Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › [Nvidia] Maxwell Moved to Legacy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Nvidia] Maxwell Moved to Legacy - Page 6

post #51 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by maarten12100 View Post

This is what makes you more of an Nvidia apologist then that other thing. redface.gif

AMD is like fine wine it ages well however I find wine utterly disgusting.
Nvidia is like lemon beer it doesn't age but when drank before that date it's good. (in terms of E-Peen)

Nah it's just that amd cards are not very well optimized out the gate at all, it takes them a while hence why you see decent gains over years. While nvidia comes out the gate very well optimized hence why there is no where near enough room for improvement.

On topic how ever, this sucks if you don't upgrade every gen nvidia does not care about you.
post #52 of 142
If you can get one for 150-200, it's still gonna be a great deal for DX11 games at 1080p. By now NVIDIA has probably optimized maxwell for dx11 as best as they can to net all those leads over AMD. Don't worry about no more mentioned optimizations in future games, because the arch is literally tapped out.
post #53 of 142
So no more performance improvements for Maxwell from now on.. rolleyes.gif

It's not the end of the world, Maxwell will still get fixes/critical updates, just nothing more than that..

Funny that the Titan X/ 980 Ti are just over a year old, disgraceful from a company with such a large software division.
post #54 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagle3092 View Post


The difference is they are still increasing the performance of older cards with improvements. Nvidia isnt.

I think it's more a matter of GCN having piss poor initial drivers that made Tahiti lose to the much smaller midrange GK104 and now performs like it should, 4 years after its release.

The same was also said about AMD when when they were on the outdated VLIW arch where 6970 competed against the GTX 580. By the time the 7970 released even the 560Ti 448 and GTX 480 beat it. Pretty sure that nowadays with support dropped for anything not GCN the 6970 is even slower than a 470, especially if you overclock them both. To put that in perspective, the GTX 480 competed with the 5870 and the GTX 470 with the 5850 less than 2 years prior to this happening. The difference between a GTX 480 and 5870 was also small initially.

It basically happened because Fermi was a new architecture that gained more from new driver releases (especially with newer iterations based on the same infrastructure) while AMD had a very old, outdated architecture (dating back to 2007) and switched to GCN.

I think we're seeing the same thing here. In Linux I still see improvements and bug fixes on this 470 from 2010 because there are actually things to fix there. Support is still relevant in these cases. Btw, the only reason the 400 series is still on that list is because the architecture still resembles the current cards somewhat. Most of the performance has been squeezed out of it however. New architectures just see more gains because optimizations were poor initially.
post #55 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlademaster01 View Post

I think it's more a matter of GCN having piss poor initial drivers that made Tahiti lose to the much smaller midrange GK104 and now performs like it should, 4 years after its release.

The same was also said about AMD when when they were on the outdated VLIW arch where 6970 competed against the GTX 580. By the time the 7970 released even the 560Ti 448 and GTX 480 beat it. Pretty sure that nowadays with support dropped for anything not GCN the 6970 is even slower than a 470, especially if you overclock them both. To put that in perspective, the GTX 480 competed with the 5870 and the GTX 470 with the 5850 less than 2 years prior to this happening. The difference between a GTX 480 and 5870 was also small initially.

It basically happened because Fermi was a new architecture that gained more from new driver releases (especially with newer iterations based on the same infrastructure) while AMD had a very old, outdated architecture (dating back to 2007) and switched to GCN.

I think we're seeing the same thing here. In Linux I still see improvements and bug fixes on this 470 from 2010 because there are actually things to fix there. Support is still relevant in these cases. Btw, the only reason the 400 series is still on that list is because the architecture still resembles the current cards somewhat. Most of the performance has been squeezed out of it however. New architectures just see more gains because optimizations were poor initially.
This is wrong. A couple of websites (alienbabel tech and HC) looked into this and the performance delta in the titles tested at that time remained pretty much the same. It's not a case of AMD reaching peak performance 4 years after release because the radeons are winning in new titles going forward not in old titles revisited. Radeons are not the late bloomers some want to paint them as, they are still being actively optimised for and are simply better suited going forward, than anything nvidia currently has out now.
post #56 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChevChelios View Post

the sky is falling redface.gif


http://www.geforce.com/drivers/results/105037
GeForce Game Ready Driver
Version 368.81 - WHQL
Release Date Thu Jul 14, 2016
Operating System Windows 10 64-bit
Language English (US)
File Size 343.87 MB
Quote:
Supported Products
GeForce 10 Series
GeForce GTX 1080, GeForce GTX 1070, GeForce GTX 1060
GeForce 900 Series
GeForce GTX TITAN X, GeForce GTX 980 Ti, GeForce GTX 980, GeForce GTX 970, GeForce GTX 960, GeForce GTX 950
GeForce 700 Series
GeForce GTX TITAN Z, GeForce GTX TITAN Black, GeForce GTX TITAN, GeForce GTX 780 Ti, GeForce GTX 780, GeForce GTX 770, GeForce GTX 760, GeForce GTX 760 Ti (OEM), GeForce GTX 750 Ti, GeForce GTX 750, GeForce GTX 745, GeForce GT 740, GeForce GT 730, GeForce GT 720, GeForce GT 710, GeForce GT 705
GeForce 600 Series
GeForce GTX 690, GeForce GTX 680, GeForce GTX 670, GeForce GTX 660 Ti, GeForce GTX 660, GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST, GeForce GTX 650 Ti, GeForce GTX 650, GeForce GTX 645, GeForce GT 645, GeForce GT 640, GeForce GT 635, GeForce GT 630, GeForce GT 620, GeForce GT 610, GeForce 605
GeForce 500 Series
GeForce GTX 590, GeForce GTX 580, GeForce GTX 570, GeForce GTX 560 Ti, GeForce GTX 560 SE, GeForce GTX 560, GeForce GTX 555, GeForce GTX 550 Ti, GeForce GT 545, GeForce GT 530, GeForce GT 520, GeForce 510
GeForce 400 Series
GeForce GTX 480, GeForce GTX 470, GeForce GTX 465, GeForce GTX 460 SE v2, GeForce GTX 460 SE, GeForce GTX 460, GeForce GTS 450, GeForce GT 440, GeForce GT 430, GeForce GT 420

Another one of your famously accurate posts rolleyes.gif. If you actually read the patch notes of the drivers, there is never any mention of improvement in older tier cards, but maybe, MAYBE a critical bug error in a game if it is still popular. So while you can copy and paste the "supported GPU" section, it doesn't mean a thing to those of us who are in that legacy bucket, including the $1k club Titan X owners. My Fermi 480 in another rig has not had any meaningful improvement from any driver since 2012, and my Kepler 670s have not had any noticeable or meaningful improvements since Maxwell's release.

The fact is AMD cards age much better than Nvidia, as nearly every recent benchmark on their aging hardware shows.
post #57 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlugSeven View Post

This is wrong. A couple of websites (alienbabel tech and HC) looked into this and the performance delta in the titles tested at that time remained pretty much the same.
I dont think none of those review are unbiased..
Q1 2015
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GTX_980_Matrix/28.html
Q3 2015
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_980_Ti_Lightning/23.html
Q3 2016
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1060/26.html
Edited by PontiacGTX - 7/29/16 at 3:57pm
post #58 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlugSeven View Post

This is wrong. A couple of websites (alienbabel tech and HC) looked into this and the performance delta in the titles tested at that time remained pretty much the same. It's not a case of AMD reaching peak performance 4 years after release because the radeons are winning in new titles going forward not in old titles revisited. Radeons are not the late bloomers some want to paint them as, they are still being actively optimised for and are simply better suited going forward, than anything nvidia currently has out now.

I don't see how what you said contradicts what I posted. It is now where it needs to be both in new and old titles. Of course that means it saw recent improvements.

4 years is also an exaggeration, but initial drivers were bad. The 7970 was ~15-20% faster than a 580 at launch for instance. AMD had to do a lot of work ironing out issues with the architecture. Even issues like frametime variance and dropping frames etc.

Can you pass me the articles you mentioned?
post #59 of 142
Quote:
If you actually read the patch notes of the drivers, there is never any mention of improvement in older tier cards
thats because those cards reached their peaks (or very nearly peaks) years ago, friend wink.gif
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 #60 of 142
To this day, AMD and nvidia pretty much rewrite shaders for plenty of DX11 games out there. There WILL be cases of brand new DX11 titles in need of driver level tweaking for both camps and as it seems, maxwell will not be having it.
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire RX Vega 64 reference Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire RX Vega 64 reference Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: NVIDIA
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › [Nvidia] Maxwell Moved to Legacy