Vulkan and Nvidia

[Remilia]

Fun time, yay fps cheat.

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

Amd pretty much lied about how good mantle was.. it brought nearly no performence gains.. and it was only going to work for a few games.. and it's no longer being made.. cause of Vulkan

Mantle brought forward low-level APIs. We'd likely have been stuck with DX11.3 in Windows 10 and OpenGL 4.5 if it hadn't been for Mantle.

[Remilia]

Whoops I posted it in [img], not [video], anyways yeah...

[Vash The Stampede]

Fun time, yay fps cheat.

This did happen to other games like Ashes of Singularity. I hope more people test this to make sure.

[Artorius]

Fun time, yay fps cheat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVb25eomcrI

Beat me to it, came here to post it

[Alindra]

Fun time, yay fps cheat.

How is it a cheat? If a texture isn't done streaming in from the harddrive, the engine has two choices - just keep using the lower resolution resource already loaded or stall and cause a frame rate drop until it's ready. I don't really see the latter being a viable option.

I think what's more accurate is that streaming in resources is slower on Nvidia, not any trickery on Doom's part.

[Remilia]

How is it a cheat? If a texture isn't done streaming in from the harddrive, the engine has two choices - just keep using the lower resolution resource already loaded or stall and cause a frame rate drop until it's ready. I don't really see the latter being a viable option.

I think what's more accurate is that streaming in resources is slower on Nvidia, not any trickery on Doom's part.

If it's not rendering the proper texture especially in a fast paced scene, it's going to look like it's getting more FPS because it's not rendering the proper textures.

[Zenny]

Texture pop in has very little impact on performance. Especially if vram is not a problem, I just tested on my 1080 and other then a slight delay on loading a new level I couldn't notice anything, even when spinning around and jumping down high levels.

Considering the issues megatexture has had on both AMD and Nvidia cards, I'll chalk this up to a bug myself.

[Alindra]

If it's not rendering the proper texture especially in a fast paced scene, it's going to look like it's getting more FPS because it's not rendering the proper textures.

I disagree, it's not "looking like" it's getting more FPS, it is getting them - it's just not getting the same quality per frame. Those are two completely different metrics. If you wanted to advocate more thorough metrics for frame rate, have at it! I'm all for more insightful information. In a way, it reminds me of frame rate measuring years ago with SLI. The average frame rate looked fine, but there were more variations in the frame time / micro-stutters, etc, leading people to realize that a lower steady frame rate is a better experience than a jittery higher frame rate.

Unless, of course, you'd prefer games to bottleneck and hitch when a resources hasn't loaded yet. :P

[Vash The Stampede]

Texture pop in has very little impact on performance.

If you're moving and textures are in low quality until you stop, then yes it'll impact performance. This is messing with LOD.

I just tested on my 1080 and other then a slight delay on loading a new level I couldn't notice anything, even when spinning around and jumping down high levels.

Considering the issues megatexture has had on both AMD and Nvidia cards, I'll chalk this up to a bug myself.

Someone on reddit said that this also appears for them on a 1080 but only when initially loading the game in OpenGL.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comment...e_high/d5gga7m

[Deleted]

And that's why I'm perfectly fine with my 970 and wait for the next generation after the 1000s.

[Remilia]

I disagree, it's not "looking like" it's getting more FPS, it is getting them - it's just not getting the same quality per frame. Those are two completely different metrics. If you wanted to advocate more thorough metrics for frame rate, have at it! I'm all for more insightful information. In a way, it reminds me of frame rate measuring years ago with SLI. The average frame rate looked fine, but there were more variations in the frame time / micro-stutters, etc, leading people to realize that a lower steady frame rate is a better experience than a jittery higher frame rate.

Unless, of course, you'd prefer games to bottleneck and hitch when a resources hasn't loaded yet. :P

and yeah, pure FPS is a pretty eh number.

Well that's kind of the point of a loading screens. Yes, the dreaded loading screen but that's what it's for.

[Drunkenvalley]

In fairness, those performance increases nVidia drivers bring in need to come from somewhere. Hard to tell at times what's a bug and what's a quick, usually minor exception to increase performance, nor is it necessarily out of malice. Microsoft did the same with a lot of software over the years...

That said, it becomes misleading in terms of benchmark results, when you expect the games to look and behave the same, and base the performance from that. I don't remember why exactly, but somewhere around HD 7000 series reviewers were (at least briefly) very aware of jitter and stuff.

[Alindra]

and yeah, pure FPS is a pretty eh number.

It's not about the number - it's about responsiveness.

Well that's kind of the point of a loading screens. Yes, the dreaded loading screen but that's what it's for.

Sure, but there are a lot of considerations and ways to solve the problem. What's important?

- Having a seamless experience with as few load times as possible? (Open world vs highly compartmentalized levels.)
- Having maximum fidelity at all times? (Longer load times, must load everything upfront.)
- Minimizing wait times for the player? (Load minimal resources, stream in as needed.0
- What kind of hardware is the game / engine supposed to run on?
- How much video memory is available? (Everything for a given level might not fit in VRAM.)
- How long should resource (textures, models, etc) be cached in video memory after being used?
- What platforms will this run on? What APIs does that necessitate?

Etc, etc. There could be an optimal solution for one particular case, but engine design requires making the most optimal solution for a wide variety of cases, even if it's not the best at the extremes. If a company decides that they favor framerate over fidelity, I can't fault the decision, especially in an FPS. I can't call it an "fps cheat," it's the engine doing exactly what it's supposed to - keep frame rate high.

That said, I take no issues with people pointing out the slower load times or more noticeable pop-in. If it's vendor specific, it points to a problem with their hardware, not a fault of the engine.

What I'd call an "fps cheat" would be something like the engine detecting it's being measured and adjusting performance to make itself look better than it should. Certain smartphones detecting benchmark apps and running more aggressively than normal is a cheat because it's behaving outside normal performance just to look good.

[Lumineus]

How much video memory is available? (Everything for a given level might not fit in VRAM.)

Well I mean he's comparing the 480X which has 8 gigs of memory to a pair of cards with 3 gigs and 3.5 respectively and "observing" that the giant 4k textures load slowly on the older cards. Well... no shit, Sherlock.

[Remilia]

It's not about the number - it's about responsiveness.

Well when I mean pure fps, I mean no information like frametimes or whatever that affect how it feels, or whatever appropriate word. Fun stuff like my laptop on warframe could get 40-50FPS all low settings, but at points the frametime wasn't corresponding to the FPS a lot of time so it feels more like 20-25FPS.

Sure, but there are a lot of considerations and ways to solve the problem. What's important?

- Having a seamless experience with as few load times as possible? (Open world vs highly compartmentalized levels.)
- Having maximum fidelity at all times? (Longer load times, must load everything upfront.)
- Minimizing wait times for the player? (Load minimal resources, stream in as needed.0
- What kind of hardware is the game / engine supposed to run on?
- How much video memory is available? (Everything for a given level might not fit in VRAM.)
- How long should resource (textures, models, etc) be cached in video memory after being used?
- What platforms will this run on? What APIs does that necessitate?

Etc, etc. There could be an optimal solution for one particular case, but engine design requires making the most optimal solution for a wide variety of cases, even if it's not the best at the extremes. If a company decides that they favor framerate over fidelity, I can't fault the decision, especially in an FPS. I can't call it an "fps cheat," it's the engine doing exactly what it's supposed to - keep frame rate high.

That said, I take no issues with people pointing out the slower load times or more noticeable pop-in. If it's vendor specific, it points to a problem with their hardware, not a fault of the engine.

What I'd call an "fps cheat" would be something like the engine detecting it's being measured and adjusting performance to make itself look better than it should. Certain smartphones detecting benchmark apps and running more aggressively than normal is a cheat because it's behaving outside normal performance just to look good.

Oh yes I'm well aware that there are multiple considerations. For benchmarking, you want everything to be on an even playing field, that means assets and what not are all the same quality and what not. Gameplay experience wise is a different thing. I'm actually not that bothered with loading times outside of a few exceptions, but that's my personal opinion and it's not an easy thing to balance out.

[Deleted]

Fun time, yay fps cheat.

TBH, he could have done that vid better. And not just at 4k, which those cards are not meant to be for.

I'd rather see results from 1080p and 1440p, starting at the same point for both cards.

I am not saying the problem is not there, I will have a look myself once I have time. But he could have made a better vid...
And I think it is well known that Nvidia plays these kind of tricks more often then not.. Compared to AMD at least.

[gegalfo]

Well I mean he's comparing the 480X which has 8 gigs of memory to a pair of cards with 3 gigs and 3.5 respectively and "observing" that the giant 4k textures load slowly on the older cards. Well... no shit, Sherlock.

if you had watched the video, you would have noticed tehre was still vram leftover

TBH, he could have done that vid better. And not just at 4k, which those cards are not meant to be for.

I'd rather see results from 1080p and 1440p, starting at the same point for both cards.

I am not saying the problem is not there, I will have a look myself once I have time. But he could have made a better vid...
And I think it is well known that Nvidia plays these kind of tricks more often then not.. Compared to AMD at least.

the 780 test is done in 1080

[mercutiouk]

I do love when you get NVidia only folks banging on about how marketing is somehow worth buying. It's highly amusing.

"I'm swallowing lies I know are lies but because I'm with other people swallowing lies, it's fine"...

Buy the best hardware, there's NO POINTS for backing a certain brand. You don't get free BJ's, you don't get preferential treatment. You DO get a games market where a hardware supplier gets to call shots and hold things back because of herds of morons following them. "I don't think games should improve if it hurts my precious graphics card brand". Just give that a couple of seconds though and realise how absolutely fucking retarded it actually is.

Do your research, back the guys that are producing better hardware, we all benefit from it.

(For bias check: Currently a 980ti owner. DX11 at 1080p is where it's been at the last year or so, best card for that purpose. If I move to 1440p or 4k: AMD, If more of the games I like support DX12 or Vulkan: AMD. IT COULD ALL CHANGE IF NVIDIA SORTS THEIR CARDS OUT, DON'T PANIC FANBOYS. My last few cards have gone: AMD 4870, Nvidia GTX480, AMD 7950, Nvidia 980ti)

[Zenny]

The same exact texture pop in issue appearing on both the RX480 and a Geforce 1080:



Plus in one of the reddit threads, AMD users with 3GB cards (AMD R9 280X) are reporting the exact same thing.

This is a utter non issue, Id tech has had numerous issues with texture pop in before.