The directX 12 conspiracy

mrmerfeor

n00b
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
28
For a while now i've been seeing from amd users saying that directX 12 that will come out will destroy the nvidia's gpu's performance for some reason yet here i discussed which gpu i wanted to get and some said that amd gpu's would be better in the future etc.
Soo is it that true or its just pure BS because i don't even know what to think about this either
 
Seriously, why are you posting this? Welcome to the H forums but, regardless, this type of topic will end up being a fanboy feeding frenzy on both sides. :D On a different note, what did you end up purchasing and why? DX 12 is no conspiracy, it is a long time in coming and needed API, thankfully.
 
All speculation, no games out that are ready for it. Recently, ARK was "close" to being released to the public but was questionably yanked a day before the announced date.
There have been closed demos of alpha games, that's about it.

For all we know, there could be another generation or two of videocards before dx12 games/drivers mature enough to take full advantage of features.
 
wait till then is now and then decide. Speculation can be fun, but its kind of pointless until we have games we want to play that are running DX12 and drivers that are optimized for them.
 
All speculation, no games out that are ready for it. Recently, ARK was "close" to being released to the public but was questionably yanked a day before the announced date.
There have been closed demos of alpha games, that's about it.

For all we know, there could be another generation or two of videocards before dx12 games/drivers mature enough to take full advantage of features.

Remember HL2 where everyone was panning Geforce FX DX9 performance? By the time the game actually came out NV had already solved it with the 6800/6600.
 
For a while now i've been seeing from amd users saying that directX 12 that will come out will destroy the nvidia's gpu's performance for some reason yet here i discussed which gpu i wanted to get and some said that amd gpu's would be better in the future etc.
Soo is it that true or its just pure BS because i don't even know what to think about this either

There are no DX12 games on the market yet. If you want to buy a new video card, look at games currently on the market that you want to play and make your decision based on that.

It takes several years for game developers to fully switch over to a new DirectX so just focus on how cards play in today's games.
 
"Destroy" isn't a valid description of the comparison between NV and AMD this generation. The footing is fairly close, but NV has the upper hand at the highest price bracket. AMD is competitive across the lineup, and arguably wins on performance per dollar everywhere except for single-card Fiji.

What you do depends on what kind of card you are looking for. If you're looking for something to play something now, and don't mind upgrading when this card becomes obsolete, buy NV. They always have a fastest-right-now card at the top of their lineup, and their driver and game development optimizations (the places where they have the biggest advantages) will always support their current generation. If $700 for a card is fine with you, it should be a 980Ti.

AMD's GCN platform has held up pretty well over time, although it's not as good at geometry/tessellation as Maxwell. NV is at risk of being known for designing obsolescence into their cards. It happened with Kepler and may happen with async compute on Maxwell. Not that they go from better than AMD's to worthless, but they are at risk of going from better to worse.

Regardless, next year's chips on the new manufacturing process are going to be much faster, and everyone will move to HBM2, so I wouldn't worry about what's best right now. The best cards now will be blown out of the water in 6-9 months, and the best thing out there will change yet again. It's not a great time to buy, and I'd recommend buying something affordable unless you have a significant budget.
 
Go read bane talking to Bruce Wayne about hope in Gotham and how it can be used to corrupt people and you will see why direct x 12 is making amd people happy now. :)


Joking aside I think it's mostly just people excited at the idea that something will make their purchase seem more justified. Unfortunately some people like to compare e peens among peers. I think it's a small amount of people having a very vocal voice though.
 
If you go back to the HD5870 days and remember how Nvidia had no plans to support DX 11 and got caught dragging there azz and why the 480GTX was half a year late.. DX 12 is no different as it's the same ole Nvidia dragging there azz again..

Some of us have been around for awhile and remember how things really happen and we are not going to believe Nvidia's issue's are to be blamed on AMD from a group of newbie Nvidia fanboyz.
 
The online debate seems to go back and forth between theory and application. The theory says AMD has a leg up with this new API, but there is little way to test the theory at the moment.

Personally, I would rather be a theoretician as I prefer to use logic to deduce what is true. Ultimately with enough empirical evidence next year, theory will be irrelevant to consumers.
 
§kynet;1041847526 said:
That sure helped all the suckers that bought the FX.

If you are going buy cards based on how fast it runs future games then you are already a sucker. And its not like the FX got released before R300 anyway.
 
NVIDIA is making a strong showing here in DX12 vs a 390X and a Nano (around 30% faster) - http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_nano_review,26.html
I noticed the same thing in their Devil 390X review a few days ago.

https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/3jyjv8/powercolor_devil_radeon_r9_390x_review/cutdizv

But it's just one test, and they also didn't include any other Nvidia cards. I would like to see the 970 or 980 included, along with Fury X. It's also a bit odd the 390X and Nano pull the exact same numbers in every batch test.
His conclusion about async compute in that benchmark is completely wrong... The 980 Ti is exactly where it should be.
 
Seriously, why are you posting this? Welcome to the H forums but, regardless, this type of topic will end up being a fanboy feeding frenzy on both sides. :D On a different note, what did you end up purchasing and why? DX 12 is no conspiracy, it is a long time in coming and needed API, thankfully.

Welp the "conspiracy"is the fact it will make a super massive performance increase mostly at the amd side from what i saw since i saw some videos seeing the amd gpus getting lag spikes when there is alot of action in the screen.It's really more of cpus fault that decides what does it render and when but i doubt it will make a massive diffrence.
Now i will get a gtx 750 acx ftw because of the stupid low amount of power it need's (less power cosumption yay) also the fact my gpu is 3-4-ish year olds now and it comes from the early 7000 hd series soo basicaly it gets wrecked even on low settings in some games
 
Last edited:
All speculation, no games out that are ready for it. Recently, ARK was "close" to being released to the public but was questionably yanked a day before the announced date.
There have been closed demos of alpha games, that's about it.

For all we know, there could be another generation or two of videocards before dx12 games/drivers mature enough to take full advantage of features.

Yeah thats what i heard of too and people simply told me while i was asking help for a gpu upgrade to get a AMD card because they will have better support which the biggest reason is that the new 300 series are based on the older 200 series and those to the 7000 series which in some cases its a re-rebrand of the even older gpu's like the MSI Radeon R7 370 2GB OC which mean's they MUST be well optimised otherwise their performance will be horribly reduced.Also the fact some of the newer games i saw like the Project cars and even Witcher 3 soo with that in mind people think that directX 12 will fix all the issues soo i don't eat it and i went for Nvidia
 
wait till then is now and then decide. Speculation can be fun, but its kind of pointless until we have games we want to play that are running DX12 and drivers that are optimized for them.

Yep exacly but the whole issues with amd gpus in the newer games like Project cars and even Witcher 3 had issues with them soo i just don't eat the fact that it will make a massive diffrence for amd gpu's since people told me to get those since they will be more optimized in the future with games that actualy support directX 12 but i just don't belive it
 
Remember HL2 where everyone was panning Geforce FX DX9 performance? By the time the game actually came out NV had already solved it with the 6800/6600.

Yeah that's what im talking about people think if i get a AMD gpu's since those will be more optimized with directX 12 or something like that but i just don't belive it
 
There are no DX12 games on the market yet. If you want to buy a new video card, look at games currently on the market that you want to play and make your decision based on that.

It takes several years for game developers to fully switch over to a new DirectX so just focus on how cards play in today's games.

Yeah a few posts back i asked for some help picking a new gpu (which i got alot of good help from here) some people said to go with a AMD gpu because it will be more optimised with directX 12 but from what i saw every single new game i saw like Witcher 3 or Project cars had issues with AMD cards (Lets not talk about the pure shit optimization of Arkham knights because games like that just runed like trash with AMD and Nvidia card's).So i just don't think that DirectX 12 will make a massive diffrence in performance
 
"Destroy" isn't a valid description of the comparison between NV and AMD this generation. The footing is fairly close, but NV has the upper hand at the highest price bracket. AMD is competitive across the lineup, and arguably wins on performance per dollar everywhere except for single-card Fiji.

What you do depends on what kind of card you are looking for. If you're looking for something to play something now, and don't mind upgrading when this card becomes obsolete, buy NV. They always have a fastest-right-now card at the top of their lineup, and their driver and game development optimizations (the places where they have the biggest advantages) will always support their current generation. If $700 for a card is fine with you, it should be a 980Ti.

AMD's GCN platform has held up pretty well over time, although it's not as good at geometry/tessellation as Maxwell. NV is at risk of being known for designing obsolescence into their cards. It happened with Kepler and may happen with async compute on Maxwell. Not that they go from better than AMD's to worthless, but they are at risk of going from better to worse.

Regardless, next year's chips on the new manufacturing process are going to be much faster, and everyone will move to HBM2, so I wouldn't worry about what's best right now. The best cards now will be blown out of the water in 6-9 months, and the best thing out there will change yet again. It's not a great time to buy, and I'd recommend buying something affordable unless you have a significant budget.

You made some interesting point's but my budget isn't higher than 190 euro(I live outside of america).So i will get my self a gtx 950 acx ftw since i will use it for a long time,Oh and also i will under clock the processor since 1165mhz seem's too much for me so if i won't be happy with its performance in the future(Also let's keep in mind i use a 1280x1024).
I will use it for a good amount of time since i like to get most of my gpu and not just upgrade it once in a while(Because im quiet broke heh)and the amount of power it need's and how cool it is seriously increases it's life span.

And people keep saying that AMD is the best thing to get now because they will have better support for directX 12 and here people told me to get AMD because in the future it will have better support for the newer games in the future.But from what i saw alot of the new games now aren't soo well optimised with AMD cards.Let's say CoD advanced warfare here is a link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQzLU4HWw2U.And people say that directX 12 will change all of that and it will be better optimized with directX 12 games but i won't belive it soo i will just stick with Nvidia for now soo i won't get these issues too in the future
 
One game doesn't represent an entire API.
Especially true for an unfinished Indie title.

Well yeah but were not talking about some crappy unfinished indie title it even happend with the latest AAA games like CoD advanced warfare for example as seen here in the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQzLU4HWw2U AMD cards arent soo optimised (Lets not look at shitty games like batman arkham knight which work garbage with both AMD and Nvidia)
 
Go read bane talking to Bruce Wayne about hope in Gotham and how it can be used to corrupt people and you will see why direct x 12 is making amd people happy now. :)


Joking aside I think it's mostly just people excited at the idea that something will make their purchase seem more justified. Unfortunately some people like to compare e peens among peers. I think it's a small amount of people having a very vocal voice though.

Yeah heh but alot people said even here on the [H]forums when i asked for help picking my gpu that its better to go with AMD cards because that will make a massive diffrence in the future but i won't belive it.
 
Yeah that's what im talking about people think if i get a AMD gpu's since those will be more optimized with directX 12 or something like that but i just don't belive it

Unless you're buying an overkill GPU for your current resolution, you'll be replacing it in 2-3 years. By that time the needs of DX12 titles will be much more clearly defined.

Right now we have the equivalent of the early HL2 benchmarks. In two years we will have release HL2 benchmarks, plus a half-dozen other games benchmarked. We will KNOW which DX12 games work best with which video cards, if there is even still a difference in new cards.

Basically, in just one year Nvidia went from this 2003 HL2 PREVIEW clusterfuck (9800 Pro owns all):

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/halflife-2-benchmarks,679-5.html

To this HL2 dominance in 2004 RELEASE (6600 GT at $200 destroying the old $400 9800 Pro):

http://www.anandtech.com/show/1546/3

So you see, a lot can happen in a year. You have no idea what games will be hits and which ones will crash-and-burn, so making predictions about what TYPE of game engine you will be playing on 2 years from now is simply impossible. Just buy the best card for the games you play now.
 
Last edited:
If you go back to the HD5870 days and remember how Nvidia had no plans to support DX 11 and got caught dragging there azz and why the 480GTX was half a year late.. DX 12 is no different as it's the same ole Nvidia dragging there azz again..

Some of us have been around for awhile and remember how things really happen and we are not going to believe Nvidia's issue's are to be blamed on AMD from a group of newbie Nvidia fanboyz.

Yeah AMD mostly releases rebrands of the 200 series which are rebrands of the older 7000HD series.Soo they must be well optimised since they are rebranded soo often and are based on old technology
 
The online debate seems to go back and forth between theory and application. The theory says AMD has a leg up with this new API, but there is little way to test the theory at the moment.

Personally, I would rather be a theoretician as I prefer to use logic to deduce what is true. Ultimately with enough empirical evidence next year, theory will be irrelevant to consumers.

And thus i will stay safe and stick with Nvidia for now (Even though i own a 7770hd series gpu which served me well now but its about to be dead since i had to under clock it to 300mhz xD)
 
§kynet;1041847526 said:
That sure helped all the suckers that bought the FX.

Ah the infamous "more cores means better performance"
Still baffles me that people belive that xD
 
If you are going buy cards based on how fast it runs future games then you are already a sucker. And its not like the FX got released before R300 anyway.

You mean the rebranded 300 series that are based on the 200 series which those 200 series are based on the old 7000HD series?
 
I noticed the same thing in their Devil 390X review a few days ago.

https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/3jyjv8/powercolor_devil_radeon_r9_390x_review/cutdizv

But it's just one test, and they also didn't include any other Nvidia cards. I would like to see the 970 or 980 included, along with Fury X. It's also a bit odd the 390X and Nano pull the exact same numbers in every batch test.
His conclusion about async compute in that benchmark is completely wrong... The 980 Ti is exactly where it should be.

Now don't forget there are no games that have directX 12 support soo we can't really prove otherwise
 
Unless you're buying an overkill GPU for your current resolution, you'll be replacing it in 2-3 years. By that time the needs of DX12 titles will be much more clearly defined.

Right now we have the equivalent of the early HL2 benchmarks. In two years we will have release HL2 benchmarks, plus a half-dozen other games benchmarked. We will KNOW which DX12 games work best with which video cards, if there is even still a difference in new cards.

Basically, in just one year Nvidia went from this 2003 HL2 clusterfuck (9800 Pro owns all):

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/halflife-2-benchmarks,679-5.html

To this HL2 dominance in 2004 (6600 GT at $200 destroying the old $400 9800 Pro):

http://www.anandtech.com/show/1546/3

So you see, a lot can happen in a year. You have no idea what games will be hits and which ones will crash-and-burn, so making predictions about what TYPE of game engine you will be playing on 2 years from now is simply impossible. Just buy the best card for the games you play now.

Yeah i will just stick with the Nvidia cards and won't risk it with such a lack of evidence we have right now
 
Yeah heh but alot people said even here on the [H]forums when i asked for help picking my gpu that its better to go with AMD cards because that will make a massive diffrence in the future but i won't belive it.

Lol I think the ones who aren't complaining are probably too busy playing their games and not benchmarking it.

I'm an Nvidia guy now, but have had AMD cards in the past. And by all means both have run really well, and within 2~3 years I'll buy another video card that runs current games well no matter the company. Though I will admit kinda shoe horned myself into a corner getting a gsync monitor but hell right now if I had a 390 or 970/980 I would probably be absolutely happy with my 1440p performance.
 
I am actually a pretty big fan of the FX series. It's the last series to have full Windows 98 support for the venerable 45.23 driver version.
 
I think the big thing people are missing in all of this was the intentions behind the hardware designs. None of the hardware right now fully supports all the functions of DX12, and it'll be a while before even the new parts get to it.

AMD has always focused on the raw compute power of their GPUs, which is why many scooped them up for folding and mining, but for a long time they have trailed behind in software support. Software solutions for the hardware were intrinsic to supporting previous versions of DirectX, and AMD developed Mantle as a way around this limitation, but even that proved to be only beneficial at removing the bottleneck on a system that was already bottleneck'd (ergo, a slow CPU), and it was hard to adopt because it was still considered an AMD technology (despite stating publicly that it was usable by anyone). Nvidia on the other hand has been designing their hardware around the software, attempting to reduce the bottleneck as much as possible via software means and developing a hardware that can match that. The changes from Fermi to Kepler to Maxwell were all methods of improving how the cards could handle the software calls by increasing efficiency rather than brute force.

What we're seeing now is the elimination of the software bottleneck with DX12. Brute force is king because the API now can directly communicate, and so Nvidia has to find a way to compensate for that. As someone on Steam's "Ark: Survival Evolved" forum put it, the difference between the two is like attempting to transport 64 units of data by having 8 trucks carry 8 units of data (AMD) at a normal speed versus one truck carrying 32 units of data at a slightly faster speed. Both will reach the endpoint, but one can do it in a fraction of the time with less effort.

I have no doubt that Nvidia will come up with a software solution for the hardware problem, but it'll be more of a band-aid until new hardware is released, and I'm betting Pascal is about to go through a major hardware revision and delay due to this new information.
 
What we're seeing now is the elimination of the software bottleneck with DX12. Brute force is king because the API now can directly communicate, and so Nvidia has to find a way to compensate for that.

Compensate for what exactly? The stock 980ti is currently beating all of AMD's products in the (alpha) DX12 Ashes benchmark by a sizable margin.
 
Compensate for what exactly? The stock 980ti is currently beating all of AMD's products in the (alpha) DX12 Ashes benchmark by a sizable margin.
I'm not even sure what's happening anymore. The two most recent tests from Toms & Guru3D put it to rest. Look at these benchmarks and tell me if you see anything wrong (spoiler alert: You won't).

kaTlnq9.png


SCdMSrj.png
 
Compensate for what exactly? The stock 980ti is currently beating all of AMD's products in the (alpha) DX12 Ashes benchmark by a sizable margin.

Beating, yes, but the performance difference between DX11 and DX12 isn't what it should be on Nvidia hardware. A 980Ti sweeps the floor with the 390x and in most cases the Fury X in almost all tests, but if AMD hardware is seeing close to a 2x boost in performance by switching to DX12, while Nvidia is seeing a gain/loss around 5%, that's an issue, and that's what has everyone so riled up. I think most people, myself included, were expecting the performance gains of DX12 on Nvidia hardware to be significantly better than what we're seeing so far.

Then again, we are talking about a single benchmark, but the information out there does seem to paint a pretty clear picture of what's going on.
 
Back
Top