[Various] Ashes of the Singularity DX12 Benchmarks - Page 41 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[Various] Ashes of the Singularity DX12 Benchmarks

 
Thread Tools
post #401 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 01:03 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Ganf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bonifay, Fl
Posts: 7,987
Rep: 503 (Unique: 276)
Quote:
Originally Posted by revro View Post

is there a link to benchmark to download the benchmark, or its just something they gave those newsreporters to test out? thank you

You can buy into the alpha for 50 bucks. That's likely where they got it.

I only understood why my Mother had been so fond of the adage "Bread will always land butter side down" when one day, on a whim, I asked her if I had been born with such a lumpy head or if it came later. - Me.


Ganf is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #402 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 01:14 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
knightsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Redneckville U.S.A.
Posts: 728
Rep: 19 (Unique: 12)
DX12 won't mean a dern thing unless drops the bogusness with Win10...
knightsilver is offline  
post #403 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 01:34 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Dudewitbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Pittsburg California
Posts: 1,736
Rep: 87 (Unique: 71)
Quote:
Originally Posted by maltamonk View Post

they are mostly cpu bound, so not really an issue for most gpu's amd or nvidia.

The point of the lower level access is supposed to decrease CPU bound situations and make a game more gpu bound. Mmos can make the most of the situation, but cannot only be dx12 simply because mmos aim for compatability for most number of users(why many mmos are dx9)

Dudewitbow is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #404 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 03:45 PM
PC Gamer
 
revro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,179
Rep: 93 (Unique: 73)
Quote:
Originally Posted by knightsilver View Post

DX12 won't mean a dern thing unless drops the bogusness with Win10...
yep. i am waiting for the marketshare data report from september to see how it is faring

https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0

Dont buy corporate, play free games: OpenRA, UrbanTerror, PrivateerGemGold
Nikon D7100/DX AF-S 18-105 3,5-5,6; Sticking to [email protected] till my PC breaks down
CPU: DidaktikGama > 286 > 486SX2 > 486DX4 > PIII700MHz > PIV3GHz > E7500 > Q9550
GPU: RageAIO128 > Rad9700Pro > Rad5750 > Evga 660FTW > GB 780OCWF3 > 970G1
GTX780 320.49 @1440 Crysis 3 very high 4MSAA 30,24 avg fps, FXAA 47,83 avg fps
My Rig 2010
(16 items)
CPU
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 2.83 GHz
Motherboard
Gigabyte EP43-UD3L
GPU
Gigabyte NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970, 4GB
RAM
Kingston 4x2GB DDR2-SDRAM 400MHz
Hard Drive
Kingston SV300S37A240G 240GB
Optical Drive
HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GH22NS50
Power Supply
AKASA Venom Power 1000W
Cooling
Coolermaster Vortex Plus
Case
AKASA Venom Toxic
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 7 (6.1) Home Premium Edition 64-bit Service Pack 1
Monitor
Dell U2713HM
Monitor
Iiyama ProLite 2475HD
Keyboard
Microsoft Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000
Mouse
Microsoft Genius Netscroll 120
Mouse
Fighter Jet Mouse Pad
Audio
Genius SW-5.1 Home Threater
▲ hide details ▲
revro is offline  
post #405 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 05:18 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Mahigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 1,750
Rep: 874 (Unique: 233)
Well I figured I'd create an account in order to explain away what you're all seeing in the Ashes of the Singularity DX12 Benchmarks. I won't divulge too much of my background information but suffice to say that I'm an old veteran who used to go by the handle ElMoIsEviL.

First off nVidia is posting their true DirectX12 performance figures in these tests. Ashes of the Singularity is all about Parallelism and that's an area, that although Maxwell 2 does better than previous nVIDIA architectures, it is still inferior in this department when compared to the likes of AMDs GCN 1.1/1.2 architectures. Here's why...

Maxwell's Asychronous Thread Warp can queue up 31 Compute tasks and 1 Graphic task. Now compare this with AMD GCN 1.1/1.2 which is composed of 8 Asynchronous Compute Engines each able to queue 8 Compute tasks for a total of 64 coupled with 1 Graphic task by the Graphic Command Processor. See bellow:




Each ACE can also apply certain Post Processing Effects without incurring much of a performance penalty. This feature is heavily used for Lighting in Ashes of the Singularity. Think of all of the simultaneous light sources firing off as each unit in the game fires a shot or the various explosions which ensue as examples.




This means that AMDs GCN 1.1/1.2 is best adapted at handling the increase in Draw Calls now being made by the Multi-Core CPU under Direct X 12.

Therefore in game titles which rely heavily on Parallelism, likely most DirectX 12 titles, AMD GCN 1.1/1.2 should do very well provided they do not hit a Geometry or Rasterizer Operator bottleneck before nVIDIA hits their Draw Call/Parallelism bottleneck. The picture bellow highlights the Draw Call/Parallelism superioty of GCN 1.1/1.2 over Maxwell 2:




A more efficient queueing of workloads, through better thread Parallelism, also enables the R9 290x to come closer to its theoretical Compute figures which just happen to be ever so shy from those of the GTX 980 Ti (5.8 TFlops vs 6.1 TFlops respectively) as seen bellow:




What you will notice is that Ashes of the Singularity is also quite hard on the Rasterizer Operators highlighting a rather peculiar behavior. That behavior is that an R9 290x, with its 64 Rops, ends up performing near the same as a Fury-X, also with 64 Rops. A great way of picturing this in action is from the Graph bellow (courtesy of Beyond3D):




As for the folks claiming a conspiracy theory, not in the least. The reason AMDs DX11 performance is so poor under Ashes of the Singularity is because AMD literally did zero optimizations for the path. AMD is clearly looking on selling Asynchronous Shading as a feature to developers because their architecture is well suited for the task. It doesn't hurt that it also costs less in terms of Research and Development of drivers. Asynchronous Shading allows GCN to hit near full efficiency without even requiring any driver work whatsoever.

nVIDIA, on the other hand, does much better at Serial scheduling of work loads (when you consider that anything prior to Maxwell 2 is limited to Serial Scheduling rather than Parallel Scheduling). DirectX 11 is suited for Serial Scheduling therefore naturally nVIDIA has an advantage under DirectX 11. In this graph, provided by Anandtech, you have the correct figures for nVIDIAs architectures (from Kepler to Maxwell 2) though the figures for GCN are incorrect (they did not multiply the number of Asynchronous Compute Engines by 8):



People wondering why Nvidia is doing a bit better in DX11 than DX12. That's because Nvidia optimized their DX11 path in their drivers for Ashes of the Singularity. With DX12 there are no tangible driver optimizations because the Game Engine speaks almost directly to the Graphics Hardware. So none were made. Nvidia is at the mercy of the programmers talents as well as their own Maxwell architectures thread parallelism performance under DX12. The Devellopers programmed for thread parallelism in Ashes of the Singularity in order to be able to better draw all those objects on the screen. Therefore what were seeing with the Nvidia numbers is the Nvidia draw call bottleneck showing up under DX12. Nvidia works around this with its own optimizations in DX11 by prioritizing workloads and replacing shaders. Yes, the nVIDIA driver contains a compiler which re-compiles and replaces shaders which are not fine tuned to their architecture on a per game basis. NVidia's driver is also Multi-Threaded, making use of the idling CPU cores in order to recompile/replace shaders. The work nVIDIA does in software, under DX11, is the work AMD do in Hardware, under DX12, with their Asynchronous Compute Engines.

But what about poor AMD DX11 performance? Simple. AMDs GCN 1.1/1.2 architecture is suited towards Parallelism. It requires the CPU to feed the graphics card work. This creates a CPU bottleneck, on AMD hardware, under DX11 and low resolutions (say 1080p and even 1600p for Fury-X), as DX11 is limited to 1-2 cores for the Graphics pipeline (which also needs to take care of AI, Physics etc). Replacing shaders or re-compiling shaders is not a solution for GCN 1.1/1.2 because AMDs Asynchronous Compute Engines are built to break down complex workloads into smaller, easier to work, workloads. The only way around this issue, if you want to maximize the use of all available compute resources under GCN 1.1/1.2, is to feed the GPU in Parallel... in comes in Mantle, Vulcan and Direct X 12.

People wondering why Fury-X did so poorly in 1080p under DirectX 11 titles? That's your answer.


A video which talks about Ashes of the Singularity in depth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9UACXikdR0


PS. Don't count on better Direct X 12 drivers from nVIDIA. DirectX 12 is closer to Metal and it's all on the developer to make efficient use of both nVIDIA and AMDs architectures.

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." - Arthur Conan Doyle (Sherlock Holmes)
Mahigan is offline  
post #406 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 05:29 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
JunkoXan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,486
Rep: 113 (Unique: 99)
^^^^ someone give him a Cookie, seems logical to me. biggrin.gif

JunkoXan is offline  
post #407 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 05:53 PM - Thread Starter
pass the lortabs
 
p4inkill3r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Rusk, TX
Posts: 4,988
Rep: 513 (Unique: 311)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Well I figured I'd create an account in order to explain away what you're all seeing in the Ashes of the Singularity DX12 Benchmarks. I won't divulge too much of my background information but suffice to say that I'm an old veteran who used to go by the handle ElMoIsEviL.

First off nVidia is posting their true DirectX12 performance figures in these tests. Ashes of the Singularity is all about Parallelism and that's an area, that although Maxwell 2 does better than previous nVIDIA architectures, it is still inferior in this department when compared to the likes of AMDs GCN 1.1/1.2 architectures. Here's why...

Maxwell's Asychronous Thread Warp can queue up 31 Compute tasks and 1 Graphic task. Now compare this with AMD GCN 1.1/1.2 which is composed of 8 Asynchronous Compute Engines each able to queue 8 Compute tasks for a total of 64 coupled with 1 Graphic task by the Graphic Command Processor. See bellow:




This means that AMDs GCN 1.1/1.2 is best adapted at handling the increase in Draw Calls now being made by the Multi-Core CPU under Direct X 12.

Therefore in game titles which rely heavily on Parallelism, likely most DirectX 12 titles, AMD GCN 1.1/1.2 should do very well provided they do not hit a Geometry or Rasterizer Operator bottleneck before nVIDIA hits their Draw Call/Parallelism bottleneck. The picture bellow highlights the Draw Call/Parallelism superioty of GCN 1.1/1.2 over Maxwell 2:




A more efficient queueing of workloads, through better thread Parallelism, also enables the R9 290x to come closer to its theoretical Compute figures which just happen to be ever so shy from those of the GTX 980 Ti (5.8 TFlops vs 6.1 TFlops respectively) as seen bellow:




What you will notice is that Ashes of the Singularity is also quite hard on the Rasterizer Operators highlighting a rather peculiar behavior. That behavior is that an R9 290x, with its 64 Rops, ends up performing near the same as a Fury-X, also with 64 Rops. A great way of picturing this in action is from the Graph bellow (courtesy of Beyond3D):




As for the folks claiming a conspiracy theory, not in the least. The reason AMDs DX11 performance is so poor under Ashes of the Singularity is because AMD literally did zero optimizations for the path. AMD is clearly looking on selling Asynchronous Shading as a feature to developers because their architecture is well suited for the task. It doesn't hurt that it also costs less in terms of Research and Development of drivers. Asynchronous Shading allows GCN to hit near full efficiency without even requiring any driver work whatsoever.

nVIDIA, on the other hand, does much better at Serial scheduling of work loads (when you consider that anything prior to Maxwell 2 is limited to Serial Scheduling rather than Parallel Scheduling). DirectX 11 is suited for Serial Scheduling therefore naturally nVIDIA has an advantage under DirectX 11. In this graph, provided by Anandtech, you have the correct figures for nVIDIAs architectures (from Kepler to Maxwell 2) though the figures for GCN are incorrect (they did not multiply the number of Asynchronous Compute Engine by 8):



People wondering why Nvidia is doing a bit better in DX11 than DX12. That's because Nvidia optimized their DX11 path in their drivers for Ashes of the Singularity. With DX12 there are no tangible driver optimizations because the Game Engine speaks almost directly to the Graphics Hardware. So none were made. Nvidia is at the mercy of the programmers talents as well as their own Maxwell architectures thread parallelism performance under DX12. The Devellopers programmed for thread parallelism in Ashes of the Singularity in order to be able to better draw all those objects on the screen. Therefore what were seeing with the Nvidia numbers is the Nvidia draw call bottleneck showing up under DX12. Nvidia works around this with its own optimizations in DX11 by prioritizing workloads and replacing shaders. Yes, the nVIDIA driver contains a compiler which re-compiles and replaces shaders which are not fine tuned to their architecture on a per game basis.


PS. Don't count on better Direct X 12 drivers from nVIDIA. DirectX 12 is closer to Metal and it's all on the developer to make efficient use or either nVIDIA or AMDs architecture.
Great post, very informative. thumb.gif

p4inkill3r is offline  
post #408 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 06:01 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Glottis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,411
Rep: 87 (Unique: 65)
www.ashesofthesingularity.com

notice AMD logo at the bottom of that page wink.gif

like post above says. "Nvidia is at the mercy of the programmers talents", and since this game is sponsored/partnered with AMD... let's just say optimizing for nvidia probably wasn't on their priority lists. i think we'll have a clearer picture of DX12 performance when we have a lot larger sample of DX12 games/benchmarks to choose from.
Glottis is offline  
post #409 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 06:05 PM
Linux Lobbyist
 
mav451's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 984
Rep: 44 (Unique: 34)
If you're trying to make me question my 980Ti purchase, it's working great haha tongue.gif

http://heatware.com/eval.php?id=31362Build History (Click to show)
CPU History:
Thunderbird-C 800Mhz, 2100+ TBred B, 2600+ XP-M, Opteron 146, Core2 e8400, i5 750, i5 4670K

MB History:

A7V, A7N8X rev1.06, DFI NF4 Ultra-D, DFI LT P35, GB P55-UD3R, GB Z87-UD4H

GPU History:
Matrox G400, ATi 8500LE, ATi 9800Pro, Leadtek 6800NU, BFG 7800GT, BFG 8800GT, GTX 260, eVGA GTX 560 Ti, Zotac GTX 580, eVGA GTX 780, eVGA 980Ti
mav451 is offline  
post #410 of 2682 (permalink) Old 08-20-2015, 06:11 PM
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Turkiye
Posts: 6,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glottis View Post

www.ashesofthesingularity.com

notice AMD logo at the bottom of that page wink.gif

like post above says. "Nvidia is at the mercy of the programmers talents", and since this game is sponsored/partnered with AMD... let's just say optimizing for nvidia probably wasn't on their priority lists. i think we'll have a clearer picture of DX12 performance when we have a lot larger sample of DX12 games/benchmarks to choose from.
What about the correlating theoretical benchmarks part?
mtcn77 is offline  
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off