Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [wccftech] AMD RX Vega 64 Outperforms NVIDIA GTX 1080 Ti By Up To 23% In DX12 Forza 7
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[wccftech] AMD RX Vega 64 Outperforms NVIDIA GTX 1080 Ti By Up To 23% In DX12 Forza 7 - Page 24

post #231 of 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoxile View Post

No, they wouldn't. Barely anyone is interested in GPUs right now much less large dedicated GPUs, much less buying RTG who has very little marketshare in any of the markets dGPUs are sold to.
the marketshare isnt related to the fact it can allow them to enter a market they arent selling anything, Intel Would probably take a chance if they could
Edited by PontiacGTX - 10/5/17 at 7:04am
post #232 of 497
That is odd, how does the TI lose @ 1080p and kill @ 4k.

The vega cards are even beaten by a 1070 @ 1440p.
post #233 of 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie2009 View Post

That is odd, how does the TI lose @ 1080p and kill @ 4k.

The vega cards are even beaten by a 1070 @ 1440p.

Something seriously screwed up in the driver profiles they've not fixed for figured out.
Since that was 17.8.1 Beta 6 and we are on 17.9.3 (what's that 2 drivers later??) it's going to take them a few more driver releases to get it sorted IMO.
The performance is there, apparently, but haven't quite harness the fully potential of the card yet.
That's why I say teething issues. Because these card were not designed for just 1080p. That's a given.
As we can see the RX56 won over the 1070 by 10 fps at 4K resolution. That's huge. So it looks like they are/have gotten to the RX56 for driver improvements,
FPS: RX56 75.3 fps vs 1070 65.2 fps @ 4k. Which is a virtual tie with the 1080 at 75.4 fps

The RX64, 580, Fury, etc. still need "driver improvements"
But curious enough the 99th %tile clearly has the RX64 in the lead at 4K which clearly tells me something minor needs to be addressed in the drivers for the Vega cards.
99th %tile: RX64 75.3 FPS vs 1080TI 69.9 FPS. Heck even the RX56 is beating the 1080 TI in 99th %tile with 70.9 FPS.

That's very telling that there are improvements still yet to come.

If I'm not mistaken, this kind of delay could be impacted by trying to get their own Ryzen CPU's up to snuff instead of prioritizing Intel CPUs.
Which might be, for them, a pretty large project.

But that's just my opinion.
Edited by EastCoast - 10/5/17 at 8:20am
post #234 of 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastCoast View Post

Here it is again, RX series on top in PUBG...

But, this is at 1080p. This is starting to look like teething issues with optimizing profiles in the drivers.
Very similar results to Forza 7 benchmark.



http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Playerunknowns-Battlegrounds-Spiel-60812/Specials/Playerunknowns-Battlegrounds-neue-Benchmarks-Vega-1236260/
17.8.1 Beta 6

What's interesting about this is that AMD actually negates their DX11 overhead where-as the Ti, 1080 and 1070 all flatline neatly to show a solid API limitation.

Epic developers stated that they would be working with AMD to optimize for it on the CPU side, around Ryzen's launch IIRC. It's possible that if PUBG is using the latest releases, which I believe they did a few months ago, of UE4 and this is seeing some of that optimization crop up on Radeons front end. I'm sure any spreading of threading, alone, helped alleviate the core 0 ceiling issue.

It most likely happened right about... here:
https://www.pcgamesn.com/playerunknowns-battlegrounds/cpu-game-update
https://steamcommunity.com/games/578080/announcements/detail/1451701826007887564

Unreal throughout the years has always used a lot of NVIDIA's rendering cra... uh, assets. So I'm sure a lot of these are bound at the engine level.
https://forums.unrealengine.com/community/general-discussion/24447-nvidia-gameworks-integration

So it just makes sense for Epic to use these features out of the gate and wait for AMD to fix i... uh, rectify it on their end smile.gif Which is most likely why the GPU sided benchmarks, 1440 and 4K are terrible.
https://developer.nvidia.com/nvidia-gameworks-and-ue4

It's probably been fixed by AMD in the most recent drivers from what I've seen.
http://www.game-debate.com/news/23624/amd-17-8-2-driver-improves-playerunknowns-battlegrounds-fps-by-18-on-radeon-rx-vega-gpus
17.8.2 which is post 17.8.1, obviously.
Quote:
Those lucky few with AMD’s new Radeon RX Vega 64 graphics cards could see performance gains of up to 18% when playing PUBG in comparison to the previous 17.8.1 driver.

It kinda shows that proper engine development trumps driver intervention. No pun intended.
Whew all this digging is making me tired biggrin.gif
Edited by pengs - 10/5/17 at 8:10am
post #235 of 497
The GTX 970 is performing very well in those PUBG benchmarks though, if we compare it to its direct competitor the R9 390. And the GTX 1060 is performing better than a Fury X... And still Vega is outperforming the GTX 1080 line... Most curious. Primitive discard accelerator at work?
post #236 of 497
Here it is once more to clearly show a trend.
As you can see even at higher resolutions the 1080 TI wins are marginal compare to what it loses at 1080p.
It would have been interesting to see the 99th %tiles.





https://www.techspot.com/review/1476-amd-radeon-vega-64/page2.html
Edited by EastCoast - 10/5/17 at 8:30am
post #237 of 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightAntilli View Post

The GTX 970 is performing very well in those PUBG benchmarks though, if we compare it to its direct competitor the R9 390. And the GTX 1060 is performing better than a Fury X... And still Vega is outperforming the GTX 1080 line... Most curious. Primitive discard accelerator at work?

The reason you are seeing what, really, should be the 390 decimating the 970 is because of UE4 and it's integration with NVIDIA's assets. NVIDIA hits that 80/83fps wall, CPU/API side - AMD then regains the lead beyond that with Vega, because, while it's still more unoptimized on the GPU side it's able to pass the Ti as it's not hampered by the API limitation (which NVIDIA is).

It's confusing because this is directly opposite what we've seen for years. DX11, 1080p and poor API performance from AMD.

Obviously the GPU sided deficit was most likely fixed beyond 17.8.1. It would be interesting to see another run with the game to date and current drivers (18%). This may had been something that NVIDIA was also able to fix quite quickly also.

Who knows when it comes to primitive discard. It's definitely present in some benchmarks but Vega's clock speed is much higher than the Fury X at stock / 500-700MHz, 700-750MHz AIO, 50-75%. Would be nice to know though.
Edited by pengs - 10/5/17 at 8:54am
post #238 of 497
Well there is a video from AdoredTV about this. He thinks this is from CPU bottleneck and that VEGA can coupe better then NVidia. This kind of results are in 3 games for now Forza7, Dirt4 and PUBG(High preset) when there is a CPU bottleneck.
Append
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8320 Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5 SAPPHIRE NITRO+ RX 580 8 GB Corsair Vengeance Pro CMY8GX3M2B2133C9 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 840 EVO Western Digital WD30 EFRX-68EUZN0 NZXT Kraken X52 Windows Pro 10 Insider Build 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
LG 24MP76 LG W2261VP Cheap Genius Corsair RM 1000 Watt 80 PLUS Gold 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Cooler Master CM 690III Window MAD CATz RAT 8 Asus STRIX Kingston Hyper X Cloud II 
Audio
2.1 Speakers Vigoole 
  hide details  
Reply
Append
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8320 Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5 SAPPHIRE NITRO+ RX 580 8 GB Corsair Vengeance Pro CMY8GX3M2B2133C9 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 840 EVO Western Digital WD30 EFRX-68EUZN0 NZXT Kraken X52 Windows Pro 10 Insider Build 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
LG 24MP76 LG W2261VP Cheap Genius Corsair RM 1000 Watt 80 PLUS Gold 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Cooler Master CM 690III Window MAD CATz RAT 8 Asus STRIX Kingston Hyper X Cloud II 
Audio
2.1 Speakers Vigoole 
  hide details  
Reply
post #239 of 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie2009 View Post

That is odd, how does the TI lose @ 1080p and kill @ 4k.

The vega cards are even beaten by a 1070 @ 1440p.
Possibly pixel fill rate. It's the most apparent conclusion, anyway.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700k 4.5 GHz 1.3v Asus Z170i MSI 980Ti 1490/7760 MHz G.skill DDR4 8 GB x2 3733 MHz 15-15-15-35-1 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Crucial M4 256 GB NH-C14S Windows 10 Student 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
TBD Cooler Master Quick Fire TK Corsair SF600 Fractal Core 500 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Zowie EC2-A Zowie G TF-X Fiio E17 v1 Sennheiser HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700k 4.5 GHz 1.3v Asus Z170i MSI 980Ti 1490/7760 MHz G.skill DDR4 8 GB x2 3733 MHz 15-15-15-35-1 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Crucial M4 256 GB NH-C14S Windows 10 Student 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
TBD Cooler Master Quick Fire TK Corsair SF600 Fractal Core 500 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Zowie EC2-A Zowie G TF-X Fiio E17 v1 Sennheiser HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
post #240 of 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post

Possibly pixel fill rate. It's the most apparent conclusion, anyway.

Could be bandwidth. It's effectively less than the fury x's despite propping up a bigger, faster chip
New and Shiny
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Rynze 7 1700 ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire HD7950 G.SKILL TridentZ F4-3200C14D 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Kingston HyperX 3K Crucial MX300 Western Digital Black Western Digital Green 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Red Noctua NH-U14S Windows 10 Pro Dell U2414H 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell P2414H Ducky One Corsair RM650x NZXT H440 White 
MouseAudio
Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum Xonar DX 
  hide details  
Reply
New and Shiny
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Rynze 7 1700 ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire HD7950 G.SKILL TridentZ F4-3200C14D 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Kingston HyperX 3K Crucial MX300 Western Digital Black Western Digital Green 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Red Noctua NH-U14S Windows 10 Pro Dell U2414H 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell P2414H Ducky One Corsair RM650x NZXT H440 White 
MouseAudio
Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum Xonar DX 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [wccftech] AMD RX Vega 64 Outperforms NVIDIA GTX 1080 Ti By Up To 23% In DX12 Forza 7