No DX12 Software is Suitable for Benchmarking *spawn*

DavidGraham said:
Wow, these are mighty impressive gains right there, didn't know Tomb Raider could yield such great increases under CPU bound conditions in DX12, though the DX12 path is marred by being inferior to DX11 image quality wise, as VXAO only works in DX11 and does wonders for shadows quality.

FWIW, I couldn't replicate your gains in The Division on my 1070 and i7 3770, so I am left wondering if it's a Ryzen thing?
Click to expand...

Probably a "moar core" thingy
 
DavidGraham said:
All in all it appears that playing the game is best achieved on NVIDIA's DX11, as it's at least 20% faster than even AMD's DX12. This is exactly the same situation as the first Warhammer.


http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Total...Specials/Direct-X-12-Benchmarks-Test-1200551/

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-03...est/2/#diagramm-total-war-warhammer-2560-1440

http://www.pcgamer.com/total-war-wa...md-still-cant-match-nvidias-dx11-performance/
Click to expand...

Quantum Break as well, same exact thing
 
RotTR is able to substiantially gain measured avg. Fps from DX12. And by substantially I mean 40 percent upwards.
 
At least they provide links to the original sites. People usually like to read different commentary/interpretation as one it may differ between the sites.
 
pharma said:
At least they provide links to the original sites. People usually like to read different commentary/interpretation as one it may differ between the sites.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that („commentary/interpretation“) is a great reason to rip the whole lot of benchmarks from the source. Fair use in my books would have been one sample benchmark, their commentary and an explicit mentioning of the source for further reading.

But a big problem is people being indifferent to who did the actual work. If rip-off sites get all the traffic, i.e. all the money, who would be willing to put in the effort to do thorough benchmarks, tests and reviews? Sorry for OT, I won't pursue any more in this thread, but I think these rip-offs are just not fair.
 
The entire basis of that site is exactly that, a rip-off of hard work by others for clicks. They barely make any attempt to note the source, rip all the real content from the source and re-post it on their own site which leaves no reason for the reader to go to the source. That's why I protest most of the time when people link them here, instead of the actual source.

Their domain name should be filtered from posts imo.
 
CarstenS said:
Fair use in my books would have been one sample benchmark, their commentary and an explicit mentioning of the source for further reading.
Click to expand...
If only this was the standard for every piece of info gleamed from the original site that created a news worthy story.
 
CarstenS said:
They "borrowed" the whole content, i.e. the benchmarks, from Computerbase. A shame really that WTF-Tech gets the links for others' original work.
https://www.computerbase.de/2017-09/forza-7-benchmark/2/#diagramm-forza-7-1920-1080
Click to expand...
The scaling is completely bonkers in this game. It seems like NV is either really CPU limited in a lot of cases... or something else is wrong. From 2560X1440 to 3840X2160 the 1080Ti only loses about 10% of its performance? Given the existence of an xb1 version of the game, the dx12 implementation and the CPU scaling seems to be very very poor if a 1080Ti is CPU limited to about 110 fps at 1920X1080. PC desktop CPUs should be putting in multiples of better CPU performance than the jaguar cores.... especially under DX12 in a properly multithreaded engine.
 
Yeah, I agree. The results look strange, but then, Computerbase apparently did contact Nvidia and they said, that's basically expected behaviour. I guess there can be more intricate pitfalls for performance than just the standard-issue ROP-limited, memory limited or geometry limited monikers. Maybe many complex compute tasks which are resolution independent. I have neither the game nor a recent Nvidia card at home to take a look myself.
 
Dictator said:
PC desktop CPUs should be putting in multiples of better CPU performance than the jaguar cores.... especially under DX12 in a properly multithreaded engine.
Click to expand...
I think you got it backwards.
Many cores with lower single-threaded performance will gain more than fewer cores with higher single-threaded performance.
 
Dictator said:
PC desktop CPUs should be putting in multiples of better CPU performance than the jaguar cores.... especially under DX12 in a properly multithreaded engine.
Click to expand...
Isn't Forza 7 using 11_0 feature set and is running on mainly 2 cores only?
 
@CarstenS
Wtf-tech have a high reach of people, if you look at the comment section they have the most time about 5000 comments and more. I think a lot of people are clicking at the link to Computerbase which appears in the first sentence of the article. And they posted a link under every picture. Guru3d didn't do that. At the end of the day I think Computerbase had more clicks on there side because of WTF-tech.

But I wish also that more people go to the original sides and show respect to there works.
 
Last edited:
Digidi said:
I think a lot of people are clicking at the link to Computerbase which appears in the first sentence of the article.
Click to expand...
And then panic and cower in fear at the sight of the mighty german language.

The fact that others did worse does not absove Wtf-tech one iota
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
id Software releases Open-Source Wolf3D iPhone port
Replies
13
Views
6K
Ailuros
Ailuros
O
Unreal creator Tim Sweeney: "PCs are good for anything, just not games”
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
18K
Mobius1aic
M
A
Full transcript of John Carmack's QuakeCon 2005 Keynote
3 4 5
Replies
98
Views
34K
nemisis
N
Back
Top