| ethomaz said:
|
Thx. that's wat I was looking for. If his statement still applies. My 680 which is around 3.4 Tflops will perform similar to mid-late PS4 games or even worse by the end of nextgen. So no, a 7870 will not keep up.
Smartest nam evila
Current Platforms: HighendPC[rip]/PS4/PS3[rip]/Vita[rip]
disolitude said:
|
Actually I take this back. Any non reference 7950 is going to beat the GTX 760 in performance. Just barely but 7950 has huge overclocking headroom...
For example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Sy6cNsokiKI#t=147s
Haaaaa just to be clear guys.... I'm not saying DX is bad or criticizing the API.
I'm saying there are cons and pros in DX API... into the pros we have security, stability and something that works with all GPU hardware launched... into the cons we have the performance drop when compared to a direct access to the hardware and the limitations to the features set of the DX.
That's make the same GPU performs far better on consoles than PC.
PS. The DirectX version used in 360 is a modified one that talks more close to metal with the GPU and there are a lot of specifics functions not available on PC to run code directly on GPU... so the devs can do what they want and the performance is far better than DX on PC.
ethomaz said:
No. The full story started when AMD said MS needs to drop the DX (DX11 not the DX9) to have a far better performance in their GPUs like consoles. Carmack said the consoles performs 2x the PC with same hardware not only due the API (DX) but because the optimizations for single specs too. At the end you are comparing a abstraction API (DX) with some more close to metal (consoles)... that's what AMD wants to say. And DX11 give less freedom to developers than DX9... it is really attached to OS... DX9 not so much... in this aspect devs like more the DX9 style. |
I've read that article, it was mostly bashing D3D in general, not just DX11, the drawcall issue got better with DX11(which is still fucking terrible), and I don't think Carmack worked with DX11 a lot during that time since id Tech 5 runs on OpenGL primarily, he did say that DX is better than OGL around that time too which is kinda funny. What AMD was really bitching about was that since there were so many preset and locked down features in the API, that devs weren't able to be more creative with the shaders, and performance also suffers from the overhead, which I 100% agree with. I've hated DX since day 1, and I too wish that shit would just go away, but now we have shit like KH3 being deved with DX11 so I guess it's sticking around..... sigh....
Efficienty will get better though, they need to figure that shit out, at least bring it up to about 70% at bare minimum is good enough, at least MS is somewhat trying on that front.
trixiemafia86 said:
|
I hate it, just call it Windows 7.1 and not change the UI would have sufficed.
| ethomaz said: This is what happened in 2011. AMD: DirectX Holding Back Graphics Performance On PC http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/123987/AMD_DirectX_Holding_Back_Graphics_Performance_On_PC.php And yeah... the flexibility that any API like DirectX give to you, where you can make a code to run in almost every PC configuration in the world have a price to be paid... the price is the overhead created by these APIs... if you make a API that access directly the hardware (a fixed hardware and not all the hardware available in the maket) it will performance far better than DirectX but it will be locked to only unique hardware. That will never change... Windows/Linux/Mac and DirectX/OpenGL/etc hold the graphcis performance on PCs. Every developer agree with AMD. Some quotes from AMD... "It's funny, we often have at least ten times as much horsepower as an Xbox 360 or a PS3 in a high-end graphics card, yet it's very clear that the games don't look ten times as good," he said. "To a significant extent, that's because, one way or another, for good reasons and bad -- mostly good -- DirectX is getting in the way." "Wrapping it up in a software layer gives you safety and security," Huddy said, "but it unfortunately tends to rob you of quite a lot of the performance, and most importantly it robs you of the opportunity to innovate." "If we drop the API, then people really can render everything they can imagine, not what they can see -- and we'll probably see more visual innovation in that kind of situation," he said. |
This is a better article http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1
disolitude said:
Actually I take this back. Any non reference 7950 is going to beat the GTX 760 in performance. Just barely but 7950 has huge overclocking headroom... For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Sy6cNsokiKI#t=147s |
That's why I have that 7950 in my build :P
trixiemafia86 said:
|
Na, your 680 wouldn't keep up with PC graphics is about it, I have rigs from years ago that can still run console games better. All the shit you will see with 8th gen consoles will just look and run better on PC at the end of the gen and your 680 won't be able to catch up to those.
| dahuman said: Na, your 680 wouldn't keep up with PC graphics is about it, I have rigs from years ago that can still run console games better. All the shit you will see with 8th gen consoles will just look and run better on PC at the end of the gen and your 680 won't be able to catch up to those. |
I intend to upgrade to the GTX 880 or AMD equivalent when it's out if there's up to 50% performance increase.
Smartest nam evila
Current Platforms: HighendPC[rip]/PS4/PS3[rip]/Vita[rip]
trixiemafia86 said:
I intend to upgrade to the GTX 880 or AMD equivalent when it's out if there's up to 50% performance increase. |
yeah I'm waiting for Maxwell level video cards as well myself, been running 6950 unlocked xfire a couple of years already, need that new toy.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
