs.

AMD drivers are much, much better than they were, but still could use more attention.Yeah, theoretically it should offload optimizations from drivers, but only if the game developers did a brilliant job making the game or at least patching afterwards. BUT..... we all know how poorly a lot of the large studios patch and maintain their games, or even build their games in the first place. It makes you wonder if giving them more powerful tools would be a wise decision.

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

I personally really liked what NVidia was doing with gameworks, and I hope some devs chose to implement it down the line because it allows them to focus on the story/gameplay aspects rather than optimizing it graphically.

 

[RejZoR]

I personally really liked what NVidia was doing with gameworks, and I hope some devs chose to implement it down the line because it allows them to focus on the story/gameplay aspects rather than optimizing it graphically.

If only that was true... the reality is, it isn't. They will be too busy pushing PhysX again and bunch of other stuff like they bragged about in Watch Dogs and then nothing really ended up in the game, because someone decided to just kill all the cool effects for whatever reason...

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

That was nothing related to anyone on the PC side, I'm pretty certain either MS payed the devs off to disable them, or the devs are peasants.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

And AMD just made Mantle in like 2 weeks before first games were released with it. They worked on it for ages. You people are crazy jokers... And of course DICE did most of the job later on. They make the games, not AMD. AMD just made the API and EA endorsed it. Do you expect it to go any other way?

LOL, here you are calling us jokers, when you're apparently not even aware that Mantle was co-developed by DICE. In fact they played a major role in it's development. So no, this wasn't just an AMD developed it and handed it over to DICE to adapt BF4 to it thing like you make it sound.

The more you look at the developer conferences, the more it becomes obvious that AMD were just responding to what devs wanted, and largely letting those devs dictate how it needed to be made, with DICE at the helm. AMD of course was needed to make sure their drivers worked with it, but it takes game programmers to best adapt an API to the games, which involves making decisions how the API is designed in the first place.

You also underscore your point of view by implying AMD are the great heros of low level API, but in reality they were only serving their own hardware by it. They had to hope Nvidia would adopt similar hardware features, which I'm sure they knew was unlikely, or ride it out with a slight performance edge over Nvidia (on certain titles) until another low level API came along. The latter would really only work with a small group of dev teams that are OK with being very AMD biased, which obviously can somewhat cripple game sales.

Anyway you look at it, the only real hope was that a better API would somehow come along, or in reality, be expedited, as MS was already working on one. This is why it wouldn't make sense for AMD to waste time doing the lion's share of the work, as it was doomed to fail. In reality it was a very collaborative effort. So at best Mantle will see maybe a yr or two of use on a limited number of games, then reality will set in.

 

[Champ]

So I was thinking 970 vs 980, the 970 wins in about everywhere. I'm thinking nvidia must be holding back something. The price difference is not justied in any way