Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [computerbase.de] DOOM + Vulkan Benchmarked.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[computerbase.de] DOOM + Vulkan Benchmarked. - Page 23

post #221 of 632
Decrease in average performance on my 980ti OC.
OpenGL averages 140fps drops to 90fps.
Vulkan averages 130fps drops to 110fps.
Crazy as coil wine on vulkan as well, opengl there was no coil wine at all and on other DX11 games very slightly noise.
post #222 of 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glottis View Post

but but nvidia doesn't have async compute gains, they said, DOOM not yet supporting async compute for nvidia doesn't matter, they said.


I am not disputing that Pascal can get a boost under light loads... never have. As for 3D Mark Time Fly... See concurrent vs parallel execution. All of the current games supporting Asynchronous Compute make use of parallel execution of compute and graphics tasks. 3D Mark Time Fly support concurrent. It is not the same Asynchronous Compute.

Concurrency fills in gaps which are in the execution pipeline. Parallelism executes two tasks at the same time.


Notice the context switch involved?

If 3D Mark Time fly were using Parallel executions then there would be synchronization points between the two contexts (Graphics and Compute). There would also be pipeline stalls on Maxwell GPUs. Both the pipeline stalls and the flush required for a synchronization point would add latency thus leading to Maxwell losing performance when running this variant of Asynchronous compute. We do not see Maxwell losing performance under 3D Mark Time Spy. We see a tiny performance boost. Thus 3D Mark Time Spy is not running Asynchronous Compute + graphics. You see parallel executions = Asynchronous Compute + Graphics. Concurrent execution = Asynchronous Compute. They are not the same thing.
Quote:
With DirectX 12, GPUs that support asynchronous compute can process work from multiple queues in parallel.
They can but that is not what 3D Mark is doing.
Quote:
In Time Spy, asynchronous compute is used heavily to overlap rendering passes to maximize GPU utilization. The asynchronous compute workload per frame varies between 10-20%. To observe the benefit on your own hardware, you can optionally choose to disable async compute using the Custom run settings in 3DMark Advanced and Professional Editions.

That is from 3DMark and can be found in the PC Per review. http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/3DMark-Time-Spy-Looking-DX12-Asynchronous-Compute-Performance

Yeah... even PCPer went a step further and attacked "AMD Fanboys" when in reality... PC Per do not even know the difference. Tech journalism.... rolleyes.gif

What is concurrency?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concurrent_computing
Quote:
Concurrent computing is a form of computing in which several computations are executed during overlapping time periods —concurrently— instead of sequentially (one completing before the next starts).

So yeah... 3D Mark does not use the same type of Asynchronous compute found in all of the recent game titles. Instead.. 3D Mark appears to be specifically tailored so as to show nVIDIA GPUs in the best light possible. It makes use of Context Switches (good because Pascal has that improved pre-emption) as well as the Dynamic Load Balancing on Maxwell through the use of concurrent rather than parallel Asynchronous compute tasks. If parallelism was used then we would see Maxwell taking a performance hit under Time Fly as admitted by nVIDIA in their GTX 1080 white paper and as we have seen from AotS.



GCN can handle these tasks but performs even better when Parallelism is thrown in as seen in the Doom Vulkan results. How? By reducing the per Frame latency through the parallel executions of Graphics and Compute Tasks. A reduction in the per-frame latency means that each frame takes less time to execute and process. The net result is a higher frame rate. 3DMark lacks this. AotS makes use of both parallelism and concurrency... as does Doom with the new Vulkan patch. See below...


If 3D Mark Time Fly had implemented a separate path and enabled both concurrency and parallelism for the FuryX... it would have caught up to the GTX 1070. No joke.

If both AMD and nVIDIA are running the same code then Pascal would either gain a tiny bit or even lose performance. This is why Bethesda did not enable the Asynchronous Compute + Graphics from the AMD path for Pascal. Instead... Pascal will get its own optimized path. They will also call it Asynchronous Compute... people will think it is the same thing when in reality... two completely different things are happening behind the scene.

See why understanding what is actually happening behind the scenes is important rather than just looking at numbers? Not all Asynchronous Compute implementations are equal. You would do well to take note of this.

Where are the tech journalists these days?
Edited by Mahigan - 7/15/16 at 8:56pm
Kn0wledge
(20 items)
 
Pati3nce
(14 items)
 
Wisd0m
(10 items)
 
Reply
Kn0wledge
(20 items)
 
Pati3nce
(14 items)
 
Wisd0m
(10 items)
 
Reply
post #223 of 632
NvidiaMark once again.
post #224 of 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post



Where are the tech journalists these days?
Bought out by big bad boyz (intl/nvda) to slack, so they can con many peoples.
post #225 of 632
Thread Starter 
I am very underwhelmed by this GPU cycle. Honestly, new memory,new node,new architecture - these things had my hopes up for something different. What it turns out is that nVidia is yet again staying in the way of innovation (to make more money, who can blame them) with their Pascal shenanigans, especially after seeing Mahigan's Time Spy posts. And on the other hand is AMD that might have the better hardware, but you'd be a fool to buy them when the market is controlled by nV. I really want to buy a Vega, but I know that the Titan will be likely faster. This is like an exact repeat of the Maxwell/Fiji generation. I am not going to buy a Pascal (Maxwell v3) regardless of its performance when I know that it will be times more obsolete than Maxwell is now when Volta hits. If I go with a Vega then I'll have to deal with nVidia strong arming the market and it would be just as obsolete (having features it can't make use of) as Fiji was... Really sad, imo.
Snappy
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790K 1.428V 4900MHz GA-Z97X-Gaming G1 WIFI-BK Sapphire R9 Fury X Corsair CMD16GX3M4A2133C9 Dominator Platinum 16... 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
Sandisk Extreme Pro 240GB Corsair H110i GT Seasonic Platinum SS-760XP2 Cooler Master Storm Stryker 
MouseMouse Pad
Razer Mamba 4G 2012 Edition Genesis Soft Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
Snappy
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790K 1.428V 4900MHz GA-Z97X-Gaming G1 WIFI-BK Sapphire R9 Fury X Corsair CMD16GX3M4A2133C9 Dominator Platinum 16... 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
Sandisk Extreme Pro 240GB Corsair H110i GT Seasonic Platinum SS-760XP2 Cooler Master Storm Stryker 
MouseMouse Pad
Razer Mamba 4G 2012 Edition Genesis Soft Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
post #226 of 632
DF did another video, now mostly about Fury X at 4k with some discussion:
Pretty impressive to sustain 50 to 60 FPS at 4K for Fury X on Ultra. 1070, as little has been in the video, gains nothing so far and under Vulkan the V-sync cannot be disabled for it.
Fluffy
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1700 MSI B350 Tomahawk ASUS Strix R9 380x Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Seagate SSHD 2TB Kingston SSD HyperX Fury 120GB LG DRW AMD Wraith Spire 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 10 64-bit Home AOC AGON AG241QX Corsair CS650M Fractal Design Define R4 
  hide details  
Reply
Fluffy
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1700 MSI B350 Tomahawk ASUS Strix R9 380x Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Seagate SSHD 2TB Kingston SSD HyperX Fury 120GB LG DRW AMD Wraith Spire 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 10 64-bit Home AOC AGON AG241QX Corsair CS650M Fractal Design Define R4 
  hide details  
Reply
post #227 of 632
No need to upload my video then.
post #228 of 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomdude View Post

I am very underwhelmed by this GPU cycle. Honestly, new memory,new node,new architecture - these things had my hopes up for something different. What it turns out is that nVidia is yet again staying in the way of innovation (to make more money, who can blame them) with their Pascal shenanigans, especially after seeing Mahigan's Time Spy posts. And on the other hand is AMD that might have the better hardware, but you'd be a fool to buy them when the market is controlled by nV. I really want to buy a Vega, but I know that the Titan will be likely faster. This is like an exact repeat of the Maxwell/Fiji generation. I am not going to buy a Pascal (Maxwell v3) regardless of its performance when I know that it will be times more obsolete than Maxwell is now when Volta hits. If I go with a Vega then I'll have to deal with nVidia strong arming the market and it would be just as obsolete (having features it can't make use of) as Fiji was... Really sad, imo.

Oh lord... if you like AMD and what they are doing.. support them. They need it.

But it's funny to me that people like you claim that Nvidia are holding technology back, having to debate which GPU vendor to buy from because on one hand.. AMD has innovative hardware, yet on the other hand Nvidia has the best performance.. It doesn't sound like they are holding technology back to me...

Blame AMD for not having an ultra high-end enthusiast card out there to battle the 1080 yet

If you like that AMD cards hold performance due to more forward thinking technologies, then support AMD for doing that. But I think it's time we stop blaming Nvidia for holding things back when right now AMD isn't even giving them any challenge on the high end.

Mid-range, I think the choice is fairly clear which company stands to provide the best performance/value ratio. AMD has always been good in that regard, and always been a more value oriented purchase for consumers in that range.

But all this strong arming that people say Nvidia is doing with their marketshare influence is no worse than the advantage AMD has with the GCN architecture being in all 3 current gen consoles and those coming in the foreseeable future. Nvidia has the right and duty to push it's platform and make it THE hardware to want to play games on. AMD has the same duty. They have the hardware, it's their job to make sure developers use it to it's fullest extent. There was a wait, but now things are starting to come together for them. They've got much better APIs for their hardware, they have better drivers (seemingly) than before. They have their hardware in all game consoles. And now they have a newer architecture on the horizon.

However, after all that if you're still not convinced to buy from them (especially because the competition still has a faster GPU out) then you need to just drop the moral dilemma from the equation and buy what suits your needs and be happy with it.
My main PC
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700k Asus ROG Maximus VIII Gene Nvidia GTX 1080Ti G.Skill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOSKeyboardPower
Samsung 850 EVO  Windows 10 Razer Blackwidow Chroma EVGA Supernova 1300w 
  hide details  
Reply
My main PC
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700k Asus ROG Maximus VIII Gene Nvidia GTX 1080Ti G.Skill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOSKeyboardPower
Samsung 850 EVO  Windows 10 Razer Blackwidow Chroma EVGA Supernova 1300w 
  hide details  
Reply
post #229 of 632
Quote:
1070, as little has been in the video, gains nothing so far and under Vulkan the V-sync cannot be disabled for it.
dunno about 1070, bur neither of those is true for my G1 1080

there is a slight increase in avg fps, and a decent one in min fps

Vsync can absolutely be disabled with Vulkan, Vsync line in Options says Off and my fps counter isnt 60, but up to 200 fps, as it should be
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
post #230 of 632
Fury x 27% faster than the 1070 in the first scene in the Eurogamer video above using vulcan

Impressive
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Game News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [computerbase.de] DOOM + Vulkan Benchmarked.