NVIDIA: "AMD's developer relations efforts are thinly spread"

trick0502 said:
someone drug test this person!

mantle is here now. dx12 will be here when? nvidia did not create dx12.

dx11 optimization? that was driver was a sham. http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/1...-shouldnt-trust-manufacturer-provided-numbers

physx? they didnt ever create that, they bought it.
Click to expand...


Someone's getting a little riled up that people don't bow down and praise the Gaming dEvolved campaign from their favorite GPU vendor! :p

Mantle is here for one game! YAY!!!!!! /sarcasm It's a zombie DOA marketing api ;).

DX11 optimization made a huge difference in ESO and many other games, don't judge just by one set of tests on a limited set of games ;) from one review site. L2tech.

PhysX was created in an early version by ageia and bought by nvidia who then refined it over the years and has made it their own. It's now their tech. What's your point exactly again?
 
GoldenTiger said:
Someone's getting a little riled up that people don't bow down and praise the Gaming dEvolved campaign from their favorite GPU vendor! :p

Mantle is here for one game! YAY!!!!!! /sarcasm It's a zombie DOA marketing api ;).

DX11 optimization made a huge difference in ESO and many other games, don't judge just by one set of tests on a limited set of games ;) from one review site. L2tech.

PhysX was created in an early version by ageia and bought by nvidia who then refined it over the years and has made it their own. It's now their tech. What's your point exactly again?
Click to expand...

PhysX is cute, but really, the reason it hasn't become a 'killer' feature is because it's proprietary.

And remember, AMD invented morphological anti-aliasing, and they were the first (and so far in my opinion, the ONLY)
Vendor to make multi-monitor gaming a 'thing'. Nvidia does some awesome stuff too, but they are obsessed with making things proprietary.

Argument: but mantle!

Really, I see Mantle as the thing that kicked M$ into gear on speeding up development for DX 12.

Please, hear me out; There were tons of articles a year ago suggesting M$ was just going to keep DX 11 updated and current an there really wouldn't be a 'DX12' as we know it. AMD commented on a lot of these articles basically saying 'yeah, we haven't heard anything about it, so as far as we know, there are no plans for DX12'. The. Mantle is announced and suddenly DX12 is official, endorsed by Nvidia (AMD is left out of the press releases entirely) going to be released... all of it's features are reverse compatible with DX11 cards, and it's PRIMARY feature is 'closer integration' with video cards...

So we have the first numbered direct X in over a decade that has reverse compatible features, does not require new hardware, and even though it 'has been in development for over four years' was a ghost, with AMD kept completely out of the loop, not even given the decency of an NDA in regards to its existence.

Something about Dx12 just doesn't sit right..

Mind you; AMD has been a bit of a hog the last couple of generations, they are usually first to hop on and advertise the fuck out of the newest direct X, so it's about time Nvidia got a turn, but still; DX 9 brought out shader model 2.0 (required hardware compatibility) DX 10 brought unified shaders (a hardware feature) and DX11 brought out hardware teas elation and compute operations (both require new hardware) now DX 12 is basically just a more efficient version of DX11, reverse compatible with older DX 11 GPUs, and less than two years ago, people in the know we're suggesting that Microsoft was just going to keep Direct X updated...

Are we able to do the math here?
 
Last edited:
KazeoHin said:
PhysX is cute, but really, the reason it hasn't become a 'killer' feature is because it's proprietary.

And remember, AMD invented morphological anti-aliasing, and they were the first (and so far in my opinion, the ONLY)
Vendor to make multi-monitor gaming a 'thing'. Nvidia does some awesome stuff too, but they are obsessed with making things proprietary.
Click to expand...

Matrox TripleHead predated "eyefinity" by many years ;). AMD has made all of their good stuff proprietary too, it's simply business and I don't begrudge them for it.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Matrox TripleHead predated "eyefinity" by many years ;). AMD has made all of their good stuff proprietary too, it's simply business and I don't begrudge them for it.
Click to expand...

Matrox's triple head isn't really a consumer option, but I get what you're saying. Personally, I don't want AMD to become super successful. The reason a lot of people want Nvidia to fail is not for a love of AMD, but because, like me, they want the market to balance. Imagine if both AMD and NVIDIA had ~50% discrete GPU market share; we would have a MUCH more competitive industry. Instead now, we have Nvidia saying (almost literally) 'we have the most money, so give us your money!'
 
GoldenTiger said:
Matrox TripleHead predated "eyefinity" by many years ;). AMD has made all of their good stuff proprietary too, it's simply business and I don't begrudge them for it.
Click to expand...

And Matrox couldn't run games for shit in triple head mode either .
 
KazeoHin said:
AMD invented morphological anti-aliasing
Click to expand...
Morphological filtering was invented in 1993 by P. Soille and J.F. Rivest. They have a published paper on the subject.

Shader-based AA using the concept of morphological filtering (early versions of Nvidia's FXAA) first hit the scene in console games on the PS3 and Xbox 360, long before AMD brought MLAA out as a general feature of their cards.

KazeoHin said:
and they were the first (and so far in my opinion, the ONLY) Vendor to make multi-monitor gaming a 'thing'. Nvidia does some awesome stuff too, but they are obsessed with making things proprietary.
Click to expand...
The first (and second) company to make a large push into multi-monitor gaming was Matrox.

They released gaming-oriented graphics cards with triple-head spanning support. Here's a couple reviews of the Matrox Parhelia 512, doing triple-head gaming back in 2002:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/911/11
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?id=425&pg=3

Once Matrox exited the gaming market, they went back and released the Matrox TripleHead2Go, which adds triple-head spanning support to ANY graphics card. This was before either AMD or Nvidia had multi-monitor gaming on the books.

I remember running a GTX 260 with a Matrox TripleHead2Go and three 1680x1050 monitors. It was a good time, and I almost didn't bother with anything related to AMD Eyefinity because my Nvidia + Matrox setup worked so well.

KazeoHin said:
Argument: but mantle!

Really, I see Mantle as the thing that kicked M$ into gear on speeding up development for DX 12.
Click to expand...
Depends on who you believe.

Supposedly, AMD and Nvidia have been working on DX12 since before Mantle was even announced. If that's true, then Mantle really was just AMD trying to jump the gun and get in some PR points.

Not saying that's true, but it's a reasonable scenario.

KazeoHin said:
all of [DX12's] features are reverse compatible with DX11 cards, and it's PRIMARY feature is 'closer integration' with video cards...
Click to expand...
Not true. It was stated that, while DX12 will run on DX11 cards, DX12 will also contain new features that require new hardware.

Basically, DX11 cards will get the performance enhancements, but there will also be new bells and whistles that you'll need a new graphics card to enable. This is similar to how DX11 fully supports running on DX10 cards, but with a reduced feature set.
 
Unknown-One said:
Morphological filtering was invented in 1993 by P. Soille and J.F. Rivest. They have a published paper on the subject.

Shader-based AA using the concept of morphological filtering (early versions of Nvidia's FXAA) first hit the scene in console games on the PS3 and Xbox 360, long before AMD brought MLAA out as a general feature of their cards.


The first (and second) company to make a large push into multi-monitor gaming was Matrox.

They released gaming-oriented graphics cards with triple-head spanning support. Here's a couple reviews of the Matrox Parhelia 512, doing triple-head gaming back in 2002:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/911/11
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?id=425&pg=3

Once Matrox exited the gaming market, they went back and released the Matrox TripleHead2Go, which adds triple-head spanning support to ANY graphics card. This was before either AMD or Nvidia had multi-monitor gaming on the books.

I remember running a GTX 260 with a Matrox TripleHead2Go and three 1680x1050 monitors. It was a good time, and I almost didn't bother with anything related to AMD Eyefinity because my Nvidia + Matrox setup worked so well.


Depends on who you believe.

Supposedly, AMD and Nvidia have been working on DX12 since before Mantle was even announced. If that's true, then Mantle really was just AMD trying to jump the gun and get in some PR points.

Not saying that's true, but it's a reasonable scenario.


Not true. It was stated that, while DX12 will run on DX11 cards, DX12 will also contain new features that require new hardware.

Basically, DX11 cards will get the performance enhancements, but there will also be new bells and whistles that you'll need a new graphics card to enable. This is similar to how DX11 fully supports running on DX10 cards, but with a reduced feature set.
Click to expand...

I would like to see the features requiring new hardware. I'm not doubting you, and I REALLY want to get exited for DX12... But for some reason, something about it seems... Fishy.. I don't know.
 
If Direct3D 12 requires anything past Windows 7 (like Windows 8/8.1/9), I would rather buy more AMD GPUs and use Mantle/OpenGL whenever possible. I don't like MSFT withholding their latest DX versions from older Windows versions in order to try to coerce customers into upgrading to software I don't want.
 
blastingcap said:
I don't like MSFT withholding their latest DX versions from older Windows versions in order to try to coerce customers into upgrading to software I don't want.
Click to expand...
They can't really help it without substantially reworking previous versions of Windows. DirectX is deeply tied to the Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM). When they build a new version of DirectX, they also build new features into the driver model to support the new functionality that they want to add to DirectX.

This makes it difficult to back-port a new version of DirectX to an old version of Windows, because the older version of WDDM baked into the older version of Windows is very-likely missing required functionality.

For reference, this is the driver-model breakdown:
Windows Vista = WDDM 1.0
Windows 7 = WDDM 1.1
Windows 8.x = WDDM 1.2

There are already some features of DX11.2 that do not work on Windows 7 (because WDDM 1.1 cannot support them), so I'm kinda doubtful that DX12 will work in-full on Windows 7...
We've already been pretty lucky with DX11 as-is, though. It runs, in some capacity, on Vista, 7, and 8. That's not bad.

Edit: And yes, this really is a limitation of the driver model.
If you were to load graphics driver into Windows 8.1 that's certified ONLY for WDDM 1.1 compliance, the same features of DX11.2 that don't work on Windows 7 also become unavailable on Windows 8.1. The OS and the driver HAVE to be WDDM 1.2 compliant to get the full feature set.
 
Last edited:
I was leery of Windows 8 at first but Windows 8.1 has improved to a point to where it's perfectly acceptable now. In fact, I like it better overall than Windows 7 at this point, and the upcoming patches will improve upon it even further. Basically, MS finally saw the light and realized that desktop users have a completely different usage model and you must make concessions to give them a good experience. Im happy with 8.1 at this point. I suspect more people will feel the same by the time DX12 rolls around (if 8.1 is required), it's a non issue in my mind.

The main problem with Win 8.1 is it just isn't that great in handling DPI yet. 4k monitors really are a pain because of this, and it is even worse on mobile devices using Win 8.1 (ie ultrabooks with WQHD resolutions or higher). That shit needs to be fixed, straight up. But as far as the desktop general experience goes, I think windows 8.1 has improved greatly compared to how Win 8 was at launch.
 
Hoping for DX12 on Windows 7 is a pretty optimistic wish. Even if MS could wing it technically, I can't see what their motivation would be. Besides, gamers tend to adopt newer versions of Windows at a more rapid pace than the general public.
 
jwcalla said:
...?

In terms of the interface and workflow?
Click to expand...
Yes. 8.1 adds a pile of usability enhancements. This is, by no means, a complete list... but it's a decent highlight reel. Many of these changes are specifically to improve the usability of Mouse/Keyboard input and integration with the desktop:

1. Start button is returned to the taskbar.
This returns the start button to a literal UI context rather than an implied UI context. Improves discoverability.

2. Boot to Desktop (instead of Boot to StartScreen) is now an option.
You can now bypass the Start Screen and be sent directly to the desktop when booting up, logging in, AND closing ModernUI applications. (That last one is a HUGE usability change, it means closing a ModernUI app now returns you to the desktop rather than the Start Screen).

3. Search has been re-unified.
Major annoyance resolved here. If you launch the Start Screen in 8.0 and start typing to search, it ONLY searches apps (unlike Windows 7, which searches apps, files, and settings). This functionality is restored in 8.1, and can now search the entire system again.

4. Multitasking Enhancements.
Up to 4 ModernUI applications can be run at a time (previous maximum was 2). Split-screen is now allowed on smaller screen resolutions, opening up ModernUI multitasking to more devices.

5. Desktop Wallpaper on Start Screen.
You can now bubble-up your desktop wallpaper to the Start Screen, which improves contextual switching and perceived desktop/ModernUI integration.

6. Start Screen organization improvements.
The Start Screen's "edit mode" has been totally revamped, making it MUCH simpler to organize using a mouse.

7. More settings.
Common complaint from Tablet users was that they had to jump to the desktop to change a lot of common settings. This has been rectified for the most part in 8.1, as those settings are now available to be changed from the ModernUI settings app as well as the desktop Control Panel. huge usability improvement for those that need it.

8. The "All Apps" screen can now be sorted.
You can now have it sorted so that Desktop apps appear first, reducing the need to scroll for anything if you primarily interact with desktop applications. Also, a new size option is present that allows MANY more icons on-screen on the all-apps screen, which is more efficient for mouse users.

9. Hot Corners Optional
You can now DISABLE hot corners if you find they're a nuisance when using the desktop.

10. Modern UI apps can now be pinned to the desktop taskbar
As of 8.1 Update 1, desktop integration has been further tightened up by allowing ModernUI applications to appear on the desktop taskbar. This is a HUGE usability enhancement, as it means ALL applications can now be managed via the taskbar again (rather than ModernUI applications requiring the use of the top-left hot-corner to manage).

11. Start Screen Mouse Enhancements
As of 8.1 Update 1, the right-clicking items on the Start Screen now spawns a traditional right-click menu. This improves over the older right-click functionality, which spawned a bar at the bottom of the screen (nowhere near the cursor).

12. Power / Search buttons are now visible on the Start Screen.
As of 8.1 Update 1, there's now a Power icon and Search icon always visible in the top-right corner of the Start Screen. Again, this is to improve discoverability (these options were previously only available by using an edge-swipe gesture or by activating a hot-corner). This also reduces the amount of mouse-action required to log off, sleep, or shut-down the PC.

13. ModernUI applications now have chrome!
As of 8.1 Update 1, ModernUI applications now have a titlebar. The application icon on the left of the titlebar allows you to snap the application to a desired location WITHOUT gestural dragging. There's also a minimize and close button in the top-right corner. These should be familiar to desktop users, and behave as you'd expect (minimizing or closing the ModernUI app).

14. DirectX 11.2
8.1 bumps DirectX11 to version 11.2, adding some nice features (like tiled resources) and improving efficiency.
 
Last edited:
xoleras said:
I was leery of Windows 8 at first but Windows 8.1 has improved to a point to where it's perfectly acceptable now. In fact, I like it better overall than Windows 7 at this point, and the upcoming patches will improve upon it even further. Basically, MS finally saw the light and realized that desktop users have a completely different usage model and you must make concessions to give them a good experience. Im happy with 8.1 at this point. I suspect more people will feel the same by the time DX12 rolls around (if 8.1 is required), it's a non issue in my mind.

The main problem with Win 8.1 is it just isn't that great in handling DPI yet. 4k monitors really are a pain because of this, and it is even worse on mobile devices using Win 8.1 (ie ultrabooks with WQHD resolutions or higher). That shit needs to be fixed, straight up. But as far as the desktop general experience goes, I think windows 8.1 has improved greatly compared to how Win 8 was at launch.
Click to expand...

I've been happy with Windows 8 and using it since launch... I'm on a Dell UP2414Q (4k 60hz IPS monitor) and while some applications won't respect scaling options at all, most do work fine for me and scale properly, with some just pixel-doubling their toolbox icons (which while not ideal is fine and still looks good due to the pixel density of my display). The two major offenders that haven't bothered to fix themselves are Adobe with photoshop (and no scripting or editing options are available to do so, they are playing the blame game with microsoft instead of fixing it already, coming up with silly/lame excuse after excuse) and maya (which may actually have a scriptable way to do it, I'm looking into that now...).

Also, I'd "rep" unknown-one 10x for the last few posts he's made in this thread if I could on these forums... ;). Good stuff.
 
PRIME1 said:
Titan Z is a workstation card that can also be used for gaming.

Workstation cards tend to be expensive
Click to expand...

did AMD really use that shit HS on there workstation line TOO WOW
scraping the bottom there arnt we AMD

The Mac said:
According to Nvidias marketing, its a Gaming card that can be used for advanced compute tasks.

It cant be a workstation card, as there are no workstation drivers or support for it.
Click to expand...

a bit like Intels Extreme line that cost 1k+ for a CPU?
funny that
but i will give the Titan Z is bit over priced i could see 1.5k~2.5K ish but 3k IS pushing it for a pro-sumer part considering the parts that make up the thing any way
even with a the pro-sumer tax on it 2.5k should cover it and let every one make a bit off card but
but end of the day its a halo part to make headlines and drive sales of mid and low end parts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top