New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Asmodian

It is not just a matter of optimization! Hardware can also be better suited to different graphics engines. I don't understand how you can ignore this. Maybe this is the result of review sites over simplifying the architectures so you think there aren't any real important differences between them. My points were meant more generally, there are architectural differences between the GPUs and those differences have different impacts on different graphics loads. I don't...
You miss my point. There are different loads which run better or worse on different architectures for a myriad of reasons. Surely you don't think GCN and Kepler are almost identical architectures?
That is a completely ridiculous statement. Of course there could be programs which would run at massively different speeds on different architectures. Under no circumstances?The release date of the GPU is not important, Kepler is Kepler, the 680 and 780 Ti mostly share the same balance of resources and functional units. If a new graphics engine uses something Kepler is pretty bad at but Maxwell is pretty good at the relative performance of Kepler would be expected to be...
Yes I can explain it. Kepler was very optimized for older games but compared to GCN, Maxwell, or Pascal its architecture isn't well optimized for newer games. It doesn't have to be a lack of software optimization, a hardware feature probably bottlenecks when running newer game engines that wasn't a bottleneck with older engines.
Are you sure? Everything I saw when the 390X came out was that it was identical to a 8GB 290X at the same clocks, or at least so similar it was hard to accurately measure the difference if there was one.
Sorry, I should have made it clearer but I agree with you completely, except for the 'HDR like' comment. At this point everything is 'HDR like' or nothing is. No one is particularly strict about how HDR works, nothing I have seen of Freesync 2 has solid specs around how HDR tone mapping works or exactly what the minimum peak brightness and gamut are.Dolby Vision is probably the most strict specification but they are only strict in that they have to be the ones to...
BT.2020 has to be interpreted for every panel (10,000 nits anyone?) and there doesn't seem to be a good spec for how to do it. This is true of every HDR capable display and is why normal backlight displays call themselves HDR, they have a way of mapping HDR content to what they are capable of. Of course this mapping ends up creating SDR range content but because they don't look terrible when given HDR input they can call themselves HDR.is HDR10 really a complete spec? ...
HDR is only HDR if the dynamic range is high. With a normal backlight you cannot have the dynamic range in brightness be higher than a normal backlight.
It was the best option in 1985, why change?
1600 MHz?! That would be shocking, great if true but also truly shocking. The engineering samples at 1200 MHz and retail units at 1600 MHz would be a major improvement, that is 33% faster! This one has two different clock speeds too, 1000 MHz and 1200 MHz...
New Posts  All Forums: