Async compute, and Async Shaders. I want to clarify this

Is there any link?

http://gearnuke.com/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-uses-async-compute-to-render-breathtaking-volumetric-lighting-on-xbox-one/#

From the comments:

"What a scam. Async Computer and Async Shaders are completely different. You people fall for the marketing machine again !!! You are getting tricked, and still believe it." - Molokow chewbacca

That might be the source, not sure how it relates to NVIDIA.

Because they are saying async compute, not async shaders.

That is the difference. People dont know the difference.

Aysnc shaders is what you want, forget everything else.

Actually what you want is good looking effects and good FPS, forget everything else :p

(And yes, we know you are the guy who ranted and spammed about AMD over Nvidia before. Going on about the flickering all the time. Well, it doesn't flicker anymore :p)

More pressing is that this is not the right forum to be talking about Tomb Raider and AMD/Nvidia's approach to it. If you must do it on Stardock's webpage I believe there are more appropriate forums to do it in.

More importantly, it's wrong information to begin with because the cards have been tested and verified to compute shaders asynchronously, which was never disputed by Oxide to begin with.  What they don't do well is context switching, because there's only one compute engine I assume, but they're so much faster that it takes a lot to bog them down anyway.

I don't have a bone to pick here, personally I'm a 3dfx man and loath both of the companies.  Glide was far superior for performance when we got stuck with those assclowns at Microshit and their craptastic obfuscated rendering methods.  We're actually getting closer to how we used to do things now, with Mantle and DX12 being more like Glide was 20 years ago as far as CTM goes.

GCN performs better at higher levels of parallelism because they have a 64 command queue setup spread across 8 shaders, nVidia performs better at lower levels because they only have a single 31 command queue on one shader that is massively more efficient.  These are not single queues that do 8 and 31 in order, they're 8 and 31 simultaneously.  This hilarious mischaractarisation is the heart of the problem, you have to go back to the original Kepler, the 600 series, to have a single shader queue.  AMD bloody well knows this too, because their compute queues are called ACE's for a reason, they're asynchronous computing engines, individually.

Maxwell's single shader engine setup is so much more efficient than the GCN shaders are, that it performs better even at four times the command queue's depth.  Basically, you're far better off with a 980Ti until you get quite high in simultaneous shader commands.  There is little loss on the GCN architecture as you go past it's queue depth, but it's basic job latency is very high.  Now, performing shaders and graphics together without a performance loss doesn't seem to go very well on Maxwell, but it's so much faster with them independently that it still outperforms even with the context switching until you have very high levels of shader parallelism.  GCN is basically so overbuilt with 8 ACE's on a Fury X, that it will run out of processing power long before it runs out of queues to load up in the typical workload.

This is all well documented by enterprising individuals that did testing of the two architectures to see what they were actually capable of.  GCN architecture is highly future proofed, has been for years, with an emphasis on parallelism before it was even available for graphics.  Maxwell architecture is not, but so much more efficient that the 980Ti can still keep up with a Fury X even while it's poor context switching bogs it down.

What the players want is to take pleasure in the gameplay.

Async in this game or not, nobody wants to know about it.

I play Tomb Raider 2016 suberb game in all aspects, but to ashes the important thing is the flow of actions along with a mechanism that works.

1-And try understand what Async Computer and Async Shaders is .

2- Go to a doctor we all know who you´r and the spam you do here and on Steam, you really dont have nothing more to do?  

That blue line is missing on the benchmark with NVIDIA though. Can't deny the API not being there.

Anyways,

I liked the last tomb raider, I am waiting for it to go on special.

Tag is it a really good game, what would you rate it out of 10?

Also, have you seen the SOLUS Project?

Enough.  We're pretending you're not the other guy.  Let us continue to pretend.

Lol, ok, can you pretend to un-ban me on steam as well I cant advertise for people to vs me, and I do sit there most days in the lobby. 

Tag you kinda make me feel like a persecuted Edward Snowden that should punished for trying to tell the truth - only the people who hide the truth know it.. hehe

All good. I will stay within 31 queues

Dammit, you missed the main point - I really wanted NVIDIA hairworks on those engineers too.   )

Ok, I will shut up.. lol..  =) 

I really do want to buy tomb raider though, and Solus looks good, and I wanted to ask what you thought of both.

Jesus, stop spamming. Those nvidia people are raving about the extra

Ram access.  Geez. There is no truth ti the rumour your amd card is crashing because the took or put in nvidia code.

 jesus man, you just turn that feature down prtending it had the same draw calls

Get over it!!

Okay, I'm no expert but I just ran the DX12 benchmark a few times on my Nvidia 980 ti and I see the blue line?  Fps was between 53 and 60 each run with all maxed (manually maxed terrain shading samples) and 4x MSAA.  Am I missing something here?

 I know that Nvidia doesn't have as many Async Shading pipes but they ones they have are fast.  It seems to me that with DX12 AMD has finally caught up with Nvidia (even surpassing it depending on the game) and this can only be good as competition = better for us consumers.  What this shouldn't mean is creating a circle jerk of AMD vs Nvidia Fanboys as I've seen happen recently.

Here is a screen of my settings/benchmark (1080P btw)

http://imgur.com/a/TnX2a

Why is your resolution missing>?

This is mine

http://molokow.imgur.com/all/

The resolution display in benchmark results is occasionally bugged. This does not effect performance.

"molokow's images are not publicly available."

Fair enough

 http://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/dx12/supported-gpus

Jesus, my ten year old ram supports dx12.. Can you show on their web site the features that is supports in their GPU? You click a graphic card and nothing happens.

I can see heaps of support happening hear, even benchmarks

http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/software-technologies/directx12

My 10 year old ram supports dx12, my usb stick supports dx12.

I smell something coming out of a cows bum

AMD results are measurable.

The green hitting the blue line is a computation problem. Not really rocked science..