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 62

post #611 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Semel View Post

FMJarnis (3dmark):
>>>
nuff said, really.
You got owned, Jarnis. By nvidia and AMD themselves biggrin.gif

No.. just... no.
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 #612 of 772
You would thing a benchmark only application would implement GPU specific paths. Does it have to do with time? You only have to add support of the cards that benefit from it and new upcoming architectures? What else does futuremark have to do anyways.
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AVEXIR Blitz 1.1 16GB DDR3-2400MHz CL10 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  hide details  
Reply
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AVEXIR Blitz 1.1 16GB DDR3-2400MHz CL10 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  hide details  
Reply
post #613 of 772
You all are extremely....passionate. Best way I can represent this thread without sounding insulting. Who needs games or benchmarks when you have such great entertainment just on here?
On topic: I tend to believe FM in wanting to put out the most unbiased product they can and also believe Jarvis to be speaking honestly. That doesn't mean the product ended up being what they intended but there have been no complaints from either GPU/CPU manufacturer, not even a whisper. We know from past experience that if something was coded to favor one company in an unfair manner that it would be headlined the day after the bench was released. In the past, AMD has never had a problem voicing their feelings if they find out they have been "cheated" or made to look unfavorable when they could have been much better if they had added such and such feature. They have had ample time and a massive amount of outrage on forums to get their attention and do a press release or even a forum post if they felt the way some do on here. This goes for Nvidia/Intel as well. Any of these companies would have already made some type of release/comment, anything, if they thought or knew they were not being fairly treated in a program that claims unbiased results.
I'm thinking back to the Bulldozer pre-release and later the train wreck of the release. Much like it, the hype and outrage before release was started and propagated mostly by forum posts not the company or any of their rep's. Maybe not the best comparison but I truly believe if there was a problem, AMD would have acted already. FM is made up of 5 people Jarvis said. I think you all are putting a lot of pressure and blame on a company that has very limited resources yet still put out a product that hasn't sparked even an iota of discontent from the GPU manufactures as of yet. I think they at least deserve some patience and understanding instead of hate filled shouts of, yet to be found issues if there are any. If none of the companies feel the need to respond in some form, that should put this whole issue to rest imo. People are free to investigate themselves of course but until some concrete data comes out from a diligent forum member that tracks down something that 100% can't be disregarded OR one of the manufactures releases something, this issue is dead to me.
post #614 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

You would thing a benchmark only application would implement GPU specific paths. Does it have to do with time? You only have to add support of the cards that benefit from it and new upcoming architectures? What else does futuremark have to do anyways.

Let's see... at the moment we're working on

- An update to 3DMark (UI fixes sorting out some rare issues with odd configurations - UI changes only, no changes to any tests)
- PCMark 10
- VRMark
- API overhead for Vulkan
- Unannounced product 1
- Unannounced product 2

plus some R&D for far future things.

We clearly described why we do not do vendor-specific paths. You can go read up the statement again if you missed it.
post #615 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMJarnis View Post

Let's see... at the moment we're working on

- An update to 3DMark (UI fixes sorting out some rare issues with odd configurations - UI changes only, no changes to any tests)
- PCMark 10
- VRMark
- API overhead for Vulkan
- Unannounced product 1
- Unannounced product 2

plus some R&D for far future things.

We clearly described why we do not do vendor-specific paths. You can go read up the statement again if you missed it.

I understand you position. I just thing with the way you guys did DX12 it does not really offer much over DX11 unless you do vendor specific paths. DX12 if not the low level we want unless you use specific feature of each GPU architecture. Generic benchmark just to get a score with no real mining offer nothing new compare to what is already out there. Also just buy looking at the scenes in Time Spy it does not screen DX12 benchmark to me. Your older stuff in the space and more open ares with actual AI would been better. I hope you are working on a true DX12 benchmark.
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AVEXIR Blitz 1.1 16GB DDR3-2400MHz CL10 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  hide details  
Reply
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AVEXIR Blitz 1.1 16GB DDR3-2400MHz CL10 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  hide details  
Reply
post #616 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMJarnis View Post

Let's see... at the moment we're working on

- An update to 3DMark (UI fixes sorting out some rare issues with odd configurations - UI changes only, no changes to any tests)
- PCMark 10
- VRMark
- API overhead for Vulkan
- Unannounced product 1 -- AMDMark
- Unannounced product 2 -- nVidiaMark

plus some R&D for far future things.

We clearly described why we do not do vendor-specific paths. You can go read up the statement again if you missed it.

yessir.gifbiggrin.gif

sorry I had to
post #617 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnek View Post

yessir.gifbiggrin.gif

sorry I had to

Nah :

NvidiaMark
NeutralMark - Paxwell Edition
Workstation
(4 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsMonitor
Xeon E5-2690 Supermicro 2011 Nvidia GP100/ Vega FE Dell ultrasharp 4k 
  hide details  
Reply
Workstation
(4 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsMonitor
Xeon E5-2690 Supermicro 2011 Nvidia GP100/ Vega FE Dell ultrasharp 4k 
  hide details  
Reply
post #618 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

I understand you position. I just thing with the way you guys did DX12 it does not really offer much over DX11 unless you do vendor specific paths. DX12 if not the low level we want unless you use specific feature of each GPU architecture. Generic benchmark just to get a score with no real mining offer nothing new compare to what is already out there. Also just buy looking at the scenes in Time Spy it does not screen DX12 benchmark to me. Your older stuff in the space and more open ares with actual AI would been better. I hope you are working on a true DX12 benchmark.

The guy already said why they don't do it. If they were using vendor specific paths, then they'd have to make paths for everything. Fermi, Kepler, Maxwell, Pascal and GCN 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. As well as future generation GPUs. TimeSpy is a FL11 DX12 based benchmark. Unless of course you don't think that GCN 1.0 or Fermi or Kepler should work in this benchmark? Besides that they already said that there would be a FL12 benchmark in the future that will make better use of vendor specific paths and features. It doesn't make this any less of a DX12 benchmark though.

DX12 CAN be a low level API for developers that have the resources to do it. It still offers reduced overhead and has it's benefits over DX11.
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 #619 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

I understand you position. I just thing with the way you guys did DX12 it does not really offer much over DX11 unless you do vendor specific paths. DX12 if not the low level we want unless you use specific feature of each GPU architecture. Generic benchmark just to get a score with no real mining offer nothing new compare to what is already out there. Also just buy looking at the scenes in Time Spy it does not screen DX12 benchmark to me. Your older stuff in the space and more open ares with actual AI would been better. I hope you are working on a true DX12 benchmark.

Really? Time Spy would've crushed both AMD and Nvidia GPUs if they wrote it using DX11, just from the CPU overhead. AMD's gains in particular from switching to a leaner multi-threaded submission model is HUGE. There's also a clear benefit to GCN 1.x and Pascal from the usage of multiple queues, and with the async queue enabled Fiji gains 15%!

The drama comes from a camp of people very upset that FM didn't use intrinsic shaders for AMD, or that they didn't just run AOTS in a wrapper. There's also another group that's confusing Doom's gains from async compute with gains from intrinsic shaders, but that's whole 'nother story.
post #620 of 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remij View Post

The guy already said why they don't do it. If they were using vendor specific paths, then they'd have to make paths for everything. Fermi, Kepler, Maxwell, Pascal and GCN 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. As well as future generation GPUs. TimeSpy is a FL11 DX12 based benchmark. Unless of course you don't think that GCN 1.0 or Fermi or Kepler should work in this benchmark? Besides that they already said that there would be a FL12 benchmark in the future that will make better use of vendor specific paths and features. It doesn't make this any less of a DX12 benchmark though.

DX12 CAN be a low level API for developers that have the resources to do it. It still offers reduced overhead and has it's benefits over DX11.

Are you sure you need GPU specific path for GCN 1.0 though 1.4? I am pretty sure it only requires one path. Nvidia in the other hand needs 3 right now. Does Fermi even do DX12?
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AVEXIR Blitz 1.1 16GB DDR3-2400MHz CL10 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  hide details  
Reply
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AVEXIR Blitz 1.1 16GB DDR3-2400MHz CL10 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  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