| Page 99 of 116 |
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
 Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 00:32 Post subject: |
|
 |
| consolitis wrote: | Dictator93 is one of the most trustworthy posters on gaf actually. Durante too called bullshit at first but later accepted Dictator's explanation:
| Quote: | It is just my (aging) CPU, a Titan X + a Core i7 920 @ 4.2 Ghz can be surprisingly limiting if you aim for 120hz. That and that area of the game was one I knew where there was a large API bottleneck going on (low GPU utilisation and a large draw distance with many unique objects)
The 920 though is still pretty awesome though: 60hz is basically guaranteed in anything but Star Citizen or a Total War game, basically. |
|
Right, that makes sense. Wish people gave proper context.
Which begs the question...how big of a fucking fanboy do you have to be to plunk down a fucking grand for a Titan X, only to use it with that CPU. I'm surprised he's not running 2, to make better use of that bottleneck 
He could've bought a 980 Ti, get almost the same performance and use that money to buy a CPU (+mobo+RAM) that's not 8 years old  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 00:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| Werelds wrote: |
However, there's something that makes OpenGL much more superior and that's the frame pacing. It feels incredibly jerky with Vulkan. And considering I'm not even hitting the 120 Hz yet, VSync only makes it worse. |
for me it was the opposite with 290, with vulkan very smooth, even smoother than 980ti, where with opengl it was going down to mid 40's maxed out, now even with vsync it's smooth as silk
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 01:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Nope. FPS in that area just fluctuates wildly between 90 and 110.
OMG VULKAN LOWER FPS!!!11!1
On a serious note though: note the frametimes. Both CPU and GPU averages are lower on OGL. Quite substantially so. And that's despite the fact that in this run I apparently had a much bigger spike under OGL.
I did somehow manage to time the screenshot positions so that it looks like I switched to Vulkan right after the first one, but that's not possible. The game has to restart to switch, so the Vulkan screenshot is actually a playthrough to that point on its own.
Frame pacing issues aside, Vulkan brings practically nothing for Nvidia.
Edit: we'll have to wait and see till more sites attempt to do more controlled comparisons, but 90% of all posts everywhere from Nvidia people are about the same as mine. It doesn't really make a difference for Nvidia.
| Mortibus wrote: | | Werelds wrote: |
However, there's something that makes OpenGL much more superior and that's the frame pacing. It feels incredibly jerky with Vulkan. And considering I'm not even hitting the 120 Hz yet, VSync only makes it worse. |
for me it was the opposite with 290, with vulkan very smooth, even smoother than 980ti, where with opengl it was going down to mid 40's maxed out, now even with vsync it's smooth as silk |
Makes perfect sense, I wasn't talking about Vulkan in general. I meant from an Nvidia perspective.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 02:11 Post subject: |
|
|
R9 290
Open GL
 Spoiler: | |
Vulkan
| Spoiler: | |
had to take screenshot in vulkan in window mode, otherwise game crashed, but there is no difference in fps
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 02:17 Post subject: |
|
|
I bet most of performance increase on AMD hardware is due to eliminating or reducing API overhead AMD have with OpenGL\dx11. That's why they get better gains compared to nvidia. nvidia GPU already perform at their maximum and don't have this APi overhead "weakness"
Nvidia GPU performance compared to AMD in most games:-
DX 11 - win
OpenGL win
vulkan - either parity or win
DX12 -either parity or win
So, you see, nvidia and those who got nvidia gpus have nothing to worry about. 
Neither dx12\vulkan nor async compute will change the balance of power performance wise.
So, say, 980ti (and it OCs like crazy) will still beat furys in most if not all games.
Call me a pessimist (I got a fury) but I just don't believe in miracles. Especially if you consider a pretty aggressive nvidias "teh way it's meant to stutter" policy 
So far dx12\vulkan\async have helped AMD to close the gap performance wise between their gpus and nvidias, but certainly not surpass nvidias sheer performance power.
1) Lenovo Legion 7 (AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, RTX 3080 16Gb, 32Gb DDR4, SSD 1TB +2TB
2) SFFPC (streaming via Moonlight+ Sunshine)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 03:01 Post subject: |
|
|
| h0rnyfavn wrote: |
Nvidia GPU performance compared to AMD in most games:-
DX 11 - win
OpenGL win
vulkan - either parity or win
DX12 -either parity or win
|
That hasn't seemed to be true so far, when comparing the 390 and 970. On average, they've been equal in DX11, but the 390 has taken the lead in DX12. The one exception to this seemed to be Tomb Raider (?) but it previously had a very limited implementation of DX12. I think they used it for shadows and not much else, tho I didn't follow the development very closely. I'd be interested in seeing benchmarks for the new DX12 patch.
If someone with a 970 can show us their performance, at stock settings (for the sake of testing), at this place:
http://i.imgur.com/SP6u72H.jpg
We could make a good comparison with a 390.
With the Ultra default preset in graphics, and in Video: 1080p, vsync off, SMAA (1TX), motion blur High, chromatic abberation on, FOV 130.
Yes, those are probably not the graphics you guys use to play, but I want a baseline we can all share, so that'll be the default.
This was OpenGL:
http://i.imgur.com/SP6u72H.jpg
This was Vulkan (windowed):
http://i.imgur.com/3SmaioB.jpg
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51432
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 03:37 Post subject: |
|
|
How about someone with older CPU's, shouldn't that be where vulkan performance really improves? 
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thudo
Posts: 6309
Location: Mellonville North, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 03:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | but there is no difference in fps |
Err.. In your caps you show OpenGL with 64fps but then in the next one being Vulkan you show.. 112fps.. thats 2x faster brah..  Seems kind consistent with some users..
MSI GT72S 6QF Dominator Pro S 29th Anniversary Intel i7 6820HK @ 4.0Ghz, 32GB DDR4-2133 RAM, 2x256GB Raid0 Toshiba NVMe 2.5 inch PCIe SSD, Nvidia Geforce GTX 980 OC'ed 200+ Core / 200+ Mem, 17.3 inch LG IPS HD Display @ 75Hz, Intel 7265AC Wifi, Windows 10 Pro BIOS version: .112 EC Firmware version: .105
Current Broadband speed record: 329.1 Mb/sec down // 21.73 Mb/sec up
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/3933292.png
Last edited by thudo on Tue, 12th Jul 2016 03:46; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thudo
Posts: 6309
Location: Mellonville North, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 03:48 Post subject: |
|
|
I only took it being fps exclusively... still.. liking the results... Wonder what a 980, 980Ti, or, heck a 1080 yield? 
MSI GT72S 6QF Dominator Pro S 29th Anniversary Intel i7 6820HK @ 4.0Ghz, 32GB DDR4-2133 RAM, 2x256GB Raid0 Toshiba NVMe 2.5 inch PCIe SSD, Nvidia Geforce GTX 980 OC'ed 200+ Core / 200+ Mem, 17.3 inch LG IPS HD Display @ 75Hz, Intel 7265AC Wifi, Windows 10 Pro BIOS version: .112 EC Firmware version: .105
Current Broadband speed record: 329.1 Mb/sec down // 21.73 Mb/sec up
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/3933292.png
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 03:58 Post subject: |
|
|
yeah brah no difference between full screen and window mode, same fps
couldn't take a pic of vulkan any other way
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thudo
Posts: 6309
Location: Mellonville North, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 04:11 Post subject: |
|
|
So in other words vulkan is 2x faster but was in window mode...
MSI GT72S 6QF Dominator Pro S 29th Anniversary Intel i7 6820HK @ 4.0Ghz, 32GB DDR4-2133 RAM, 2x256GB Raid0 Toshiba NVMe 2.5 inch PCIe SSD, Nvidia Geforce GTX 980 OC'ed 200+ Core / 200+ Mem, 17.3 inch LG IPS HD Display @ 75Hz, Intel 7265AC Wifi, Windows 10 Pro BIOS version: .112 EC Firmware version: .105
Current Broadband speed record: 329.1 Mb/sec down // 21.73 Mb/sec up
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/3933292.png
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 04:34 Post subject: |
|
|
I tried Vulkan with Fullscreen and Windowed mode. Windowed increased the FPS from about 103 to 105. Not a significant difference.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon
VIP Member
Posts: 18935
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 06:56 Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, Vulkan makes DOOM stutter like mad on my 1070. Silky smooth on max details in OpenGL, massive drops and stutters on a Vulkan. Your mileage may vary, of course, but I'll stick to OGL for now, thanks.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 07:00 Post subject: |
|
|
Probably Nvidia drivers are not yet well optimized for vulkan. Don't remember that and has an head start in this sector,having developed a similar technology before (mantle) and helped develop this one.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 07:21 Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Leaf wrote: | | Probably Nvidia drivers are not yet well optimized for vulkan. Don't remember that and has an head start in this sector,having developed a similar technology before (mantle) and helped develop this one. |
It's true that AMD has an advantage, but Nvidia ran Doom with Vulkan on their 1080 before the game released. They had access to the game and Vulkan, it would be a bit surprising if they got caught by surprise and didn't release their drivers in time.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 12:03 Post subject: |
|
|
No matter the AMD's DX12 and Vulcan advantage, NVidia is still faster at pretty much everything from 980ti/1070 and upwards. Nice budget cards, though.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 12:15 Post subject: |
|
|
@Kanint
The problem here is that maxwells are overclocking beasts. You can easily achieve at least 1400+ core clock even without adding any voltage. Add a bit of voltage and you get 1500+, yeah..
@The_Leaf | Quote: | | Probably Nvidia drivers are not yet well optimized for vulkan |
Didn't Nvidia use Doom(vulkan) running on gtx 1080 in their marketing campaign?
1) Lenovo Legion 7 (AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, RTX 3080 16Gb, 32Gb DDR4, SSD 1TB +2TB
2) SFFPC (streaming via Moonlight+ Sunshine)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34998
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 12:36 Post subject: |
|
|
| Neon wrote: | | Actually, Vulkan makes DOOM stutter like mad on my 1070. Silky smooth on max details in OpenGL, massive drops and stutters on a Vulkan. Your mileage may vary, of course, but I'll stick to OGL for now, thanks. |
I noticed the same way back then with my AMD 7870 and testing Mantle on Plants vs. Zombies Warfare and Battlefield 3 or 4.
FPS were high, but that shit had constant and annoying microstuttering going on.
Enthoo Evolv ATX TG // Asus Prime x370 // Ryzen 1700 // Gainward GTX 1080 // 16GB DDR4-3200
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 12:42 Post subject: |
|
|
didn't experience any stutter, it was the opposite, uber smooth with vulkan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 13:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| h0rnyfavn wrote: | @The_Leaf | Quote: | | Probably Nvidia drivers are not yet well optimized for vulkan |
Didn't Nvidia use Doom(vulkan) running on gtx 1080 in their marketing campaign? |
On that note I remember how it was widely misreported that they showed the game jumping from ~60 to up to 200 fps by switching from OpenGL to Vulkan when what they did is simply disable the framerate cap of the game already running on Vulkan. They never showed any performance difference between OpenGL and Vulkan
TWIN PEAKS is "something of a miracle."
"...like nothing else on television."
"a phenomenon."
"A tangled tale of sex, violence, power, junk food..."
"Like Nothing On Earth"
~ WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY CAN ONLY BE SEEN ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHTUOgYNRzY |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 15:41 Post subject: |
|
|
I'd love to see vulkan added to an actual CPU hungry game, like arma 3. doom is not exactly a game that pushes hardware.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 15:52 Post subject: |
|
|
arma 3 is just some unoptimized turd and it performance have nothing to do with cpu hunger
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2016 16:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| Mortibus wrote: | | arma 3 is just some unoptimized turd and it performance have nothing to do with cpu hunger |
I'm quite sure that is wrong.
The old arma engine wasn't proper multicore, I'm not sure about the current version, but either way its CPU hungry.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 99 of 116 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
