Since the release of the Radeon Crimson Software Driver 16.9.2, it seems that AMD may have disabled DirectX 12 Asynchronous Compute technology on graphics cards that run first-generation Graphics CoreNext (GCN) architecture, despite the hardware supposedly being able to Aync Compute.
While AMD has blamed developers for disabling Async Compute on GCN 1.0 architecture - 1.1 and above retains Async Compute utilisation - with titles like Total War: Warhammer and Rise of the Tomb Raider, users of the Beyond3D forum - and this angry redditor - have determined that the problem stems from AMD's very own drivers, starting with 16.9.2.
The results are far from conclusive; the test is not a benchmark, and was only conducted on one game. However, it does tally with a number of anecdotal reports.
Then say it officially.. Don't blame developers if you're then one who's done it.
I'm not sure what AMD would have to gain by doing it though.. It's not like those cards would threaten their newer lineup, it doesn't really make sense..
Need a bit more info, but pitch forks at the ready i guess.
Quote:
AMD disable Async compute on old GCN architecture, making artificialy new GCN architecture shiny.
That reddit user after 1 year of inactivity owning a gtx960, posts about his findings on a 280x, yeah sure...
I'm not doubting that it's broken, it's just that the timing is interesting.
Now watch how it becomes the most important feature ever.
Honestly i believe it will be fixed on tomorrows big update, if not ? well shame on your amd. although it never really made huge difference on gcn1 cuz only 2 ACEs.
Sorry, but didn't it bring forth more performance only in the enthusiast series gpus?
For instance, Tonga gpus were pretty much indistinguishable whether asynchronous shaders was on, or off.
Sorry, but didn't it bring forth more performance only in the enthusiast series gpus?
For instance, Tonga gpus were pretty much indistinguishable whether asynchronous shaders was on, or off.
For now, I'll just address the part where "AMD blames Devs" lol. A user in AMD support forum asks why a game no longer has Async on games like ROTR to which the AMD rep replies that he should ask the dev and posts a snippit from their website that shows they will support Async compute in the game for AMD GCN 1.1+
I'm lost, how is this a problem created by AMD and AMD is just blaming others? I'm legitimately confused by this assumption...
Just keep in mind there is no real proof AMD is actually disabling features at this point, not from the bit of info posted in OP and the sources I can find linked from there. So we should likely take a wait and see approach to this and simply ask AMD for a clarified statement. Even the "AMD blames Devs" thing is pretty sad "journalism" thats baseless and silly. But hey, it gets page clicks and ad revenue so who cares about truths?
If it were Nvidia, you would be supporting G-Sync. Compatibility is exclusive, but the standard is uniform. Same here. Fewer gpus supported, but less variance between support levels. I would prefer AMD to highlight it better. There is a clear benefit to weak laptop cpus and super desktop gpus, however there is far less distinguishable benefit to everything in between.
PS: For instance in this test, triple-core laptop processors @2.0GHz would potentially be faster than quad-core desktop processors @4.4 GHz! Yet again, the tool is in the wrong hands. AMD doesn't have a bone to contend in the performance laptop segment, nor in the enthusiast gpu segment.
Truish, GCN 1 was 11_1, 2 12_0, and 3/4 12_1. GCN 1 does not support the majority of DX12 and was not a full implementation of the ACEs. Those were fully implemented in GCN 2 with the GCP and SE that separated functions and added more cache, and controllers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcn77
GCN 1.0 is past anyway. Asynchronous shaders take +2048 shaders in order to differentiate on its own.
True to an extent, the first generation GCN card was released 5 years ago (7970), but the last ones released 3 months ago for OEM cards (R5/R7 4xx cards) and one year for retail cards (R7 370/370x).
I always thought nvidia products seemed 5fps slower when a new card came
Like all optimization that happened during it's life cycle was then removed to make the new card look better but to not make it slower than the launch reviews
In that case I can report Return of the Tomb Raider as well, since it avoids complicated asynchronous shader stuff too.
Kidding:
Quote:
As in AotS, the Glacier engine uses DirectX 12 to reduce the API overheads and Async Compute to accelerate the GPU limit. Unfortunately, the function in Hitman can not switch off separately.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Tomb raider doesn't have async as you said. So why post benchmarks of it to prove async does nothing for 7970?
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Tomb raider doesn't have async as you said. So why post benchmarks of it to prove async does nothing for 7970?
Please compare that with 380. Async still isn't doing much < that is my point.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
Overclock.net
27.8M posts
541.2K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to overclocking enthusiasts and testing the limits of computing. Come join the discussion about computing, builds, collections, displays, models, styles, scales, specifications, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!