Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Various] Futuremark Releases 3DMark Time Spy DirectX 12 Benchmark
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Various] Futuremark Releases 3DMark Time Spy DirectX 12 Benchmark - Page 58

post #571 of 772
Quote:
Yes, AMD prefers not to have one of its most toted features used so it can lose in the most famous benchmark of all. I'm completely sure of it.

AMD is smart enough to balance the need for a vendor test that isn't seen as catering to any single company against the desire to have games and benchmarks that relentlessly cater to its own architectures. I'm certain AMD would prefer to be in charge of 100% of the GPU market with all games written explicitly for its own cards. But since real life isn't a fairy tale and reviewers need tests that run well on many architectures, nobody gets everything they want.

No one at AMD has represented to me that they have a problem with Time Spy or that any kind of issue has cropped up in their testing. Yes, that should tell you something.
post #572 of 772
Nice of you to ask. But until I . Me . This guy here reading It ,doesn't hold anything to me that you asked. I don't know you lol. At all.

"AMD, NVIDIA and Intel all have access to our source code and have participated in the development. Ask them if you don't believe me."

This is what I'm asking about btw. Doesn't matter to me that they didn't want it separated. It's the simple fact that this tool isn't using what AMD has been pushing for over a year. But jumps on the Nvidia band wagon. And the bench is supposed to what again? Use what's available today you said ? Lol I didn't know Nvidia was pushing Dx12 as hard as AMD had been. And for as long. Lol
post #573 of 772
This ! Thank you!
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigiHound View Post

AMD is smart enough to balance the need for a vendor test that isn't seen as catering to any single company against the desire to have games and benchmarks that relentlessly cater to its own architectures. I'm certain AMD would prefer to be in charge of 100% of the GPU market with all games written explicitly for its own cards. But since real life isn't a fairy tale and reviewers need tests that run well on many architectures, nobody gets everything they want.

No one at AMD has represented to me that they have a problem with Time Spy or that any kind of issue has cropped up in their testing. Yes, that should tell you something.

This hasn't a thing to do with fairytales nor does this run well on many architectures lol.
post #574 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigiHound View Post

AMD is smart enough to balance the need for a vendor test that isn't seen as catering to any single company against the desire to have games and benchmarks that relentlessly cater to its own architectures. I'm certain AMD would prefer to be in charge of 100% of the GPU market with all games written explicitly for its own cards. But since real life isn't a fairy tale and reviewers need tests that run well on many architectures, nobody gets everything they want.

No one at AMD has represented to me that they have a problem with Time Spy or that any kind of issue has cropped up in their testing. Yes, that should tell you something.

Who are you?
Big Timmah
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 5 1600 Asrock x370 Killer SLI/AC Sapphire Radeon Nitro Fury CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 16GB 3200mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
PNY 480GB SSD PH-TC12DX Black Windows 10 Pro LG 29inch Ultrawide 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair K70 Thermaltake SMART M Series 850W NZXT S340 White Steel ATX Mid Tower Case Wireless Logitech thing 
Mouse Pad
With a supple pad  
  hide details  
Reply
Big Timmah
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 5 1600 Asrock x370 Killer SLI/AC Sapphire Radeon Nitro Fury CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 16GB 3200mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
PNY 480GB SSD PH-TC12DX Black Windows 10 Pro LG 29inch Ultrawide 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair K70 Thermaltake SMART M Series 850W NZXT S340 White Steel ATX Mid Tower Case Wireless Logitech thing 
Mouse Pad
With a supple pad  
  hide details  
Reply
post #575 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigiHound View Post

Asynchronous compute is not a mandatory component of the DirectX 12 specification. It's ONE type of computational engine that DX12 supports. It's not the only type and it's not the sole qualifier that determines whether or not a benchmark is "really" DX12. In fact, you're committing the same error that led people to insist that DX11 benchmarks weren't "real" benchmarks if they didn't include huge amounts of tessellation (which played to the strengths of Nvidia's Fermi).

AMD has full access to Futuremark's source code. They have not raised the alarm. They have not issued press releases or whitepapers arguing against the way Futuremark implemented Time Spy. You can trust that, because AMD has a long and illustrious history of discussing why certain benchmarks aren't a fair way to evaluate the performance of its hardware. From Sysmark 2002 to the present day, when AMD has a problem with a major industry test, it makes that problem public.

Futuremark wrote a benchmark in line with the DX12 specification that's in-use today. Given the way that its past tests have evolved, it will probably patch that benchmark in the future to take advantage of higher feature levels when those feature levels are accurately reflected in other shipping titles. Choosing to emphasize compatibility over maximum feature level presentation expands the test base for DX12 graphics testing -- and yes, as a company that builds benchmarks that Intel, AMD, and NV use internally for product profiling, they have an interest in ensuring that their programs can be used to qualify current-generation products.

Also, I'd like to point out that AMD GPUs can't run a true Feature Level 12_1 at this point without falling back to 12_0 features in some areas. Each of the three companies has a different degree of support for DX12 features right now, and the fighting over feature levels reflects a continued lack of understanding among users regarding what it means to support DX12. That's understandable -- this **** is incredibly complex and often poorly understood, even by the press. But a lack of understanding by users, however understandable, doesn't translate into ethical violations by Futuremark.

So can we ever expect true, full DX12 compliant GPU's? That's not the case we have right now is what I'm getting out of this, and that fighting over feature levels seems to also happen not just between users.
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 #576 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigiHound View Post

But a lack of understanding by users, however understandable, doesn't translate into ethical violations by Futuremark.

Condescensions aside to those who do understand the issue, an ethical violation isn't even relevant. The fact is that this benchmark will be used in marketing strategies and it does not represent any recommended render strategy for any existing or future game or game engine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigiHound View Post

No one at AMD has represented to me that they have a problem with Time Spy or that any kind of issue has cropped up in their testing. Yes, that should tell you something.

Honest question here, but why should it?
Parasite
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 4770K @ 4.7GHz Z87 MPOWER (MS-7818) Sapphire Radeon 290x @1100/1500 EVGA 1080Ti SC2 Hybrid 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
G.SKILL 2133 Samsung 850 Pro Caviar Black Corsair H100 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Corsair HG10 Corsair H60 Windows 7 x64 Sony XBR65X850B 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
CMSTORM Quickfire XT Corsair AX1200i Antec P280 Logitec G700 
Mouse PadAudio
Black, came with my NeXTcube 25 years ago. Sound Blaster Recon 3D PCIe 
  hide details  
Reply
Parasite
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 4770K @ 4.7GHz Z87 MPOWER (MS-7818) Sapphire Radeon 290x @1100/1500 EVGA 1080Ti SC2 Hybrid 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
G.SKILL 2133 Samsung 850 Pro Caviar Black Corsair H100 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Corsair HG10 Corsair H60 Windows 7 x64 Sony XBR65X850B 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
CMSTORM Quickfire XT Corsair AX1200i Antec P280 Logitec G700 
Mouse PadAudio
Black, came with my NeXTcube 25 years ago. Sound Blaster Recon 3D PCIe 
  hide details  
Reply
post #577 of 772
I'm with this guy
post #578 of 772
I did a side by side of the EVGA 1070 SC & 1080 FTW. I like this bench quite a bit.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/28455/spy/52517
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigiHound View Post

Asynchronous compute is not a mandatory component of the DirectX 12 specification. It's ONE type of computational engine that DX12 supports. It's not the only type and it's not the sole qualifier that determines whether or not a benchmark is "really" DX12. In fact, you're committing the same error that led people to insist that DX11 benchmarks weren't "real" benchmarks if they didn't include huge amounts of tessellation (which played to the strengths of Nvidia's Fermi).

This about sums it up after reading through troves of these complaints.
In a typical Futuremark way, I'm sure they'll release another version of the benchmark either to address concerns or with a more feature-specific test.
Edited by OmegaNemesis28 - 7/19/16 at 11:03am
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #579 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMJarnis View Post

Because you guys dropped a 50-page threadnaught here, Reddit has a 200+ post threadnaught and Steam forums have another massive blob of back-and-forth. And because we stand behind our product.

You can argue as to the quality of the contents of these thread, but press is now asking us "so, what are these guys talking about, we can't make head or tails of this?". So we want to give a clear and detailed explanation. Primarily for the benefit of the press, that might otherwise start printing these unfounded accusations as facts.

Wow! I thought I had heard it all, but its rare to see a company spokesperson deliberately implicate the company, that purportedly claims "neutrality" in its benchmarks, in devising a controversial scheme to sway purchase decisions as its primary motivation. When making a purchase decision, I will be certain to fully discount any 3D mark benchmarks masquerading as advertisements for any vendor's product; whether Nvidia or AMD.
Simplicity
(11 items)
 
Apotheosis
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4770k Asus Z87 Pro TBD Corsair Vengeance (2x8GB) DDR3 1600 RAM 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro Dell U2713HM Alienware TactX gaming Seasonic 850W Gold  
CaseMouse
Cooler Master HAF XB Alienware TactX premium mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
Simplicity
(11 items)
 
Apotheosis
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4770k Asus Z87 Pro TBD Corsair Vengeance (2x8GB) DDR3 1600 RAM 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro Dell U2713HM Alienware TactX gaming Seasonic 850W Gold  
CaseMouse
Cooler Master HAF XB Alienware TactX premium mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
post #580 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by GorillaSceptre View Post

"educated purchasing decisions".. Thanks Time Spy, based on your guidance i have come to the conclusion (based on the benchmark scores) that the 970 will essentially be equal to the 300 series cards in DX12/Vulkan titles. thumb.gif

If it turns out that Maxwell cards end up getting slaughtered in the future when real DX12 titles drop, I'm sure 3DMark will accept accountability? rolleyes.gif

We heard it here, 3DMark is the real deal, not those actual games. Sorry, but i find it hard to believe AMD is happy for you guys to market yourselves as the DX12 performance standard, when you aren't taking advantage of the things they've been marketing for over a year..

+1
Simplicity
(11 items)
 
Apotheosis
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4770k Asus Z87 Pro TBD Corsair Vengeance (2x8GB) DDR3 1600 RAM 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro Dell U2713HM Alienware TactX gaming Seasonic 850W Gold  
CaseMouse
Cooler Master HAF XB Alienware TactX premium mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
Simplicity
(11 items)
 
Apotheosis
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4770k Asus Z87 Pro TBD Corsair Vengeance (2x8GB) DDR3 1600 RAM 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro Dell U2713HM Alienware TactX gaming Seasonic 850W Gold  
CaseMouse
Cooler Master HAF XB Alienware TactX premium mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Various] Futuremark Releases 3DMark Time Spy DirectX 12 Benchmark