Big Navi and Ampere Shenanigans!

Iching said:
Let me know if that ray tracing is worth additional $500. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Are we convinced RT will be so slow with RX series? Looking forward to seeing some benchmarks. I guess without interpolation it’s still too compute heavy.

I ask bc as far as I can tell there are RT accelerators in the RX compute units.
 
Powerage said:
Are we convinced RT will be so slow with RX series? Looking forward to seeing some benchmarks. I guess without interpolation it’s still too compute heavy.

I ask bc as far as I can tell there are RT accelerators in the RX compute units.
Click to expand...
Maybe no, maybe so. I think AMD is taking a different approach to RT. Looks like it will mostly be accomplished on the software side of things than hardware.
 
Krenum said:
Maybe no, maybe so. I think AMD is taking a different approach to RT. Looks like it will mostly be accomplished on the software side of things than hardware.
Click to expand...
Rumormill is pretty squarely in DXR exclusive for AMD raytracing. In some ways a smarter play as its default API level stuff. Nvidia may have helped make that standard but has since moved on to typical nvidia exclusive.
 
Powerage said:
Are we convinced RT will be so slow with RX series? Looking forward to seeing some benchmarks. I guess without interpolation it’s still too compute heavy.

I ask bc as far as I can tell there are RT accelerators in the RX compute units.
Click to expand...

AMD does have plans for a DLSS counterpart. Obviously, I think Nvidia has the head start especially since it took them to get to 2.0 to make it viable. DLSS 2.0 isn't perfect, but helps a lot. With luck AMD's counterpart will be on par, which should help with any type of ray tracing performance loss.
 
Krenum said:
Maybe no, maybe so. I think AMD is taking a different approach to RT. Looks like it will mostly be accomplished on the software side of things than hardware.
Click to expand...
Why mostly software? AFAIK there is 1 Ray Accelerator per CU. Early info forwarded by AMD points to 14x improvement over software RT on the Procedural Geometry test from the DXR SDK (footnote 4: 471FPS vs 32FPS). Nvidia seems to be able to get something around ~19x improvement in the same test with a 3080: 630FPS vs 32FPS( I'm assuming it has a similar baseline, couldn't find it with a quick search).
 
Flogger23m said:
AMD does have plans for a DLSS counterpart. Obviously, I think Nvidia has the head start especially since it took them to get to 2.0 to make it viable. DLSS 2.0 isn't perfect, but helps a lot. With luck AMD's counterpart will be on par, which should help with any type of ray tracing performance loss.
Click to expand...


You can see that AMD's version is a tad softer. But also keep in mind of YouTube's compression.
 
Krenum said:


You can see that AMD's version is a tad softer. But also keep in mind of YouTube's compression.
Click to expand...

With Youtube compression it's really hard to see any difference. I am currently looking at a 15.4" 2.8k laptop screen though as opposed to my DCI-4k desktop monitor. If the performance increase is similar and the visual hit is similar across the board, at least initially I would say that this solution is "good enough" to negate DLSS as a performance advantage for nVidia over AMD.

Like all things, we'll know more after reviewers get cards in hand. Looking forward to the [H]'s review on Youtube.
 
Krenum said:


You can see that AMD's version is a tad softer. But also keep in mind of YouTube's compression.
Click to expand...

Interesting, wonder if DLSS is removing the subtle ambient effects like the white gnats floating around or dragonfly on the river scene or just scene didn't have them in Nvidia capture.
 
Flogger23m said:
AMD does have plans for a DLSS counterpart. Obviously, I think Nvidia has the head start especially since it took them to get to 2.0 to make it viable. DLSS 2.0 isn't perfect, but helps a lot. With luck AMD's counterpart will be on par, which should help with any type of ray tracing performance loss.
Click to expand...

Krenum said:


You can see that AMD's version is a tad softer. But also keep in mind of YouTube's compression.
Click to expand...


I can see a difference, but I think it's mostly a difference in hue. I don't fixate on looking for jaggies at light-transition corners, I prefer to base my opinion on the whole view as I'm playing the game, so I'm not sure I see much of a difference. They're close enough that if you took one away I'm not sure I'd be able to tell you which one I was looking at.

But I can say that the video is the longest I've seen Sam Bridges standing still. Maybe that's the problem.
 
Eymar said:
Interesting, wonder if DLSS is removing the subtle ambient effects like the white gnats floating around or dragonfly on the river scene or just scene didn't have them in Nvidia capture.
Click to expand...
Its likely the distant flies are being ommitted/ignored by DLSS. It tends to squish small stuff like that (see: DLSS drastically changes the rain effects, as one example). In this video, you can see it also affects the flashing of those light posts and the surface quality of the river is not as good.

I encourage people to head on over to the DLSS thread to talk more about this and to also check out my video for Death Stranding, which highlights shortcomings of DLSS, which I haven't seen shown anywhere else. And only briefly mentioned in one text preview article.

*My video did not show the effect it has on those light posts. But, it makes sense, based on how it affects other small/simple animations like that.


https://hardforum.com/threads/more-dlss.1990492/page-12#post-1044753127
 
Last edited:
From the times when Radeon was under ATI

The Paper Launch: NVIDIA and ATI’s release circus​

It's been a while since everyone was fully riled up about paper launches and the like, which means it's a good time to have a level-headed discussion about the topic. What is a paper launch? In general, the phrase is used to denote product announcements that explicitly compare the "new product" with other actually available products, despite the fact that the newly announced product is not actually available to consumers. We've seen a lot of this in the CPU and video card markets: 8 reviews come out on the same day touting X or Y, but it will be weeks (if not months) before the product is actually available. From my own experiences, I would say that the issue of paper launches being "good" or "bad" rests in part on the definition of a paper launch. Just what is it?

https://twitter.com/nerdtechgasm/status/1332086216905293824?s=20
 
I'm not certain the launches were in fact "paper", but I say that as I don't have evidence one way or another. If groups/people (e.g. scalpers) buy up the existing stock and essentially hold it out of circulation for a kings ransom I'm not sure I'd say "there weren't enough cards available", but not knowing how many people do that is the big question. Sure we've seen some European store (Finland? sorry the country escapes me) stating they hardly got any cards in stock, but what about the larger sellers, Newegg, Microcenter, Best Buy, it seems the "script kiddies" are able to buy every card online before any human can and they pretty much are doing exactly that, and the fact I absolutely can buy any 3000 series card right now... for the right price tells me that scalpers may have actually taken a very large percentage of the cards out of circulation. Plus there's stories of Microcenter (which is in person only) having cards come in periodically and other than the first 2-3 weeks no exorbitant amount of line waiting is necessary, it's just those tend to cater to locals and people willing to drive unreasonable amounts of distance to get one.

Overall though, I don't need any of this shit "right now" so if if I don't start building a new rig until July of next year so be it.
 
Krenum said:
*snip*

You can see that AMD's version is a tad softer. But also keep in mind of YouTube's compression.
Click to expand...
The most noticeable difference is the trailing/ghosting artifacts seen with DLSS. From personal experience, I see this a lot in Mechwarrior 5 w/ DLSS, but it's usually in my periphery so it doesn't bother me. Unfortunate that this video doesn't show the game in motion, because that's when the ghosting is way more obvious; it applies to everything, not just particle effects (like the floating blobs we see in Death Stranding) or thin geometry (e.g. wires and cables) or objects with heavy use of alpha/transparency (e.g. chain link fences). Virtually everything that's thinly silhouetted (because there's insufficient neighboring pixels for DLSS to make an accurate guestimate) has varying degrees of ghosting artifacts when the game is in motion. In MW5, this is commonly building doodads (e.g. billboards, antennae, radio towers, satellite dishes) and landscapes with high narrow peaks that silhouette against the skybox.

FidFXvDLSS.png
 
sfsuphysics said:
I'm not certain the launches were in fact "paper", but I say that as I don't have evidence one way or another. If groups/people (e.g. scalpers) buy up the existing stock and essentially hold it out of circulation for a kings ransom I'm not sure I'd say "there weren't enough cards available", but not knowing how many people do that is the big question. Sure we've seen some European store (Finland? sorry the country escapes me) stating they hardly got any cards in stock, but what about the larger sellers, Newegg, Microcenter, Best Buy, it seems the "script kiddies" are able to buy every card online before any human can and they pretty much are doing exactly that, and the fact I absolutely can buy any 3000 series card right now... for the right price tells me that scalpers may have actually taken a very large percentage of the cards out of circulation. Plus there's stories of Microcenter (which is in person only) having cards come in periodically and other than the first 2-3 weeks no exorbitant amount of line waiting is necessary, it's just those tend to cater to locals and people willing to drive unreasonable amounts of distance to get one.

Overall though, I don't need any of this shit "right now" so if if I don't start building a new rig until July of next year so be it.
Click to expand...
Yes, I would be hard-pressed to call either team's launch, a paper launch, but they are at best a soft launch. The simple fact is they both prioritized previous agreements and put out the bare minimum amount of hardware required as to not anger their shareholders, they each had a launch window they had to meet, and not announcing and launching some degree of hardware in that window would have lead to investor panic. So they made their announcements and made the minimum amount of consumer products they could feasibly get away with and still meet their contractual obligations and it's paid off, shareholders are happy, fans are salivating dreaming of the systems they are going to build, scalpers are taking their cut, and by year-end, neither party has lost out on any sales because where are we going to go?
 
SPARTAN VI said:
The most noticeable difference is the trailing/ghosting artifacts seen with DLSS. From personal experience, I see this a lot in Mechwarrior 5 w/ DLSS, but it's usually in my periphery so it doesn't bother me. Unfortunate that this video doesn't show the game in motion, because that's when the ghosting is way more obvious; it applies to everything, not just particle effects (like the floating blobs we see in Death Stranding) or thin geometry (e.g. wires and cables) or objects with heavy use of alpha/transparency (e.g. chain link fences). Virtually everything that's thinly silhouetted (because there's insufficient neighboring pixels for DLSS to make an accurate guestimate) has varying degrees of ghosting artifacts when the game is in motion. In MW5, this is commonly building doodads (e.g. billboards, antennae, radio towers, satellite dishes) and landscapes with high narrow peaks that silhouette against the skybox.

View attachment 303504
Click to expand...
are those artifacts or is it something way off in the distance? it looks like the black stuff floating...
 
SPARTAN VI said:
The most noticeable difference is the trailing/ghosting artifacts seen with DLSS. From personal experience, I see this a lot in Mechwarrior 5 w/ DLSS, but it's usually in my periphery so it doesn't bother me. Unfortunate that this video doesn't show the game in motion, because that's when the ghosting is way more obvious; it applies to everything, not just particle effects (like the floating blobs we see in Death Stranding) or thin geometry (e.g. wires and cables) or objects with heavy use of alpha/transparency (e.g. chain link fences). Virtually everything that's thinly silhouetted (because there's insufficient neighboring pixels for DLSS to make an accurate guestimate) has varying degrees of ghosting artifacts when the game is in motion. In MW5, this is commonly building doodads (e.g. billboards, antennae, radio towers, satellite dishes) and landscapes with high narrow peaks that silhouette against the skybox.

View attachment 303504
Click to expand...
As they are both "Optimization" processes I am pretty sure we can find edge cases for both where they do strange things with only one or two titles and very limited availability of the hardware available I would be hard-pressed to say either is better or worse than the other at this stage so I am sure fans of either camp could each come up with hundreds of screenshots showing the flaws of the other, the question I have is during actual gameplay while things are moving and you are running, jumping, and interacting with the environment around you which has the least noticeable flaws while providing the best overall experience. Both are going to be highly subjective and dependent on a large number of factors so the real determination of which is "best" is going to come down to adoption, if one is available in 50 titles while the other in 5 regardless of how much better or worst they are from each other the one you can use should you choose to is best. And if you have no intention of using either then it's irrelevant.
 
pendragon1 said:
are those artifacts or is it something way off in the distance? it looks like the black stuff floating...
Click to expand...
In this particular example it's the particle effects in the distance, but it's normally visible on any vfx/geometry that's thinly silhouetted. If this video compared gameplay in motion, we'd probably see the same ghosting on the stony peaks as they're silhouetted against the sky or river.

Lakados said:
As they are both "Optimization" processes I am pretty sure we can find edge cases for both where they do strange things with only one or two titles and very limited availability of the hardware available I would be hard-pressed to say either is better or worse than the other at this stage so I am sure fans of either camp could each come up with hundreds of screenshots showing the flaws of the other, the question I have is during actual gameplay while things are moving and you are running, jumping, and interacting with the environment around you which has the least noticeable flaws while providing the best overall experience. Both are going to be highly subjective and dependent on a large number of factors so the real determination of which is "best" is going to come down to adoption, if one is available in 50 titles while the other in 5 regardless of how much better or worst they are from each other the one you can use should you choose to is best. And if you have no intention of using either then it's irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Yeah, definitely reserving judgement until there's more information and footage to analyze. This video is only comparing 1 game's application of this tech and it's entirely static camera footage, which is not representative of real world gameplay and only really emphasizes DLSS artifacts. Need to see gameplay in motion, performance metrics, and so on.
 
Last edited:
Based on predictions from multiple semiconductor firms, we shouldn’t expect easy availability or normal pricing much before Q2 2021. By Pascal’s 5th birthday, the GPU market will have run hot to red-hot for 26 months out of 60. Another way of saying that is, “For 43 percent of the time over five years, you haven’t been able to buy a GPU for anything like what AMD or Nvidia claim you can.”

Gaming enthusiasts and professional users deserve better than an asterisk promising a launch in one month with actual availability arriving six months later.
Click to expand...

https://www.extremetech.com/computi...ebut-this-fall-was-effectively-a-paper-launch
 
Marees said:
Based on predictions from multiple semiconductor firms, we shouldn’t expect easy availability or normal pricing much before Q2 2021. By Pascal’s 5th birthday, the GPU market will have run hot to red-hot for 26 months out of 60. Another way of saying that is, “For 43 percent of the time over five years, you haven’t been able to buy a GPU for anything like what AMD or Nvidia claim you can.”



https://www.extremetech.com/computi...ebut-this-fall-was-effectively-a-paper-launch
Click to expand...
This is AMD's greed for business. They took on more projects than they have wafer availability from TSMC. By mid January the availability will be considerably better but not ideal. They are starting to get additional wafers from TSMC as Apple has shifted all their 7nm chip production to 5nm. Allowing for a few weeks to optimize those fabricators to AMD with cpu and gpu chip production should pick up steam. The consoles have been the biggest factor in lack of availability of Ryzen 5000 series chips and RX 6000 series gpu chips. AMD has been completely opaque instead of transparent on this issue. Nvidia has simply outright lied and is still doing so. Their problem is low yields on the Samsung 8nm node. That node was designed for small die chips not the huge gpu dies with the 3080, 3090 and to a lesser extent with the 3070 dies. It has been difficult for Samsung engineers to adapt it for these huge dies and there is a significant failure rate. Blame it on Gensen Wang. He tried to go cheap by scoring favorable prices with Samsung vs TSMC and got exactly what his hand called for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top