AMD GPU users beware

Call of Duty Ghosts PC

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to Maccabi

Consoles are using AMD GPU's and the PC version is a ported XboxOne/PS4, and that 'Graphics Card Hierarchy Chart' is a bunch of crap.

Example: The HD 7870 sells now for ~$150 v/s GTX 660 sells for ~$180, and HD 7870 ~= GTX 660 in BO2 and I can assume the same for Ghosts.

Example: The R9 290X sells now for ~$550 v/s GTX 780 sells for ~$650, R9 290X ~= GTX 780 in BO2 and I can assume the same for Ghosts.

Price/Performance Charts change like the direction of the wind. Some games nVidia is better and some AMD is better.

Level 28
Likes: 333
Posts: 2384
Registered: ‎28-12-2012

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to Momba1

Momba1 wrote:



Consoles are using AMD GPU's and the PC version is a ported XboxOne/PS4, and that 'Graphics Card Hierarchy Chart' is a bunch of crap.




ghosts is ported from pc to the consoles

Level 75
Likes: 4276
Posts: 15690
Registered: ‎31-05-2011

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to Maccabi

Nope, the game is written on a 'PC' for a console then ported back again to run on the PC. It is tested on a PC that emulates a console. I mean nowadays their all essentially the same thing, but the PC is an after thought at best. My friend the PC at best is a third-cousin relationship to Activision. The engine, optimizations or you name it are by far, not even close, geared towards the consoles especially in cross-platform games.

PC sales are going to be about 1/20th to 1/30th of Activision sales for Ghosts, if that.

Level 28
Likes: 333
Posts: 2384
Registered: ‎28-12-2012

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to Momba1

Momba1 wrote:



Nope, the game is written on a 'PC' for a console then ported back again to run on the PC. It is tested on a PC that emulates a console. I mean nowadays their all essentially the same thing, but the PC is an after thought at best. My friend the PC at best is a third-cousin relationship to Activision. The engine, optimizations or you name it are by far, not even close, geared towards the consoles especially in cross-platform games.



PC sales are going to be about 1/20th to 1/30th of Activision sales for Ghosts, if that.


Actually in the case of ghosts you're incorrect.

Trust me on this Ghosts was coded and designed first for pc ..then its scaled back for each next gen  platform to fit that platforms specs. Granted with current gen you still have to work with the platforms as you always did but.. This is one of the good things about next gen consoles they are finally based off of pc architecture meaning itsd alot easier for devs to work with.

Level 75
Likes: 4276
Posts: 15690
Registered: ‎31-05-2011

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to Maccabi

Everything I've read, and I'm a programmer by trade though be it for SQL/PHP, the games are written as I described. All optimizations are console based, and like it or not that's not uncommon. Few games are written specifically for the PC and then later for a Console. Typically you're using tools like Microsoft Visual Studio and CodeWarrior.

Minimum specs being similar to the Xbox One aren't a coincidence and neither is the 64-bit requirement.

Level 28
Likes: 333
Posts: 2384
Registered: ‎28-12-2012

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to Momba1

Momba1 wrote:



Everything I've read, and I'm a programmer by trade though be it for SQL/PHP, the games are written as I described. All optimizations are console based, and like it or not that's not uncommon. Few games are written specifically for the PC and then later for a Console. Typically you're using tools like Microsoft Visual Studio and CodeWarrior.



Minimum specs being similar to the Xbox One aren't a coincidence and neither is the 64-bit requirement.


ok but honestly that's how ghosts was done. feel free to believe me or not

Level 75
Likes: 4276
Posts: 15690
Registered: ‎31-05-2011

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to Momba1

The link to the GPU chart I provided has absolutely nothing to do with price/performance, it is a hierachy of card/performance, it clearly shows the HD 5870 is far beyond the capabilites of a GTS 450. I have explained how PhysX works and why it cannot triple the minimum requirements of AMD cards vs nvidia cards.

Level 6
Likes: 37
Posts: 160
Registered: ‎24-09-2011

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to damze

The link is Price/Performance and not completely up-to-date one at that; otherwise it's completely and terribly wrong.

Level 28
Likes: 333
Posts: 2384
Registered: ‎28-12-2012
Highlighted

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to Momba1

Lol not it is not, your ignorance is amazing. Please just stop posting in this thread you are making yourself look bad.

Level 6
Likes: 37
Posts: 160
Registered: ‎24-09-2011

Re: AMD GPU users beware

in reply to damze

Huh, says the 'tinfoil' man, more like uninformed. If there's something that doesn't make sense, you cannot jump to a conclusion on the surface but instead you need look for attributes and characteristics that solve the reasoning: Bus, DirectX, vRAM, drivers, etc which often explains the reasoning.

Again, simply looking say at the 'top' of the charts and at the top two slots of single core GPU's:

Discrete: GTX 590, 780

Discrete: HD 6990, 7970 GHz Ed, R9 280X

Discrete: GTX 680, 770

Discrete: HD 7970

Comparing a GTX 780 to an R9 280X/HD 7970 GHz is ludicrous and ditto with a GTX 770 to an HD 7970. More in keeping is a GTX 780 to an R9 290X and GTX 770 to an R9 280X/HD 7970 GHz; as the purpose from AMD was to compete directly with those GPUs. Keep in mind GTX 780 OC keeps up with a Titan in many tests. Next benchmarking can be easily skewed on what 'tests,' 'drivers,' 'settings,' or etc that are part of a series of benchmarks. Further, to complicate the crap out of a set of benchmarks are the clock speeds; try finding 'all' GTX 770's/780's at the same clock speeds in non-reference GPU's and the same holds true on the R9 280X today and very soon the 290X and many of the OC HD 7970's; stock v/s factory OC and GPU's overhead. Now if you're serious about gaming and resolutions SLI/CF can really paint a picture on GPU's shortcomings and/or drivers. Examples: the GTX 760, HD 7970's (all), R9 280X, and R9 290X all suffer from various degrees of Stutter/Frame Drop/Latency (FCAT) issues; hopefully it managed by newer drivers. Next 'games' and game optimization drivers, across all GPU's new often = bad in many cases for drivers, and an updated driver can easily change 'the game' with 5%-10%-20%+ optimizations. Lastly, who's doing the testing and what's their relationship with Nvidia or AMD. I recall a series of testing that Chris performed at Tom's HW where he was taking mid-to-low range GPU's and asserting 8xMSAA to bottleneck then deliberately the Nvidia's memory bus and hence skewed (cooked the books) testing/benchmarks. As I said, I know Chris, Don, Tom, etc at TH; I'm Jaquith at TH and I normally avoid silly GPU debates they're often like this crap.

Therefore, take 'that chart' with a gain of salt. Going back to Ghosts, approximately 1/30th of the sales are PC while 29/30th are Consoles, and the new consoles, Xbox One/PS4 are indeed AMD GPU based and any 'optimizations' are first to AMD and in cases of 'partnering' those 'optimizations' favor the partner GPU's first, but cutting-off your nose and ignoring the other GPU vendor = lost sales so at best slight favoring initially followed by a series of driver optimizations quickly. This is why some benchmarks make no sense and flip in favor of one GPU over another.

Lastly, bear in mind Nvidia as is Intel are toying with AMD, and they're both at least a generation and maybe two ahead of AMD. There's little difference between a GTX 780, a Titan and the forthcoming GTX 780 Ti other than unlocking CUDA cores and messing with overhead core frequencies.

Level 28
Likes: 333
Posts: 2384
Registered: ‎28-12-2012

Studios