Originally Posted by GorillaSceptre
It's not benefiting "end users" on PC because no games on PC have taken advantage of it yet, and the marketshare leader hasn't had support for it, so that hasn't exactly sped things up..
Look what console devs are achieving with Async, ND have pushed it further than anyone, afaik they are putting like 30% of their engine in compute with Uncharted 4.. While i don't expect Devs to get anywhere near them on PC, i would hope that some try to support the future of rendering techniques.. Otherwise what the hell is the point of buying the best hardware if most of it's potential is wasted? Not to be overly callus, but saying Async is only marketing focused and has no benefit is completely ridiculous.. Surprised that statement comes from a "journalist". But these days i guess i shouldn't be that surprised unfortunately..
It's laughable that the "under-powered" PS4 has put out a game (UC4) that looks nearly as good as the best PC games have to offer.. And it does it while costing $300 for the entire system. At this point I'm seriously considering rather picking up a PS Neo, instead of having to spend huge amounts of money on expensive GPU's while developers stick to an ancient API and have a bunch of people down play the future just because their preferred brand doesn't currently offer anything like the competition. This is not a short term thing, it's not going to make or break Nvidia, Volta will support it, i wonder what your stance on it will be then?
Asynchronous shading (or whatever Nvidias would be called) isn't exclusive to AMD, it's something devs have been wanting for years... And was one of the biggest design decisions Sony took with the PS4. But devs have also wanted something like Mantle/Vulkan for years too. Now they have all of them on PC and very few have put their money where their mouths are..
So much truth in this post that I couldn't agree more.
Do you seriously believe that those who oppose these tech improvements developers had been wanting since years, are the end users / customers ?
Suppose I am a customer who at least knows that buying something which is a superset will already work fine in all general load and if it encounters a load that requires some niche feature, it will again work absolutely fine because it has been designed to do so, no matter if that niche function is used 1 out of 10 time. Chances are I'll most definitely get the benefit of having a superset. There is no doubt that every customer wants this. I used to be an AMD CPU extremists or hardcore fanboy whatever you want to call until I saw fps dropped to ~28-35 in Skyrim with ~25 or more NPCs were fighting at some certain locations, so had happened with Crysis 1 in later levels(I think it was the tanks vs aliens one), my FX 8350 at 4.7GHz with 2400 MHz CL9 memory was struggling to get past ~25 fps and the 280X usage was ~40%. I HAD TO acknowledge that something was wrong with my system. And then I met the i3 and understood everything. I think I am not wrong when I say that a normal customer will always react same if he/she would go through what I had been in this certain situation, because he/she wasn't satisfied at first time. Now again "Do you seriously believe that those who oppose these tech improvements which developers had been wanting since years are the end users / customers ?" I believe you would have understood by now what I was implying, that who find himself/herself/themselves in danger where AMD has consoles, some porting compatibility due to identical architecture, experience in making low level vulcan/mantle/dx12, open sources Libraries/APIs,etc. In my worthless opinion, Bunch of people who down play the future just can't be one of those consumers because if they are consumers and they are here to know what is new in this so called newer hardware and ready to buy something new, why would a they already be sweating so much criticizing something again and again in the first place that hasn't launched yet ? It makes no sense.