Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Hilarious posts in this thread.
ASync DOESN'T MATTER if developers don't implement it
Compute Shaders DON'T MATTER if developers don't implement it
Phys-X DOESN'T MATTER if developers don't implement it
DX12 performance DOESN'T MATTER if developers don't implement it
I could go on and on.
Right now AT THIS TIME we have one single game that uses A-Sync IN THIS FORM (there are many forms of Asynchronous workload options within the DX12 API) so basing assumptions about future performance based on one implementation this early in an API's life is a bit hasty.
Another thing that should be mentioned is this talk of ASync is a red herring since there are other features (RoV, Conservative Rasterization, etc.) which AMD doesn't support or doesn't optimize for. If those are implemented in a game, what would be said?
In the end it all comes down to how (or if) developers choose to utilize these tools. Some will, some won't.
Asynchronous Shaders matter - every major console game of 2016, enough for you?
Compute Shaders you say? - almost all games released since summer 2015 has had GCN in the lead, I'm talking about the entire product stack has had GCN beating Nvidia handily.
Conservative Rasterization - where is this mysterious feature? Why would any dev bother with the implementation if it will never work on consoles? How can anyone compare AMD's lack in this feature to Nvidia's lie about Asynchronous Compute?
Nvidia claimed that Maxwell supports asynchronous compute - seeing as though many prominent devs are talking about this feature, it may serve your readers to investigate what is talking Nvidia so long with respect to this fundamental feature of DX12/Vulkan.
If the "Journalists" of HardwareCanucks lack the knowledge about GPU architectures, maybe they can hire an OCN member to consult them on the article - maybe: @MahiganEdited by MikeDuffy - 6/3/16 at 1:52pm