• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

[HUB] NVIDIA Has a Driver Overhead Problem, GeForce vs Radeon on Low-End CPUs

marquimvfs

Member
Jul 25, 2014
297
328
515
31
Brazil
Nope, it's neither of those.

It's not driver because under DX12 there isn't a kernel driver, and the driver doesn't manages the hardware, it doesn't even have a clue what the hardware is doing -- the game engine manages the hardware. And it isn't relying on the CPU to do magical tasks, nor offloads any extra work to the CPU.

As I said from the beginning, and as we established a few comments earlier, and proven by PCGamesHardware.de tests it's a matter of how a game engine works (chiefly, how it manages, packages and binds resources) -- the standard way, or in a way that's more ideal for GeForce. That's why in some games the 3090 is ahead of the 6900XT and in others not.
That message made all more clear to me. It's a software problem because some tasks are made in hardware by AMD and rely on the game engine to be done in Nvidia cards. Those engines could be efficient or not in performing those tasks. If that's the case, it's still a downside of Nvidia boards. Saying it's a engine/developer issue is the equivalent of saying it's a developer fault if a given website doesn't run well on Internet Explorer 6, because it's engine doesn't follow the W3C directives...
 

vanguardian1

poor, homeless and tasteless
Feb 1, 2007
2,322
21
1,360
Now I'm genuinely curious if the mid & lower end nvidia cards have similar problems, all of the discussion seems to focus on the higher end gpu's...
 
Last edited:

Bluntman

Member
May 8, 2017
222
441
430
That message made all more clear to me. It's a software problem because some tasks are made in hardware by AMD and rely on the game engine to be done in Nvidia cards. Those engines could be efficient or not in performing those tasks. If that's the case, it's still a downside of Nvidia boards. Saying it's a engine/developer issue is the equivalent of saying it's a developer fault if a given website doesn't run well on Internet Explorer 6, because it's engine doesn't follow the W3C directives...

Sort of yes.

But we have to remember that this Issue doesn't or marginally manifest in situations where these GPUs are expected to be used.... ie. NOT on 720p low settings.

On higher resolutions and settings the GPU runs into other limitations before it runs into barriers on resource management by the engine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MightySquirrel
Jan 7, 2018
1,972
2,250
590
They're testing downclocked CPU's now, because gamers downclock their cpu's to get performance? :messenger_ok:

Couldn't find 720p benches, sorry. Whats the story with that jawdropping 720p anyways, is this like new found love for Amd gamers?

 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
3,467
5,019
585
They're testing downclocked CPU's now, because gamers downclock their cpu's to get performance now? :messenger_ok:
Aaaand we're back at killing the messenger.

They are not testing with downclocked CPUs. They are locking the CPU to eliminate any performance variances.

And your 4K benchmarks mean nothing. They are testing at a lower resolution to see how much the CPU limits the GPU.

Quoting the translated version, with a key remark...;
We will not pretend that we did not know about this situation for the last 6 years (since the first games on DX12 appeared), but it always seemed strange to us that no one ever did this. did not touch - not a single blogger, not a single publication (except, of course, GameGPU, but dry numbers are given here, and not all "twist" the charts and notice this tendency). But at one time, only the lazy did not discuss the high processor dependence of the Radeon in DX11, where it really took place, and was confirmed by tests many times. But why was it actively discussed then, and as if on purpose they are silent now? In our opinion, this is a fundamentally wrong approach, because if there is a problem, it needs to be solved, and old Jen Sung knows how to solve problems like no one else.
It's time to realize that the era of low-level api has come, the layouts have turned backwards, but so far many inattentive publications and bloggers continue to recommend GeForce for weak processors, and continue to mention the high processor dependence of Radeon, either out of ignorance, or for some other reason. a reason unknown to me.


The reason is obvious. nVidia has access to much more mind share, has paid for a lot more influences, and has a bunch of free loyal keyboard warriors that refuse to criticize any faults that nVidia might have, and only propagate the positive. And all this is screwing over the not only the laymen just getting into PC gaming, but the industry as a whole.
 
Jan 7, 2018
1,972
2,250
590
So downlocked cpu, got it.

Maybe the reason why nobody benches at 720p is because nobody plays at that resolution since like late 90's no more? There are 1080p benches as well in the picture I posted.

You can see at 1080p the 3080 avg is 137, vega64 is 60, so no v64 is not beating 3090, well unless you downclock your cpu i guess. :rolleyes:

edit: and horrible perf in dx11on amd was so apparent to anyone and people complained so much is because amd could not even handle locked 60fps in many dx11 games. Totally different story with nvidia and dx12.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
3,467
5,019
585
So downlocked cpu, got it.

Maybe the reason why nobody benches at 720p is because nobody plays at that resolution since like late 90's no more? There are 1080p benches as well in the picture I posted.

You can see at 1080p the 3080 avg is 137, vega64 is 60, so no v64 is not beating 3090, well unless you downclock your cpu i guess. :rolleyes:
What do you suppose your resolution is, if you use 1080p with DLSS Quality? Or... 1440p with DLSS Balanced... Or... 4K with DLSS Performance...?

Quit with the goddamned excuses. This is not about AMD vs nVidia performance. This is about nVidia being more of a performance hog on the CPU.
 
Last edited:
Jan 7, 2018
1,972
2,250
590
What do you suppose your resolution is, if you use 1080p with DLSS Quality? Or... 1440p with DLSS Balanced... Or... 4K with DLSS Performance...?

Quit with the goddamned excuses. This is not about AMD vs nVidia performance. This is about nVidia being more of a performance hog on the CPU.
And I never denied that it isn't. I even gave props to HUB and I'm subbed to them fyi, since they're only few tubers whose benches I can trust.

I told you why it is different from amd and dx11: you can still get easily above 60fps in dx12 on nvidia, but of course nvidia should look into it and work with devs to make sure super low end cpu's get above 60fps and for the most part they do.

But testing with a downlocked CPU [that no gamer ever does that] is kind of pointless, no?
 

justiceiro

Member
Feb 27, 2015
137
89
395
With that being the case, which cpu should I get for my b540 + gtx1660 super? I was planning a upgrade anyway, and this only affects low end cpus, right?
 
Jan 7, 2018
1,972
2,250
590
What do you suppose your resolution is, if you use 1080p with DLSS Quality? Or... 1440p with DLSS Balanced... Or... 4K with DLSS Performance...?

I only use DLSS at 4K and it's 2560x1440 quality setting or 1080p perf setting, AFAIK. [in Control, CP77 etc] Wish every game had dlss support.
 

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
3,467
5,019
585
With that being the case, which cpu should I get for my b540 + gtx1660 super? I was planning a upgrade anyway, and this only affects low end cpus, right?
I assume you mean B450? I'd say the 5600X... If you can find one.

And I never denied that it isn't. I even gave props to HUB and I'm subbed to them fyi, since they're only few tubers whose benches I can trust.

I told you why it is different from amd and dx11: you can still get easily above 60fps in dx12 on nvidia, but of course nvidia should look into it and work with devs to make sure super low end cpu's get above 60fps and for the most part they do.

But testing with a downlocked CPU [that no gamer ever does that] is kind of pointless, no?
It's not exactly pointless... I mean, the RTX 3080 and 3090 edge out the 6800 and 6900 at 4k, but that gap is diminished (if not reversed) at 1440p and 1080p. I think right now it's safe to assume that performance of the 3080 and 3090 would have been higher than AMD's cards at all resolutions, if it wasn't for this issue.
Granted, unless you're into high fps gaming, these cards are overkill for those resolution. But it makes you wonder if they will regress more as games become more CPU heavy.

And considering DLSS renders at lower resolution, you could say that DLSS performance would have potentially been much better than it is right now, if this issue did not exist.
 
Last edited:
Jan 7, 2018
1,972
2,250
590
Idk, if I would recommend AMD cpu's now they have issues with CP77, which is the most technically advanced game as of now [with RT], as posted videos on previous page show. Intel outpeforms AMD with RT enabled. Who knows, if this trend will continue.
 

marquimvfs

Member
Jul 25, 2014
297
328
515
31
Brazil
Sort of yes.

But we have to remember that this Issue doesn't or marginally manifest in situations where these GPUs are expected to be used.... ie. NOT on 720p low settings.

On higher resolutions and settings the GPU runs into other limitations before it runs into barriers on resource management by the engine.
Well, we agree that the problem is way less aggressive than the AMD one on DX11. But I also get the "spirit" of the test. They simulated "extreme" situations just to show that the problem exists. If someone is in a scenario of having to play CPU bound games, or in a PC with limited CPU power, even for a brief period, the results of the test shows what to expect.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MightySquirrel
Jan 7, 2018
1,972
2,250
590
I assume you mean B450? I'd say the 5600X... If you can find one.


It's not exactly pointless... I mean, the RTX 3080 and 3090 edge out the 6800 and 6900 at 4k, but that gap is diminished (if not reversed) at 1440p and 1080p. I think right now it's safe to assume that performance of the 3080 and 3090 would have been higher than AMD's cards at all resolutions, if it wasn't for this issue.
Granted, unless you're into high fps gaming, these cards are overkill for those resolution. But it makes you wonder if they will regress more as games become more CPU heavy.

And considering DLSS renders at lower resolution, you could say that DLSS performance would have potentially been much better than it is right now, if this issue did not exist.

It's gonna be interesting to see how much perf you will be able to gain on ampere big boys with reBAR. For example in BF5 rtx 3060 with reBAR at 2560x1440 gains 18% as per eugamer testing. >> https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2021-nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-review?page=6

Which is quite a big jump for free. I know its only one game , but its very interesting nonetheless.
 

Bluntman

Member
May 8, 2017
222
441
430
Well, we agree that the problem is way less aggressive than the AMD one on DX11. But I also get the "spirit" of the test. They simulated "extreme" situations just to show that the problem exists. If someone is in a scenario of having to play CPU bound games, or in a PC with limited CPU power, even for a brief period, the results of the test shows what to expect.

Well I agree, I guess. If you want to play on lower resolutions with a weaker CPU, you're better off with an AMD GPU in most of the AAA titles it seems.

It's just not a usual scenario I guess for a 3080 or 3090 owner so I don't know if the developers are going to focus on this more in the future.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: marquimvfs
Jan 7, 2018
1,972
2,250
590
The Squirrel needs a CPU and Driver upgrade, his rig can't process the discussion.

Hey, I acknowledged HUB's results what more do you want? :messenger_winking: But testing with a downclocked cpu just to get a favourable result is bending a bit too low there.
When is reBAR coming to Ampere big boys?
End of the month supposedly. Most mobo manufacturers already got their bios available for download and flashing. Now need bios for gpu and new drivers from nvidia.
 

Marlenus

Member
Jul 29, 2013
1,864
722
590
UK
Well I agree, I guess. If you want to play on lower resolutions with a weaker CPU, you're better off with an AMD GPU in most of the AAA titles it seems.

It's just not a usual scenario I guess for a 3080 or 3090 owner so I don't know if the developers are going to focus on this more in the future.

I have said it before but it is very applicable to people who buy a CPU, Ram and mobo that they keep for 10 years and do several GPU upgrades in that time.

Further as we leave the cross gen part of this console generation I would expect games to need more CPU horsepower to run well because 8c16t zen2 is such a giant step up from the Jaguar cores in the old consoles.

So while it might mainly manifest at 1080p medium now there is no guarantee it will stay that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marquimvfs

Bluntman

Member
May 8, 2017
222
441
430
I have said it before but it is very applicable to people who buy a CPU, Ram and mobo that they keep for 10 years and do several GPU upgrades in that time.

Further as we leave the cross gen part of this console generation I would expect games to need more CPU horsepower to run well because 8c16t zen2 is such a giant step up from the Jaguar cores in the old consoles.

So while it might mainly manifest at 1080p medium now there is no guarantee it will stay that way.

That could very well be the true.

On the other hand, those days when you could keep a CPU for 10 years and upgrade just the GPU are probably over anyway. It might have worked when Intel gave us +5% performance with every new CPU generation (and the Jaguar baseline was very low anyway), but right now AMD gives us +30% or whatever basicly every other year.
 

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
May 13, 2006
1,644
350
1,600
Trick question? Anyway because on average they're equally matched in regular titles. Not including RT obviously, where 3080 is on a whole other level.

Are you joking? you literally wrote:

wouldn't go that far, when you have a $1000 6900 xt = $650 rtx 3080 .


The reason you cherry picked the 6900 vs 3080 and ignored the 6800XT which has the CORRECT PRICE POINT and PERFORMANCE to your comparison, its because in your mind it looks better to Nvidia if you compare an expensive product to your cheaper superior product. Its a completely and utterly, absolutely visible transparent process of how a Biased mind works.

The 6900XT is not equally matched to a 3080. Its on 3090 level unless you only cherry pick your titles, and forget the same can be done for the 6900xt where it wins by a lot.
 
Last edited:
Jan 7, 2018
1,972
2,250
590
Are you joking? you literally wrote:

wouldn't go that far, when you have a $1000 6900 xt = $650 rtx 3080 .


The reason you cherry picked the 6900 vs 3080 and ignored the 6800XT which has the CORRECT PRICE POINT and PERFORMANCE to your comparison, its because in your mind it looks better to Nvidia if you compare an expensive product to your cheaper superior product. Its a completely and utterly, absolutely visible transparent process of how a Biased mind works.

The 6900XT is not equally matched to a 3080. Its on 3090 level unless you only cherry pick your titles, and forget the same can be done for the 6900xt where it wins by a lot.
WRONG !

Lookie here: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/35.html

rtx 3080 and 6900 xt is neck and neck minus RT.
 

Marlenus

Member
Jul 29, 2013
1,864
722
590
UK
That could very well be the true.

On the other hand, those days when you could keep a CPU for 10 years and upgrade just the GPU are probably over anyway. It might have worked when Intel gave us +5% performance with every new CPU generation (and the Jaguar baseline was very low anyway), but right now AMD gives us +30% or whatever basicly every other year.

That is also true and AMD have made it easier to upgrade to a significantly faster CPU without changing the whole platform so maybe in 3 years time with zen 5 it will be moot because the CPU performance of even quad cores will be enough to avoid a CPU bottleneck for games built with the console Zen2 CPUs as a baseline.
 

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
May 13, 2006
1,644
350
1,600
WRONG !

Lookie here: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/35.html

rtx 3080 and 6900 xt is neck and neck minus RT.

look man, with respect (that you dont deserve but i give you all the same), the percentages "game" varies with a lot of variables. And also, comparisons between different segments must follow be the same market criteria and not be cherry picked to your cause.


You call the 999$ 6900XT a worse deal the 699$ 3080, but the 6900XT is also a much better deal than the 1499$ 3090.
In this logic, you forget that the 6800XT exists. If the 6800XT is within 5~7% of the 3080 while costing 7% less, this is the card you pick to compare with the 3080, not the 6900XT.



Regarding the 3090 VS 6900XT: https://babeltechreviews.com/the-red-devil-rx-6900-xt-50-game-review-vs-the-rtx-3090-fe-part-1/4/

Across ALL averages at ALL resolutions, the 3090 was:
- 7% faster at VULKAN than the 6900XT
- 2% slower at DX12 (2019-today) than the 6900XT
- 8% faster at old DX12 (2018 and older) than the 6900XT
- 50% more expensive.


And these differences can be higher or lower according to the hardware used by the reviewer. Intel, AMD, Sam, no sam etc:




The 6900Xt is not a 3080 competitor. Its a 3090 competitor going forward. If you want to compare old DX11 titles, heck, compare with DX9 as well. Both as useless metrics for 2021 and beyond.
 
Last edited:
Jan 3, 2021
131
193
220
Lol, the overhead seem to be also affecting Geforcenow with its weak CPU setups,



Look how horrible the Cyberpunk runs with RTX enabled. Can't even break past 30 FPS and stutters like hell (it's completely cpu bound, please don't derail the discussion) because as i said countless times, RTX adds amazingly extra CPU load due to BHV structures.

If Nvidia can adress this problem, it will be a huge fix for every gamer out there, and for their own systems as well.

If they don't, all CPUs, even the "mighty" "high-end" 5800x/11700k wil struggle to lock to 60 FPS in lots of new games, which is horrible.

It's also very funny that the big corp Nvidia has the delusion that a 3.5 ghz 4/8 coffee lake chip with halved cache can feed a 2080ti in Cyberpunk. LMAO. Talk about "unbalanced" builds.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: llien and Md Ray

llien

Member
Feb 1, 2017
9,992
7,945
935
I wouldn't go that far, when you have a $1000 6900 xt = $650 rtx 3080 .

Horrendous RT performance and 6 months later still nothing like DLSS from AMD.
Of all crazy takes, the "AMD is more expensive" is the most amazing.

Perf rating in newest 7 games vs $1500 3090:




computerbase

RT performance, hold on, AMD wins in 3 out of 11 games (WoW RT, Fortnight, Dirt 5), ties in 1 more, oh, and those are the newcomers, as if something was going on, you know, once RDNA2 hit the market:



Videocardz
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ascend

Epic Sax CEO

Member
Nov 4, 2019
356
732
345

This made me remember a comment I read on another forum, about how the press mindset is skewed by Nvidia. There's the example of Digital Foundry, they compared the RX 6700X against Nvidia GPU's, the 3060ti and 3070 asking "it's good enough"? But when they test new Nvidia GPUs they always test against other Nvidia GPUs to show "how good the upgrade is". They did this with the 3060 to show how it was time for the 1060 owners to upgrade. Then why they don't do the same for AMD GPUs? Why they don't compare the 6700X with the 5700X and the 580 to show the generational upgrade and if it's good enough to Switch?
 
Jan 3, 2021
131
193
220

Pretty conclusive. Upgrades sometimes are downgrades if your CPU is old by today's standards.

Again, it can still be a huge upgrade, depending on what you play and what settings you pick

I had a 2700x and a 1080, and sold my gpu for a good price and managed to grab a 3070 at near msrp price.

These were my Cyberpunk benchmarks with the 1080
1920x1080 Preset Medium: 56.2
1920x1080 Preset Ultra: 40.3

These are my new benchmarks with the 3070
1920x1080 Preset Medium: 75.3
1920x1080 Preset Ultra: 72.2
1920x1080 Preset RT Medium: 53.2
1920x1080 preset RT medium + DLSS quality: 68.2
2560x1440 Preset Medium: 73.6

In short, this upgrade took me from getting 40 fps in ultra settings to getting 68 fps with ultra and rt medium settings.

Even at more CPU bound medium settings, i saw a %33 increase, but clearly CPU showed its limitations at 1080p medium (but i wont be playing the game at 1080p medium so yeah, not a huge problem) At 1440p medium though, bottleneck shifted to GPU again, and game became GPU bound.

In short, it is not the end of the world. Be reminded that Cyberpunk is a tough S-O-B when it comes to be CPU bound. Yes, it is also very GPU bound in the same time.

But here's a less GPU bound situation than Cyberpunk


In short, 5600x made no meaningful differences compared to my 2700x at 1080p ultra. this is not even 1440p, which is what 3070/3080 targets

Now, you might say that lowering the settings at 1080p to high might shift the bottleneck to CPU, and 5600x would probably get the upper hand.

But then again, I got 53-54 fps at ultra with my previous gtx 1080. Now i get 79, and that's huge. I might dial back the settings, push the resolution scale a bit for a much sharper and nicer image, and so on.

Again use cases will be different. I can see where this topic going, but according to the video, HBux made it seem like it makes no difference to from a rx 580 to gtx 1080 with a 4790k. (bear in mind that 2700x actually has a gaming performance near 4790k and is considered by lowend ryzen cpu by many people, and it is somewhat lowend at this point).

Yet, here I'm, actually going from 1080 to 3070, and yet still get great uplifts in my performance, at my own preferences of games and settings. Not even at 1440p, and that tells a lot.

Again, I managed to find the 3070 by pure luck, and managed to sell my 1080 for a hefty price, or I would stick with my 1080, since i'm also okay with more optimized/lower settings. But none the less, neither 1080 nor 580 could get the results the 3070 got in these two particular games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: longdi
Jun 1, 2016
1,442
1,672
610
Again, it can still be a huge upgrade, depending on what you play and what settings you pick

I had a 2700x and a 1080, and sold my gpu for a good price and managed to grab a 3070 at near msrp price.

These were my Cyberpunk benchmarks with the 1080
1920x1080 Preset Medium: 56.2
1920x1080 Preset Ultra: 40.3

These are my new benchmarks with the 3070
1920x1080 Preset Medium: 75.3
1920x1080 Preset Ultra: 72.2
1920x1080 Preset RT Medium: 53.2
1920x1080 preset RT medium + DLSS quality: 68.2
2560x1440 Preset Medium: 73.6

In short, this upgrade took me from getting 40 fps in ultra settings to getting 68 fps with ultra and rt medium settings.

Even at more CPU bound medium settings, i saw a %33 increase, but clearly CPU showed its limitations at 1080p medium (but i wont be playing the game at 1080p medium so yeah, not a huge problem) At 1440p medium though, bottleneck shifted to GPU again, and game became GPU bound.

In short, it is not the end of the world. Be reminded that Cyberpunk is a tough S-O-B when it comes to be CPU bound. Yes, it is also very GPU bound in the same time.

But here's a less GPU bound situation than Cyberpunk


In short, 5600x made no meaningful differences compared to my 2700x at 1080p ultra. this is not even 1440p, which is what 3070/3080 targets

Now, you might say that lowering the settings at 1080p to high might shift the bottleneck to CPU, and 5600x would probably get the upper hand.

But then again, I got 53-54 fps at ultra with my previous gtx 1080. Now i get 79, and that's huge. I might dial back the settings, push the resolution scale a bit for a much sharper and nicer image, and so on.

Again use cases will be different. I can see where this topic going, but according to the video, HBux made it seem like it makes no difference to from a rx 580 to gtx 1080 with a 4790k. (bear in mind that 2700x actually has a gaming performance near 4790k and is considered by lowend ryzen cpu by many people, and it is somewhat lowend at this point).

Yet, here I'm, actually going from 1080 to 3070, and yet still get great uplifts in my performance, at my own preferences of games and settings. Not even at 1440p, and that tells a lot.

Again, I managed to find the 3070 by pure luck, and managed to sell my 1080 for a hefty price, or I would stick with my 1080, since i'm also okay with more optimized/lower settings. But none the less, neither 1080 nor 580 could get the results the 3070 got in these two particular games.
Yeah the testing for some games seemed weird. It's like yes it's an issue in some eSports titles but who is playing cyberpunk with a 3080 at 1080p medium?
 
Jan 3, 2021
131
193
220
Yeah, WTF?



the more accurate statement would be:

4790k becomes cpu bound near 130 fps for any nvidia card, and becomes cpu bound near 160 fps for any amd card

so in all due respect, it's a clear %23 difference of overhead

good to know that it's documented like this, since with amd card you can have stable 144 fps+ with such an old cpu (yet again, actually powerful still), but cant with an nvidia card.

its clear that 4790k, despite having better fps with amd cards, still runs into a bottleneck at 160 fps, since after vega 56, framerates are mostly same, signaling the bottleneck is still there for it
 
Last edited:

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
May 13, 2006
1,644
350
1,600
They should have tested dx11 too in Fortnite, I wonder how that would look like.
It would show the AMD dx11 overhead kick in. But dx11 is not the way of the future. Current issues with dx12 are the ones that should be fixed.

Also, he tested dx11 in the video. You should watch it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Md Ray

Armorian

Member
Jan 17, 2018
2,551
3,760
475
It would show the AMD dx11 overhead kick in. But dx11 is not the way of the future. Current issues with dx12 are the ones that should be fixed.

Also, he tested dx11 in the video. You should watch it.

Yes, but on case of Fortnite - DX11 renderer is probably more efficient and it performs better than DX12 why would anyone use that if there is a choice?
 

longdi

Ni hao ma, fellow kids?
Jun 7, 2004
8,433
5,804
1,865
Yeah, WTF?


i7 4790k is still way more powerful than last gen consoles, surprising to see it cpu bounding fortnight.

so what's causing this extra nvidia overhead? shadowplay? ansel? gsync? shield?
 

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
May 13, 2006
1,644
350
1,600
Yes, but on case of Fortnite - DX11 renderer is probably more efficient and it performs better than DX12 why would anyone use that if there is a choice?
It doesn't invalidate the findings. Dx12 is here to stay, so it must be addressed.
 
Jan 3, 2021
131
193
220
i7 4790k is still way more powerful than last gen consoles, surprising to see it cpu bounding fortnight.

so what's causing this extra nvidia overhead? shadowplay? ansel? gsync? shield?
Supposedly, they used some special modes in Fortnite, pro players or something like that.

I get 200+ fps in solo mode with my 2700x paired with a nvidia gpu, but i don't know what mod or what map or what specific settings they tested so can't reitarate the tests (i wish they were more transparent about these)