TR Forums

i recently read an artical about how the Gameworks tools for developers has hampered the performance of AMD cards which was surprising i was not sure such things went on in the background that's really a low blow from Nvidia
What do you guys think?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevange ... ecosystem/

I'm not sure what's the point of this post. Both AMD and Nvidia are known for bribing the various game developers at various times for "twimtbp/gaming evolved" proprietary hardware optimizations. It has been happening for many years before and will continue to happen in future.

If you're butthurt about one of these particular brand's behavior - buy a gaming console. I got the "Watch Dogs" on PS4, it performs well and looks well enough to be enjoyable to play. No crashes (like I've seen some people were having even with latest Nvidia's drivers), no "mouse acceleration", no "tearing" issues, no need to download garbage "Uplay" client, game controls work PERFECTLY with a console controller.

oh my u hurt my feelings XD
amd seems to have been past that phase from what i read in the artical but oh well

killadark wrote:

amd seems to have been past that phase from what i read in the artical but oh well

Yeah, AMD seems to be mostly working to open standards - OpenCL vs CUDA, TressFX vs PhysX, VESA Adaptive-sync instead of G-Sync. Nvidia screws over everyone by pushing vendor lock-ins whilst AMD is championing open standards that anyone can use on any hardware.

The only one that's anti-Nvidia is Mantle, but that's more about bringing the console hardware (AMD exclusives) to the PC world. AMD has at least said that it won't be keeping it exclusively to AMD hardware in the future, but until the kinks are ironed out, they're focussing on their own products first.

JohnC wrote:

game controls work PERFECTLY with a console controller

We both know that's an oxymoron.

Wow. I didn't realize the situation was that bad... though the reviewer states Watch Doges seems poorly optimized even on nvidia's hardware at times. I wonder if the fact that the game was pushed back/rushed a bit has something to do with that. It's even crazier that the development tools would optimize for the newest consoles, running GCN, but not their desktop counterparts.

EDIT: puppetworx's benchmarks are a lot more promising. Thanks, puppetworx and techspot.

Techspot extensively benchmarked the game and got very different results. For their tests they used a 45 second portion of the game rather than the built in benchmark tool, they also tested different resolutions. Unfortunately neither testing method provides really conclusive data though I'm inclined to think the builtin benchmark offers more diversity of environments for what that's worth.

Benchmarking is hard.

Chrispy_ wrote:

Yeah, AMD seems to be mostly working to open standards - OpenCL vs CUDA, TressFX vs PhysX, VESA Adaptive-sync instead of G-Sync. Nvidia screws over everyone by pushing vendor lock-ins whilst AMD is championing open standards that anyone can use on any hardware.

The only one that's anti-Nvidia is Mantle, but that's more about bringing the console hardware (AMD exclusives) to the PC world. AMD has at least said that it won't be keeping it exclusively to AMD hardware in the future, but until the kinks are ironed out, they're focussing on their own products first.

You do realize that they have to go this route, that if they developed their own proprietary stuff that they would end like LaserDisc, Betamax, and HDDVD?

While the 'overtness' of AMD's actions seem all cool & hip n such don't believe for a single second if the roles were reversed that AMD would take the the proverbial highroad.

That's just speculation; The reality right now is that Nvidia has some shady, self-serving practices designed to lock customers to the brand and AMD don't. Their technologies are all proprietary and it means that us consumers lose out.