Originally Posted by degenn
That's not really what he's doing.
Is that really how you interpreted his statement? That all he was getting at is Nvidia fanboys are hard done by?
You know what....? Nevermind, I concede... you guys win.
No worries, it has been this way here for years. Extreme and blind bias towards a vendor is nothing new, at least not in the 20+ years I have been doing this crap. I find it entertaining that I can quote AMD themselves, literally put it right in the forum. Yet they get turned into my words, and it is OK for AMD to say them..."because".
We, as a community, literally have AMD making false claims, or rather outright lying again, about ASC. They are pushing it as their "unique" and "exclusive" feature, when that isn't even true. Hell, even everyone in here is in agreement with ASC not being exclusive to them.
Yet people want to get mad at me for pointing out what they agree on? Interesting.
If AMD wants to play the "unique" feature card, then they get to play that card and must deal with the standards that come with it. If they can have a unique feature, so can Nvidia - regardless of how it is being done. If having a unique feature is OK for one, then it must be for the other.
After all, I am not the one claiming uniqueness here, it is AMD.
Originally Posted by Themisseble
So nvidia fanboys want to convince normal users that async shaders are black boxed just like gameworks, ...physx.
I alway though that nvidia cannot run async because hardware doesnt support it and AMD GPU cant run phsyx, because software doesnt allow it.
And also phsyx and async shaders are very different things, I am right?
If you actually read a damn thing, you would have known what you think is happening, isn't. No one said anything about Nvidia being black boxed.
Try and keep up, it is only a few paragraphs you need to read and comprehend.EDIT:
Simplified and brief (consumer) history on compute.....
Years ago Nvidia was compute heavy, and AMD wasn't. Then the world/usage/market shifted, Nvidia went away from compute. Around this time AMD went into compute with their hardware. Think back to the AMD mining days. Now, in the time that Nvidia went away, they also (through various events) gained a massive marketshare, now North of 80%.
Enter DX 12, and compute. We still currently don't know what roll it is going to play in the consumer space, it is all speculation. However, as it sits right now...
- Nvidia hardware doesn't have the hardware for ASC support, and thus is being emulated via drivers.
- AMD has boat loads of support for it.
- Who knows about Pascal.
We could easily see a period, if DX 12 and ASC really took off, where AMD is the dominate performer in scenarios that use it. Until Volta from Nvidia comes along. Why? Well, it could be possible that Pascal was too far into development to turn around to focus back on supporting ASC.
Now, let's say Pascal just sucks at it. The new question becomes "Will developers spend the resources to develop for a feature ~20% of users can use?"
Even if it is "better", will they sink that resource in the face of the 80%?
Only the developers can answer that. If it is difficult and costly to have in their product, and only 20% of the user base supports it, they won't do it. If it is easily understood and implemented, it could be part of the push to get AMD/RTG off the ground again.Edited by PostalTwinkie - 2/11/16 at 11:16am