Nvidia Clears the Air About GameWorks

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
i'm glad they addressed this out in the open and provided a counter argument for pretty much all of AMD's allegations. truth be told, AMD's driver support is not on the same level as Nvidia's. I think that's something everyone can agree on.

It may be a hardware thing, but i doubt it, i think nvidia just has some really good coders and engineers.
 
I think Extremetech did an article about how much more resources Nvidia had to devote to their graphics driver teams than AMD has. Given that AMD's graphics team has apparently much less to draw from, I think they do a pretty good job. Its just a shame that AMD puts out this great hardware that unfortunately gets a bad rap due to the drivers progressing so slowly.
 
I think Extremetech did an article about how much more resources Nvidia had to devote to their graphics driver teams than AMD has. Given that AMD's graphics team has apparently much less to draw from, I think they do a pretty good job. Its just a shame that AMD puts out this great hardware that unfortunately gets a bad rap due to the drivers progressing so slowly.
Click to expand...

now now. lets see the 3 major players in the conventional computer from a wider perspective.

Nvidia competes in mainly graphic processors, a little in the SoC (although they said the were going to withdraw from it). that's 1 market focus

Intel competes in mainly main processors, a little in the SoC division, and a little on the graphic processors, although still only integrated ones. that's 2 market focus (as they are only developing IGP and not discrete ones)
not to mention they have their own fab.

AMD? they are everywhere.. GPU, CPU, SoC(although still a small part of it) that's at least 3 market focus, yet a leader in HSA innovation(which intel is still trying to catch upto). and then you count AMD is MUCH smaller than intel is. they have less workers count, the have less income, less money to invest in R&D, yet still keeping up with the latest technologies, and in some part not just keeping up. (i meant they are one of the major contributor in the HSA foundation)
 
now now. lets see the 3 major players in the conventional computer from a wider perspective

......

less money to invest in R&D, yet still keeping up with the latest technologies, and in some part not just keeping up. (i meant they are one of the major contributor in the HSA foundation)
Click to expand...

i forgot to mention some things. i'm not a fanboy of any brand, AMD products does have it's flaw, big ones compared to the competition. i think most of you guys already knows what i mean
 
Fully understand the idea behind the development of that project, lets face it - Many developers are lazy and settle for the low hardware standard that the consoles provide and don't want to spend a lot of time beefing up the gfx. If this makes that beefing up process easier - More will jump on that train and that in turn will make people want to upgrade when an upgrade actually gives some tangible benefits rather than play that console "killer title" in 500fps for no use.

This is a great idea that could revitalize the stagnant game gfx!
 
koolkei
Click to expand...

I think thats exactly what I said---I wasnt blaming AMD for not being able to devote "Nvidia-level" resources to their drivers, but the reality is, like you said, they simply cannot. Given the apparent disparity of the size/quality driver teams between those two companies, I'm actually impressed that they do as well as they do. Either that or their hardware is just such a superior design that the lagging in driver development is offset by having the better hardware.
 
My issue with GameWorks is that some of it is closed source, and most of it is licensed source so it's not available for AMD to look at. Very little of Nvidia's stuff is open source. PhysX is another example, and they use that to their advantage by deliberately crippling the Software mode by using antiquated code and not taking advantage of modern SSE/AVX. Even changing some compiler settings would give it a huge boost - but then that would make PhysX hardware mode less impressive!
 
I think Extremetech did an article about how much more resources Nvidia had to devote to their graphics driver teams than AMD has. Given that AMD's graphics team has apparently much less to draw from, I think they do a pretty good job. Its just a shame that AMD puts out this great hardware that unfortunately gets a bad rap due to the drivers progressing so slowly.
Click to expand...

now now. lets see the 3 major players in the conventional computer from a wider perspective.

Nvidia competes in mainly graphic processors, a little in the SoC (although they said the were going to withdraw from it). that's 1 market focus

Intel competes in mainly main processors, a little in the SoC division, and a little on the graphic processors, although still only integrated ones. that's 2 market focus (as they are only developing IGP and not discrete ones)
not to mention they have their own fab.

AMD? they are everywhere.. GPU, CPU, SoC(although still a small part of it) that's at least 3 market focus, yet a leader in HSA innovation(which intel is still trying to catch upto). and then you count AMD is MUCH smaller than intel is. they have less workers count, the have less income, less money to invest in R&D, yet still keeping up with the latest technologies, and in some part not just keeping up. (i meant they are one of the major contributor in the HSA foundation)
Click to expand...

Intel does way more than what you give them credit for.

Core x86 Team
Atom Team (which is pretty big branch nowadays)
XEON Phi Team
Quark/Edison Embedded Teams
Graphics Team
Intel Chipset Team (covers platform chipsets, Thunderbolt, Ethernet, Widi/miracast,RAID)
SSD's Team

list goes on.

Regarding what will push gpu makers to make faster, beefier cards, 4K Gaming simple as that. Next Gen consoles will push feature set, but 4K will drive raw performance. Asus just released a 60HZ 4K 28" monitor for $650, within a year they will be Single Tiled displays for $400 with HDMI 2.0, and updated display port. HVEC (H.265) and Googles VP8 will also be supported.


 
I agree with most of the other comments. AMD doesn't release driver updates like Nvidia does. They refuse to work with game developers like Nvidia does. Nvidia tries to enhance games and game developers with their code. What company wouldn't want to take that advantage and make their product better. AMD is just to slow to think of it.
 
i'm glad they addressed this out in the open and provided a counter argument for pretty much all of AMD's allegations. truth be told, AMD's driver support is not on the same level as Nvidia's. I think that's something everyone can agree on.

It may be a hardware thing, but i doubt it, i think nvidia just has some really good coders and engineers.
Click to expand...

Truth be told, two 290x smoke two 780 TI at 4k for 350$ less. Not also that, but multi-gpu solution is way better with AMD which is also shared by HardOCP.
 
NV did not address the issue here. The problem with Gameworks is that it's being used as a way to keep AMD out of the game's sourcecode entirely. Few if any companies are going to scrub all references to Gameworks out of their source (due to the effort and possible legal issues if not done properly), so that AMD can work on it with them.
 
This article doesn't really clear up anything. All we get is allot of vague language about how Nvidia gameworks doesn't effect the performance of amd cards without any direct answer or proof. The author should have at least provided a cross-section of game performance between gameworks and non-gameworks games.

What has been proven by hackers is that PhysX deliberately affects the performance of non-nvidia cards. For example, in sacred 2, physX runs on the cpu unless you have a physX card. Not even the most powerful intel/amd system can handle that game without stuttering unless you turn PhysX off.

It's been shown over and over again that the deeper a dev. has integrated with Nvidia, the slower performance you can expect on competitor's cards. Words from Nvidia alone aren't going to clear that up.
 
I think NVidia only support by game developers has been going down for a number of years with AMD gaining a lot of traction after the HD4800 series of cards. As a developer it makes very little sense to sacrifice at least half of your potential customers and consoles for a chance to use NVidia's proprietary tools and APIs.
I think its a no brainer NVidia has been using its proprietary tools, APIs, and developer networks to gain an advantage over AMD. This is why they invest in them. But the developers who take part will see themselves suffering in terms of profits now so its a moot point.
 


I have to agree on everything except "As a developer it makes very little sense to sacrifice at least half of your customers". Most of the Devs that sign up for programs like Nvidia's gameworks are pretty clueless when it comes to PC optimization or are small. In the case of ubisoft, it's the former. They just don't care that they are screwing over a good portion of customers in order to save money/time on optimization. You would think that ubisoft would have optimized the game engine for PCs by now with how many titles they have out but I see them constantly release titles that are plagued by technical issues.
 
Truth be told, two 290x smoke two 780 TI at 4k for 350$ less. Not also that, but multi-gpu solution is way better with AMD which is also shared by HardOCP.
Click to expand...

Most people (yes, I'm guilty) say that SLI is better, or at least more reliable, than CrossfireX.
 
"Why? Because Nvidia is allegedly crippling performance on AMD products with this middleware suite "to widen the margin in favor of Nvidia products."

There goes AMD crying again. It seems every time I read something from AMD they are crying about Intel and if they aren't crying about Intel they are crying about Nvidia. All they do is constantly complain! “WAAA WAAA Intel isn't playing fair! WAA! WAA! Nvidia is using software to cripple AMD's performance in games” Here's an idea do something about it. Try making CPU's that can actually compete with Intel and drivers that aren't crap.
 
Most people (yes, I'm guilty) say that SLI is better, or at least more reliable, than CrossfireX.
Click to expand...

And others think both companies are behaving like chilldren for playing the benchamark war and not ditching AFR alltogether.I for one would not touch SLI or CF tbh(at least not in theyr current format).
 
Most people (yes, I'm guilty) say that SLI is better, or at least more reliable, than CrossfireX.
Click to expand...
Funny how AMD had problem with crossfire for years never fixed it, Yet AMD finally fixed it when NVIDIA released FCAT system. Anyone give any credit to nvidia for it? no

The Whole matter of AMD claiming this is stupid, Not like AMD hasn't pulled same crap they are claiming against nvidia. In the game they they started this whole bit over was Watch Dogs. Only part of that game that is gameworks is HBAO+, Take a small guess what happens if its turned off? Game still runs like crap on AMD cards, so what is AMD's excuse then? If AMD wants to talk about locked source this, they Could get source for Gameworks, but what about Mantle? Can't get source for that Anywhere or API's so it is like they complain PhysX which they could license code from Nvidia but refused that as well. What I really am getting at in all this, AMD has pulled the same crap they are claiming nvidia is doing. Biggest difference you never see Nvidia whining about it or blaming AMD publicly over the whole thing, they just work on the problem and fix it.

So, nvidia sent their gameworks guy to scratch their balls only?
Don't forget nVidia has long history working with game companies implant source code to shred the performance of AMD/ATI card.
Why believe the guys from a evil company that always do nasty work?
Click to expand...

As i said earlier, AMD has pulled same crap in their history and they are only ones that whine about the game being played same way against them. AMD sounds like bunch of politicians.

i'm glad they addressed this out in the open and provided a counter argument for pretty much all of AMD's allegations. truth be told, AMD's driver support is not on the same level as Nvidia's. I think that's something everyone can agree on..
Click to expand...

Was a game out about year or so ago called Tomb raider, Nvidia never got an advanced copy of the game. First copy they got was when offical release happened, Yet Nvidia didn't call out AMD for it, they just said they didn't get an early copy to optimize drivers for it.
 
AMD was at its best before they bought ATI (socket A to socket 939) and Nvidia was making their chipsets. Remember Nforce boards? It took AMD forever to get their own chipsets up to that level after buying ATI. ATI and Via were both making chipsets for AMD as well but Nvidia stood head and shoulders above them with, wait for it, their drivers!
ATI always had great hardware on paper but half the time their drivers were crap, I'm guessing AMD kept the same guys writing the drivers.
If AMD wants the primary GPU market, they've got to work on their drivers and work on supplying demand for their cards, if they can't do those 2 things they'll keep losing.
 
for a decade straight, NVIDIA has done the GPU engineering and AMD/ATI has cloned and patched what they could in their drivers. NVIDIA has shown they know more about the hardware and the developer frustrations than their competition. Intel is always busy over charging / trying to take over the world. AMD (who like) is always trying to find new revenue streams and NVIDIA is always perfecting what they have to make using their products easier.

There is a reason Intel GPU's suck...they are extremely late to the market and the best and brightest have been bought up by NVIDIA and AMD.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom