nVidia 2015 mobile speculation thread

Discussion in 'Gaming (Software and Graphics Cards)' started by Cloudfire, May 9, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Deks

    Deks Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,105
    Messages:
    4,654
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Trophy Points:
    231
    I was under the impression that AMD gpu's tend to be far more powerful/capable than Nvidia in professional software.
    Now, if all you are comparing are gaming performance and efficiency based on that alone, then yes, AMD is definitely lacking, and they hadn't released anything new (except rebrands) in the mobile (even desktop - sans their Fury line which actually puts them relatively on par with Maxwell more or less gaming-wise).

    However, I was under the impression that a GPU should be evaluated using ALL of it's capabilities.
    Not just gaming performance.
    After all, there are multiple consumers who use pro based software.

    I just find that its a bit unfair to compare AMD and Nvidia on the gaming side and say which company is better based on that alone.
    GCN as an architecture also seems to age better than Nvidia's do (at least on the desktop end), so AMD seems more focused on the longevity of their products - though if I'm not mistaken, 7970m experienced a lot of problems and failures, did it not?
     
  2. ssj92

    ssj92 Neutron Star

    Reputations:
    1,910
    Messages:
    3,820
    Likes Received:
    4,646
    Trophy Points:
    331
    After Fermi, nVidia cards took a performance hit in pro apps and in compute in general. AMD still has the upper hand there, but in pure gaming, nVidia is winning. However their Fiji based cards are doing well against the big maxwell GM200 chips. We just need something in the mobile sector, which should happen in 2016.
     
    TomJGX likes this.
  3. D2 Ultima

    D2 Ultima Livestreaming Master

    Reputations:
    4,329
    Messages:
    11,800
    Likes Received:
    9,732
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Well, to make it clear, AMD's cards were always stronger. They just can't driver. Without drivers pulling out their full potential, GPUs might as well be scrap metal. AMD's drivers get slowly better over time, so you see their cards getting "stronger". It isn't that the cards are getting stronger... they just couldn't use their power before. It's why they fly in DX12, even under the 31+1 compute that nVidia is limited to. They can simply render to their full strengths and their drivers aren't such a limiting factor anymore. Teraflops and such are a stupid way to compare GPUs, sure, but make no bone about it: they are a legitimate compute measurement. If they can render at say... 300 gigatexels and 1000 gigapixels per second, and their drivers let them only use 200 gigatexels and 500 gigapixels, and nVidia can max at 250GT and 600GP, then what happens if their drivers don't block things off? Good things happen. That's why AMD is being so sought after by idiots who think DX12 is literally right around the corner, when in reality by the time it's in full swing, we might be ready to launch the GPU that's two generations above what we have now.

    That being said, if AMD's arctic islands can crush what we currently have and match Pascal's cards next year, but still be "underperforming", when DX12 actually does come out and get used a bit, nVidrosoft might find that their "build to suffice" attitude is biting them in the butt =D.
     
    TomJGX and jaybee83 like this.
  4. Deks

    Deks Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,105
    Messages:
    4,654
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Trophy Points:
    231
    AMD did mention that Arctic Islands will have twice the performance per watt compared to their Fury line (which is almost neck and neck - 10W difference in some games - TDP wise).

    I would imagine that a lot of AMD's power draw might come from their ability to surpass Nvidia in professional software.
    Hence the high shader numbers which do not readily translate to gaming performance (but evidently, its a completely different ballpark on pro software).

    As for their drivers... yes, it was pointed out that at DX11 and below, their drivers lack the same type of optimizations that Nvidia pulls into their own, but at the same time, Nvidia also plays dirty by using proprietary Gameworks libraries, while AMD freely released their TressFX (which is open source and incidentally BETTER in terms of visual quality and less resource intense than Nvidia) for which Nvidia managed to optimize.

    Granted, Nvidia has more cash behind it, so they can afford better driver optimizations... though, after all this time, AMD really has little to no excuse on that end - though the upcoming driver release might affect things on this scale.

    Regarding DX12... it may not be around the corner, however, given the choice between Nvidia and AMD, I'd pick the AMD Fury Nano.
    Preferably in laptop form, exactly because it's more DX12 ready, has HBM already, and I usually keep my laptops for extended periods of use (my current Acer is 7 years old after all).

    It's actually sad that AMD isn't pushing the Nano for the mobile. It probably can be done, and it would likely give them a needed edge to boost their sales and keep themselves visible in the laptop arena while also matching the desktop 980, if not surpassing it (and it would still offer more than good enough DX11 performance).
     
    TomJGX and triturbo like this.
  5. Ethrem

    Ethrem Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,404
    Messages:
    6,706
    Likes Received:
    4,735
    Trophy Points:
    431
    AMD has promised so many things so many times... And they haven't delivered since the Athlon 64 on the CPU front and when it comes to video cards, sure they've traded blows with nVidia... But as @D2 Ultima said...... They can't make a driver to save their lives... and they REALLY need to.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page