![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
NVIDIA: "AMD's developer relations efforts are thinly spread"
- Thread starter PRIME1
- Start date
TaintedSquirrel
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 12,741
cageymaru
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2003
- Messages
- 22,129
If that was true then why only GameWorks games run like shit on AMD?
Both of these companies are full of shit and they're just trying to stir up the fan bases on both sides to rush to their defense.
How about the fan base just tell them both to shut the fuck up and work together on technologies that could better PC gaming in general and see who makes the better hardware and drivers in practice. Do we really need to play these fuck fuck games with "buying" development time from a studio and creating interesting, yet proprietary technologies that just end up dying?
How about the fan base just tell them both to shut the fuck up and work together on technologies that could better PC gaming in general and see who makes the better hardware and drivers in practice. Do we really need to play these fuck fuck games with "buying" development time from a studio and creating interesting, yet proprietary technologies that just end up dying?
needmorecarnitine
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2004
- Messages
- 4,609
you know why games run so poorly these days?
Obama...
Obama...
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,848
Considering most XBOX 1 and PS4 games are available on the PC, that's a hilarious statement. May as well just say "I hate videogames, they all suck" then
.Personally I'm very much enjoying my games on my 4k monitor with framerates and details that make a 960p console game look like an original NES
.
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,848
You mean like Mantle aka a marketing move, when they already had been collaborating with nvidia and microsoft for 4 years on DirectX 12, a far superior API? Nvidia has brought shadowplay, physx, and txaa to the table + DX12 and huge dx11 optimizations, AMD has brought Mantle for BF4 marketing, and slander for DX12 even though they've been working on it a ton too and contributing to it.
Considering most XBOX 1 and PS4 games are available on the PC, that's a hilarious statement. May as well just say "I hate videogames, they all suck" then
That's true: that would have been a more accurate statement. But everybody here knows console games suck, so I didn't feel a need to state the over-obvious.
D
Deleted whining member 223597
Guest
Lol.
styckx
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2003
- Messages
- 846
AC4 and Watch Dogs runs equally like shit on Nvidia too.. Arkham Asylum? What time vault did they find for that comparision? Fluff piece of fluff.
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,848
That's true: that would have been a more accurate statement. But everybody here knows console games suck, so I didn't feel a need to state the over-obvious.
Agreed
.
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,848
What more successful arm product is amd producing again??
It's funny how the nvidiots are mentioning PhysX as an Nvidia contribution. It was created by Ageia, the only thing Nvidia did was buy Ageia and lock the API to their hardware. Woop dee doo.
And why did Dirt Showdown and Hitman Absolution run like shit on NV for over a year? *blinks*
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,848
Created by ageia originally, then bought and built upon by nVidia. Why should they give away their assets for free as a business? AMD could have done the same, but didn't.
I almost pissed myself reading this.
BullsEyeBob
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2004
- Messages
- 2,661
A link to the article without the troll title would have been sufficient.
The short version is, Robert Hallock is marketing scum trying to spin facts to make AMD seem like the good guys and NV seem evil. There is nothing true about the original forbes article, and there was a forbes follow up.
Facts:
1) Watch dogs only uses HBAO+ which runs at similar speeds on both NV/AMD
2) AMD was not denied access to Ubi
3) AMD simply chose not to due to lack of funds/whatever
4) AMD instead spends their money on online marketing via shills and spin such as what Mr. Hallock did
5) Only physx and TXAA are "closed" but are licenseable. The rest of gameworks, including HBAO+ , works on AMD.
6) On top of #5. AMD has confirmed that Mantle is a closed API. But here we are with AMD throwing stones out of a glass house.
Basically, I find it hilarious that Robert Hallock complains about gameworks when in fact the game uses nothing but HBAO + which works on AMD. More amusingly, Mantle is a closed API (verified by PCPer) and they want to go down THAT ROAD of complaining about physx or TXAA being closed? The rest of gameworks is in fact open and usable on AMD hardware - that includes HBAO+.
Essentially, this entire thing was an AMD marketing stunt to make nvidia seem "evil". AMD fans eat that shit up. But the entire premise was based on lies by Robert Hallock. Marketing scumbaggery at its finest.
MOST amusingly is despite that marketing scumbaggery that AMD exhibits time and time again, they can't seem to gain GPU market share which continues to stagnate or erode. How funny is that. I'd have more sympathy for AMD if they were honest through marketing, but this entire stunt has demonstrated that what they've done for years. Trying to perpetuate a "good guy" image through online social media marketing. Fans of AMD LOVE that shit. Eat it up. But it's based on lies and bullshit.
Facts:
1) Watch dogs only uses HBAO+ which runs at similar speeds on both NV/AMD
2) AMD was not denied access to Ubi
3) AMD simply chose not to due to lack of funds/whatever
4) AMD instead spends their money on online marketing via shills and spin such as what Mr. Hallock did
5) Only physx and TXAA are "closed" but are licenseable. The rest of gameworks, including HBAO+ , works on AMD.
6) On top of #5. AMD has confirmed that Mantle is a closed API. But here we are with AMD throwing stones out of a glass house.
Basically, I find it hilarious that Robert Hallock complains about gameworks when in fact the game uses nothing but HBAO + which works on AMD. More amusingly, Mantle is a closed API (verified by PCPer) and they want to go down THAT ROAD of complaining about physx or TXAA being closed? The rest of gameworks is in fact open and usable on AMD hardware - that includes HBAO+.
Essentially, this entire thing was an AMD marketing stunt to make nvidia seem "evil". AMD fans eat that shit up. But the entire premise was based on lies by Robert Hallock. Marketing scumbaggery at its finest.
MOST amusingly is despite that marketing scumbaggery that AMD exhibits time and time again, they can't seem to gain GPU market share which continues to stagnate or erode. How funny is that. I'd have more sympathy for AMD if they were honest through marketing, but this entire stunt has demonstrated that what they've done for years. Trying to perpetuate a "good guy" image through online social media marketing. Fans of AMD LOVE that shit. Eat it up. But it's based on lies and bullshit.
1) Yes AMD is evil and yes Nvidia is evil, you don't get as big as these boys are by playing nice.
2) why do we care so much, this will be fixed in a driver update in like 4 weeks or less.
Redirection away from something doesn't need to have anything to do with something else.
Well, AMD's marketing for many years has tried to mis-align the corporate character of their competitors as being "evil" entities and their fans apparently enjoy this. Particularly against intel, since AMD will not ever win on performance, AMD instead tries to personify themselves as a "good" corporation and intel and nvidia as being evil.
The rational person would realize that AMD, intel, and nvidia all have their quirks and they are all for-profit corporations. Anyone buying into AMD's marketing, or ANYONES marketing to mis-align the character of a competitor, is simply naive.
I've outlined why Robert Hallock and this attack on nvidia is basically, a bunch of shit. It's AMD's marketing doing what they've done for years: Mis-align the character of their competitors to make themselves seem "good" and competition seem "evil".
NV's marketing has done their share of scumbag stupid stuff as well, make no mistake. Particularly with the Titan Z. But that definitely didn't win anyone over either, so, yeah. But I find this entire nonsense by Thracks to be particularly hypocritical and hilarious since HBAO+ (gameworks) is "open" while he complains of "black box" closed features. Hello, Mantle? Mantle was confirmed to be a 100% closed API despite what their marketing said last year.
FOS marketing? Yes, yes it is. None of these companies are different from one another: there is no evil or good. They are all for profit corporations. I simply find this marketing tack from AMD to be hilariously hypocritical, and their marketing trying to personify intel and nvidia as the "bad guys" is truly eye-roll worthy.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
I don't really see the Titan Z as a "scumbag" thing. Charging exorbitant prices for extremely niche, luxury items doesn't strike me as being offensive. I would suggest that people not buy it when there are better alternatives, but that's a different discussion.
Corporations who really gut consumers on what are, for all practical purposes, essential items are most certainly scumbags, but "essential item" is certainly not how I'd describe a high-end graphics card. NVIDIA still has plenty of stuff at much lower price points that deliver pretty reasonable value.
Corporations who really gut consumers on what are, for all practical purposes, essential items are most certainly scumbags, but "essential item" is certainly not how I'd describe a high-end graphics card. NVIDIA still has plenty of stuff at much lower price points that deliver pretty reasonable value.
Titan Z is a workstation card that can also be used for gaming.
Workstation cards tend to be expensive
Workstation cards tend to be expensive
Gonna agree with this, offering a product isn't really a "scumbag" thing. Companies like intel have always offered their "extreme edition" versions of mainstream products at super high prices.
Unknown-One
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,909
Thing people seem to forget is that PhysX was always hostile to other vendors, long before Nvidia picked it up. Ageia created PhysX and their own custom hardware accelerator cards to support it. The CPU-based version they released was a sad joke that basically fully disabled soft-body/fluid simulation and seriously toned-down rigid-body simulation.
Not much changed when Nvidia bought them out (though CPU performance is now a LOT better). It pretty much just went from being locked to Ageia hardware to being locked to Nvidia hardware and/or your CPU.
And Havok isn't really any better as far as lock-in goes. A GPU-based version (HavokFX) was in development, but canned shortly after Havok partnered with Intel. This is very-likely because Intel has a vested interest in pushing x86. Releasing HavokFX would have allowed AMD and Nvidia graphics hardware to accelerate physics, lessening demand for x86 chips (the majority of which are sold by intel). Hello lock-in!
tonyftw
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2013
- Messages
- 1,817
Both companies are evil and only care about one thing, your money. That saying, amd is looking silly here.
Gameworks games always run perfectly fine for me on amd cards and vice versa (amd evolved titles on nvidia).
I think the real point isnt that they run like crap or not, its the fact that no one can see what the hell is going on due to the precompiled binaries.
It just leads to conspiracy theories. If something isnt going right, its going to get blamed.
Ive seen complaints from more than one developer concerning the black box nature of gameworks.
Mind you they have been individual codemonkey's blogs, not official statements but they are still valid complaints.
It just leads to conspiracy theories. If something isnt going right, its going to get blamed.
Ive seen complaints from more than one developer concerning the black box nature of gameworks.
Mind you they have been individual codemonkey's blogs, not official statements but they are still valid complaints.
It seems that that "fact" is not quite a fact.
And on another point, I find some of this developer whining to be very annoying. No developer is forced to use this middleware. Don't like it? Don't use it. Or, alternatively, they can use AMD's middleware (if they ever make any). Or use both. Or use none at all and roll their own.
These whiny developers (the whiny ones) want somebody else to do the heavy lifting for them, but at the same time expect it to be completely on their own terms. When are they going to open source their code so we can all look at it?
AMD cannot see them to do driver optimizations, thats all that really matters. So fact, yes.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
You can certainly see what's going on in shader blobs, which is primarily what you're getting from any of the GameWorks libraries. Whatever static libraries they provide are unlikely to be doing anything of any particular optimization interest.
Bullet wants to make their engine run on OpenCL.
http://www.nvidia.com/content/GTC/documents/1077_GTC09.pdf
It's taking them quite a while though.
That may or may not be the case. Certainly you can the the effect on the shaders within the blobs, but that doesnt mean there isnt anything in there slowing performance within the function calls themselves..
"Trust us, we arent doing anything shady" is used car salemsan speak as far as im concerned.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
Near as I'm aware, NVIDIA isn't asking anyone to trust them. Licensees can evaluate the performance on any hardware they wish.
NEWSFLASH, there is no BLACK BOX associated with HBAO+ which is the only common denominator gameworks feature used within Watch Dogs. Move on to your next conspiracy theory, Everything aside from physx and TXAA are in fact open with the source available to developers, and the developers can work with AMD to optimize for those features. HBAO+ is, again, the only feature which was used and it runs at the same speed, within milliseconds, on AMD hardware (per PCPer)
Everything within gameworks is open except for physx and TXAA. Those use CUDA, while the other features do not. But since Hallock brought it up. Guess what isn't "open"? Mantle is not open to other IHV's. PCPer confirmed with AMD that they will not, any any point, allow any IHV to use Mantle despite what their marketing said months ago. (another lie??)
Or, alternatively, if you want to fall for Robert Hallocks deceptive marketing hook line and sinker you are free to do that as well. The entire thing is, he is clueless since he is a marketing guy and not a developer, and the fact of the matter is, he lied, HBAO+ is not a black box and does work on AMD hardware. AMD simply chose not to collaborate with Ubi for optimizations when they were freely able to do so. They did, oddly enough, create a game optimized driver without source code. Game optimized drivers do not REQUIRE source code, and developers actually do not give source code out to either NV or AMD, generally speaking. But since Hallock brought it up, the source for HBAO+ was in fact available. Just another one of his lies designed to make AMD look like the "good guys" and personify nvidia as "evil". Excuse me while I roll my eyes. AMD has been doing that stupid shit for years against intel and AMD, maybe they should move on to a different marketing strategy since the good/evil strategy isn't helping their market share.
If there is any gameworks game that doesn't run well on AMD it is because of their own lack of widespread dev relations. They are not prohibited from working with any developer, TWIMTBP or not, this was mentioned on PCPer's podcast. They simply choose not to and then take the fight to marketing which APPARENTLY is cheaper than having their developers....do work. But on the note of poor performance, anyone remember Dirt showdown running insanely fast on AMD hardware? Wonder what was up with that? *cough*
Everything within gameworks is open except for physx and TXAA. Those use CUDA, while the other features do not. But since Hallock brought it up. Guess what isn't "open"? Mantle is not open to other IHV's. PCPer confirmed with AMD that they will not, any any point, allow any IHV to use Mantle despite what their marketing said months ago. (another lie??)
Or, alternatively, if you want to fall for Robert Hallocks deceptive marketing hook line and sinker you are free to do that as well. The entire thing is, he is clueless since he is a marketing guy and not a developer, and the fact of the matter is, he lied, HBAO+ is not a black box and does work on AMD hardware. AMD simply chose not to collaborate with Ubi for optimizations when they were freely able to do so. They did, oddly enough, create a game optimized driver without source code. Game optimized drivers do not REQUIRE source code, and developers actually do not give source code out to either NV or AMD, generally speaking. But since Hallock brought it up, the source for HBAO+ was in fact available. Just another one of his lies designed to make AMD look like the "good guys" and personify nvidia as "evil". Excuse me while I roll my eyes. AMD has been doing that stupid shit for years against intel and AMD, maybe they should move on to a different marketing strategy since the good/evil strategy isn't helping their market share.
If there is any gameworks game that doesn't run well on AMD it is because of their own lack of widespread dev relations. They are not prohibited from working with any developer, TWIMTBP or not, this was mentioned on PCPer's podcast. They simply choose not to and then take the fight to marketing which APPARENTLY is cheaper than having their developers....do work. But on the note of poor performance, anyone remember Dirt showdown running insanely fast on AMD hardware? Wonder what was up with that? *cough*
Last edited:
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.
wow, you are just as bad as PRIME
Under no circumstances is a developer permitted to share licensed code from gameworks with AMD.
How exactly if you were AMD are you going to "collaborate" on code optimizations if the developer cant tell you whats going on with the code?
Sure, you can come help make my car faster, but you aren't allowed to to look under the hood.
lol
Not only that but not all developers even get access to the source. it is licensed separately from the gameworks compiled libraries and tools.
Last edited: