Battlefield 1 is just a few days from launching. In fact, owners of the Deluxe Edition have the game unlock yesterday. It's interesting that multiple publishers are using release date as a special edition bonus these days, including Microsoft's recent Windows Store releases. I'm not going to say interesting bad or good, though, because I'll leave that up to the reader to decide.
Anywho, DigitalFoundry is doing their benchmarking thing, and they wanted to see what GPU could provide a solid 60FPS when everything is maxed out (at 1080p). They start off with a DX12-to-DX12 comparison between the GTX 1060 and the RX 480. This is a relatively fair comparison, because the 3GB GTX 1060 and the 4GB RX 480 both come in at about $200, while upgrading to 6GB for the 1060 or 8GB for the 480 bumps each respective SKU up to the ~$250 price point. In this test, NVIDIA has a few dips slightly below 60 FPS in complex scenes, while AMD stays above that beloved threshold.
They also compare the two cards in DX11 and DX12 mode, with both cards using a Skylake-based Core i5 CPU. In this test, AMD's card noticed a nice increase in frame rate when switching to DirectX 12, while NVIDIA had a performance regression in the new API. This raises two questions, one of which is potentially pro-NVIDIA, and the other, pro-AMD. First, would the original test, if NVIDIA's card was allowed to use DirectX 11, show the GTX 1060 more competitive against the DX12-running RX 480? This brings me to the second question: what would the user see? A major draw of Mantle-based graphics APIs is that the application has more control over traditionally driver-level tasks. Would 60 FPS in DX12 be more smooth than 60 FPS in DX11?
I don't know. It's something we'll need to test.
Well AMD is holding it’s own
Well AMD is holding it’s own on the low end…..but where’s the answer for the 1070 and up?
If you have a Fury X, then it
If you have a Fury X, then it seems like you're competitive to the GTX 1070 in DX12 and Vulkan. Nothing in DX11 yet, though.
DX11?
That’s like asking Elon
DX11?
That’s like asking Elon Musk to build a gas powered Tesla.
“Many” developers aren’t yet
"Many" developers aren't yet comfortable developing DX12 or Vulkan titles, and engine support is typically still experimental. It's not unreasonable to think that, if you buy a GPU today, you will be playing a lot of DX11 titles on it.
How many of those “Many”
How many of those “Many” developers use there own engines ?
Yes most of the so called
Yes most of the so called games developers are not the software engineers that develop the gaming engines! So most of the games developers use script driven software using the gaming engine SDK to develop their games with the few real software engineers on most gaming projects doing the work of porting the game over to DX12/Vulkan at the gaming engine level. Games companies, just like the motion picture industry, have the experts, consultants, and software engineers/software engineer contractors to get the hard parts done with plenty of assistance from the gaming engine companies.
Off the top of my head,
Off the top of my head, Remedy Entertainment (Quantum Break, Alan Wake) and Thekla, Inc. (The Witness) spoke out. Also, other studios, like Blizzard and Bethesda, seem to be ignoring it for now.
It’s an interesting topic,
It’s an interesting topic, look for example at Quantum Break where NVIDIA in D3D11 performs better than AMD does in D3D12. And that isn’t the only example, that’s why measuring framerate consistency is so important.
Most of these DX12 labeled
Most of these DX12 labeled games are just that. Compliance patches. There was a reason why Quantum Break was called Quantum Broken by the media.
Why don’t you do your own
Why don’t you do your own analysis?
We do. We also highlight
We do. We also highlight really good work from our colleagues if it's something that we believe will interest our readers, especially when we have our own experience and opinions to add. Just look at the lists below basically every one of Jeremy's news posts.
@Scott Michaud
They are
@Scott Michaud
They are comparing the cards both in DX12, then both in DX11, and in the end they run the GTX with DX11 alongside the RX in DX12, so I think your question is already answered in the last part of that video.
One more thing. This isn’t about BF 1.
Can you guys have a look at Techspot’s findings about the ultra quality settings in GoW4. It seems that the game’s engine is not producing the same quality, but varies based on the memory on the card. If this isn’t a mistake, or a bug, or something, it could end up being the first case of a future trend where the game engine is doing what you would expect GeForce Experience or Raptr to be doing.
http://www.techspot.com/review/1263-gears-of-war-4-benchmarks/
It’s confirmed and solidly
It’s confirmed and solidly set in stone, folks: AMD IZ BACK INTO DA ACTION, BABEH!
Frostbite engine is really
Frostbite engine is really really impressive since I started playing Star Wars Battlefront and the BF1 beta. To me its the best engine out there atm. UE4 still needs to show more as I didnt like the texture quality in GoW4 but it does also run super.
Star Engine Faggot. Duh.
Star Engine Faggot. Duh.
Not appropriate.
Not appropriate.
I’m guessing GoW4 is heavily
I'm guessing GoW4 is heavily forked from mainline UE4. DX12 isn't even a supported feature in Epic's version.
I dont think UE has been
I dont think UE has been updated in the DX12 department since Lionhead studios helped them and they closed shop awhile back.
bottom line… PC graphics
bottom line… PC graphics cards that are 2x more powerful than consoles can play console ports at 1.2x higher FPS
Can’t wait to see those red dead benchmarks at the end of 2018 or 2019… LOL
Depends on the settings.
Depends on the settings. When was the last time you went into a console game and changed the MSAA/AF or change the texture detail, shadows, etc? I’m guessing close to never.
agree… i go into the
agree… i go into the recommended pc settings on a 970 and turn stuff down because i get paranoid about losing performance during competition.
remember in Quake 4 when ID decided that shadows and graphics could all be turned off for competition, and then Quake 4 ended up looking just like Q3 which made it pointless. This is when everyone abandoned Q4.
How many console gamers tweak their settings in competition to make the game looks like an atari 2600 game just to be more competitive?
So you are right, i turn stuff down and make the game uglier which just pisses me off.
BTW, played some BF1 this morning on the PC and then went to the forums to read about the flight stick issues. PC master race…. LOL
That’s a lot of resentment
That's a lot of resentment for personal choice.
Some people value mechanics and fluid performance over prettiness. Unless the developer failed to balance the game correctly for all quality settings, like allowing users to reduce draw distance of cover, but not the distance of whatever is hiding behind them, then it really shouldn't affect you. That's like kicking down a sand castle because they didn't use a mold to build it.