Navi vs Vega... Must see comparison.

DooKey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
8,405
Thanks this was a very good breakdown and pretty much reaffirmed what I believed about VEGA and NAVI.

I'm still rather irritated with reviewers who insist on including more DX11 games in their reviews than DX12.

Some games are 7 years old. We should not be seeing them.
As long as the majority of games are coded with DX11 they will continue to be used like that and that's as it should be.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,526
I'm still rather irritated with reviewers who insist on including more DX11 games in their reviews than DX12.
Given the veritable ass that many DX12 implementations are representative of, I don't see a problem at this time. But it should be mentioned by reviewers when they eschew DX12 for DX11 as to why they're still doing it.
 

dvsman

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Messages
3,107
Wow that's pretty interesting. I guess I'll keep my VII around for a while then. Should be good in a year or three :-D
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
As long as the majority of games are coded with DX11 they will continue to be used like that and that's as it should be.
That's the problem any new game you buy today supports DX12. We should not be seeing 7 year old titles anymore. It's getting so bad that many of them have stayed longer than Quake ever did.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
Given the veritable ass that many DX12 implementations are representative of, I don't see a problem at this time. But it should be mentioned by reviewers when they eschew DX12 for DX11 as to why they're still doing it.
Performance varies amongst the games of course. They always will. But seeing a heavier weight placed on DX11 over 12 we should not be seeing. It's been 5 years. Every game released today supports 12 and every card released in like the last 4 supports it.

At this point it should be closer to equal at the minimum. But we are still seeing a really crazy 75% catering to DX11 on some sites which is nuts.
 

Bankie

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
1,658
Performance varies amongst the games of course. They always will. But seeing a heavier weight placed on DX11 over 12 we should not be seeing. It's been 5 years. Every game released today supports 12 and every card released in like the last 4 supports it.

At this point it should be closer to equal at the minimum. But we are still seeing a really crazy 75% catering to DX11 on some sites which is nuts.
Only a handful of new games support DX12. It's not even close to "Every game". I would agree that every new game *should* support DX12 but with the difficulty of development in DX12 it's taking a long time to get to that point.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,526
But seeing a heavier weight placed on DX11 over 12 we should not be seeing.
Not sure what to tell you -- you're right, of course, but seeing more DX11 games does make sense. DX12 is a completely different paradigm with respect to game development, whereas DX10 was a consolidation of the ideas that started with DX8 with the option to use shaders, DX9 with programmable shaders, DX10 brought unified shaders -- and DX11 was a minor add-on to DX10 which standardized a few things that were optional in DX10. Everything from DX7, when DirectX started to gain acceptance and an install base, to the culmination of the API with DX11, was a progression of the abstraction paradigm that Microsoft initiated with the DirectX program.

DirectX 12 peels that abstraction back quite a bit, allowing for more control over hardware, but in turn developers must account for the underlying hardware at a much deeper level.


Now, given how slowly and how poorly the DirectX 12 uptake has been, something that I didn't expect myself, we'll probably see DirectX fade and Vulkan take over. When it comes to gaming I'm performance-oriented and that usually means supporting DirectX, but from what I've seen Vulkan seems to provide the best experience, and it's multi-platform. That's starting to become a much bigger deal not just with Linux gaming but also with mobile gaming and 'hybrid' mobile gaming like on the Nintendo Switch.
 

LigTasm

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
5,053
I watched it, pretty interesting and basically what we all figured out. In the end even though AMD was making very advanced GPUs they didn't build it for the workload that actually exists so what you end up with is an overpriced and underperforming chip in the consumers eye. They were probably banking on newer API's taking off more than they did but the end result is the same.
 

dragonstongue

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
3,161
I guess this is why the maker/publisher needs to be adamant on full stack support of DX11 or 12 and call it as such, not DX xx supported but BUILT WITH DX xx (this assures buyers that it was day 1 coded from, not added to base code)

I personally would like to see such...granted there are many DX9 through 11 that were built with the very lowest and managed to slap on pretty much the highest feature sets (especially with AMD, which at this point to the best of my knowledge still has deeper support across their entire portolio
vs others .. not as sure vs Nv RTX cards or them 2xxx series newest

-------
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
6,270
Now, given how slowly and how poorly the DirectX 12 uptake has been, something that I didn't expect myself, we'll probably see DirectX fade and Vulkan take over. When it comes to gaming I'm performance-oriented and that usually means supporting DirectX, but from what I've seen Vulkan seems to provide the best experience, and it's multi-platform. That's starting to become a much bigger deal not just with Linux gaming but also with mobile gaming and 'hybrid' mobile gaming like on the Nintendo Switch.
I've been saying this for probably 4-5 years, and usually a bunch of DX proponents (like they actually cared what API's were being used) tried to argue that devs code for what is popular. Which makes zero sense. Originally my discussion was discussing the lack of macOS development for games, and obviously I was arguing that using open API's to allow easier porting from platform to platform would allow devs to make more money as it would require significantly less resources to port when using an API that is supported by multiple OS'. (Blizzard and iD more or less have the gaming market cornered on macOS as most other companies don't bother to port. There are some others like Gearbox and Firaxis that also generally port to macOS).
I have no idea why every dev doesn't just code on Vulkan and go multi-platform with everything. By widening what platforms your game is on you simply make more money. DX is needlessly restrictive in terms of OS and outside of XBox isn't supported on any other OS or platform. Hopefully consoles will change this tide. Microsoft keeping a stranglehold on gaming needs to die. If gaming consoles can be the impetus to get us there, I'm all for it.

I hope Vulkan is the future. So I can get some good gaming on other platforms, so I don't have to dual boot into a terrible OS just to play games occasionally, and hell, so the devs can just make some more money.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
I've been saying this for probably 4-5 years, and usually a bunch of DX proponents (like they actually cared what API's were being used) tried to argue that devs code for what is popular. Which makes zero sense. Originally my discussion was discussing the lack of macOS development for games, and obviously I was arguing that using open API's to allow easier porting from platform to platform would allow devs to make more money as it would require significantly less resources to port when using an API that is supported by multiple OS'. (Blizzard and iD more or less have the gaming market cornered on macOS as most other companies don't bother to port. There are some others like Gearbox and Firaxis that also generally port to macOS).
I have no idea why every dev doesn't just code on Vulkan and go multi-platform with everything. By widening what platforms your game is on you simply make more money. DX is needlessly restrictive in terms of OS and outside of XBox isn't supported on any other OS or platform. Hopefully consoles will change this tide. Microsoft keeping a stranglehold on gaming needs to die. If gaming consoles can be the impetus to get us there, I'm all for it.

I hope Vulkan is the future. So I can get some good gaming on other platforms, so I don't have to dual boot into a terrible OS just to play games occasionally, and hell, so the devs can just make some more money.
I'm all for this as well. From a business perspective you have to be an idiot not to plan for cross platform APIs.

The other benefit is that it reduces, it doesn't eliminate but at least it reduces developers relying on common but closed code that reduces entry and reduces competition and innovation.

It improves the gaming experience when more ideas and features are allowed into the space from various manufacturers not just one.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,526
Originally my discussion was discussing the lack of macOS development for games
Given that Apple rarely builds hardware that targets desktop gamers... yeah.

I wouldn't code for Apple either.

Linux is also a niche, but there's more of a focus there on the part of OEMs and the community (separately and together).

With DX12, at least you're hitting a major console and the only real desktop market -- Vulkan, while I'd like to see more of it for the sake of Linux gaming and developers seem to screw it up less, would only really be a draw outside of dedicated open developers (basically id) if it were used on say a Playstation.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
6,270
Given that Apple rarely builds hardware that targets desktop gamers... yeah.

I wouldn't code for Apple either.

Linux is also a niche, but there's more of a focus there on the part of OEMs and the community (separately and together).

With DX12, at least you're hitting a major console and the only real desktop market -- Vulkan, while I'd like to see more of it for the sake of Linux gaming and developers seem to screw it up less, would only really be a draw outside of dedicated open developers (basically id) if it were used on say a Playstation.
This is what I'm talking about. There is zero benefit to being limited. You may as well code everything in Vulkan and be able to be on everything. DX gives ZERO advantages and only limits platform.
You may think that Linux and macOS are a niche, but if it takes next to nothing to develop for them, then you might as well release on those platforms and take those dollars. Both Blizzard and iD are insightful enough to know this. And as a result they're getting money that you if you were a game dev would not. I think those two companies know more about this than the average dev, and iD for the most part was releasing the most hardware intensive engines and games for decades.
Gaming hardware isn't the most important part, the most important part is that people want to play stuff. Even on the PC side, the average gamer doesn't have anything more powerful than a 580 or 1050-1060 (the [H] is skewed. Most gamers aren't rocking 1080Ti's or 2080supers/TIs). Most macOS hardware meets that level of gaming. Plenty of Mac hardware is enough for 1080p at medium settings. Just because people can't potentially max out at ultra settings doesn't mean people don't want to play games. If that was true then the aforementioned "average gamer" with the hardware I mentioned above would also not want to play games.

NOT being multi-platform, and not being open-source is bad business because it's literally costing dollars. Dollars that devs could otherwise be making regardless of if you think its niche or not. Especially when considering that once again there is zero reason to not just use Vulkan for everything as it has potential upside whereas DX just is a lock-in. Also Xbox is last in the console race both in platform and in sales of software. "Major" is an overstatement at least this time around. It's far more profitable to develop for the Switch with its "lesser" hardware, which is essentially using nVidia Shield hardware.
 
Last edited:

vegeta535

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
3,822
Given that Apple rarely builds hardware that targets desktop gamers... yeah.

I wouldn't code for Apple either.

Linux is also a niche, but there's more of a focus there on the part of OEMs and the community (separately and together).

With DX12, at least you're hitting a major console and the only real desktop market -- Vulkan, while I'd like to see more of it for the sake of Linux gaming and developers seem to screw it up less, would only really be a draw outside of dedicated open developers (basically id) if it were used on say a Playstation.
This. Idk why MacOS support even matters. Their laptops and iMacs generally only come with Intel integrated gpu. If they do get a discrete gpu it is a low end AMD GPU. Hell Apple doesn't even support much in the way of Nvidia. You know the company that owns the biggest chunk of the market. Outside of simple old games you are doing it wrong when it comes using a Mac for gaming
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
11,629
Nice video but, some of that was over my head. (Well, at least it was, since I was not totally focused and I am tired at the moment. :) ) That said, I am keeping my Vega 56 for a couple more years, at least. I do have a RX 5700 flashed with the XT Bios though.
 

SvenBent

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
3,166
Thanks this was a very good breakdown and pretty much reaffirmed what I believed about VEGA and NAVI.

I'm still rather irritated with reviewers who insist on including more DX11 games in their reviews than DX12.

Some games are 7 years old. We should not be seeing them.
More information can never hurt. Unless you simply dont understand what you are seeing
 

crazycrave

Gawd
Joined
Mar 31, 2016
Messages
696
As I wait for a pci express x 16 riser to install my RX 5700 in a case with a rack in the way .. I played with Polaris as to get a look at DX 12 and I wish all games looked this good and we really never got to test some of the other GCN gpu's that had DX 12 support and more what a gpu like Polaris was built to run .

 

PontiacGTX

Gawd
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
735
Wow that's pretty interesting. I guess I'll keep my VII around for a while then. Should be good in a year or three :-D
I believe if you dont use it for compute purposes (OpenCL/ROCm) it is a better idea to sell it before the value drops.. and get a RX 5700 XT or some cheap placeholder
 
Top