1. The forum will be closing soon permanently. Please read the announcement here

    Note: User registration has been closed. We do not accept any new accounts.

Let's talk about NVidia GameWorks

Discussion in 'General' started by LFCavalcanti, Jan 15, 2016.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. LFCavalcanti

    LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    I don't see anything against the NVidia's API being proprietary here, I never said anything against it, I however suggested that it would be better if they either collaborated with AMD in a single API or at least follow the same business model, that's my opinion. Since the API is to use their hardware, to provide effects and what not, it's better to have transparency.

    I started this whole discussion because you said this:
    Generalizing saying any proprietary software is better than Open Source.
     
  2. Neffarion

    Neffarion Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    126
    AMD has no HBAO+ Counterpart
     
  3. Syncaidius

    Syncaidius Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    824
    Because really, its not needed. HBAO+ is just a fancy tweak to HBAO to help market GameWorks. HBAO has been around for almost 10 years, and appeared in games like BF3 (which ran on consoles) long before Nvidia decided to make a proprietary version of it. Again, this kind of behavior is what pisses people off, not the products themselves.

    IMO, HBAO+ actually looks less realistic in many situations.

    https://s1.mundogamers.com/uploaded/Nvidia Gameworks - Assassins/Oclusión.jpg

    Keep in mind that there are also better occlusion effects available (HDAO and SSDO), which perform better across all hardware. On top of that, the visual improvements are definitely noticable vs the performance cost.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2016
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. Neffarion

    Neffarion Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    126
    I could care less if nvidia calls their improved version of HBAO HBAO+ and makes it proprietary.
    Its THEIR CODE, THEIR improvement. People want to make it like a charity, give away everything to your competitor so you can later get almost bankrupt like AMD

    That image is not very noticeable because of the light and its just 1 game
    HDAO is too heavy and not that good for the performance it takes away.

    HBAO+ runs better then SSAO even on AMD cards - 1 FPS difference on Fallout 4 (amd and nvidia)
    SSAO | HBAO+ | Another Comparison
    SSBC vs HBAO+
    Screenshot1

    Sorry but HBAO+ its clearly more realistic on every game i have ever played compared to others.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 3
  5. LFCavalcanti

    LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    Wow! Radical views like this doesn't help the market at all, consumers thinking like this is what allowed the gaming industry(hardware+software) to become this greedy.

    Realize that without AMD on the market you certainly would pay a lot more fore GPUs and consoles. I don't get why people trash AMD while it's existence is what keep the market in check.
     
  6. Neffarion

    Neffarion Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    126
    I don't hate AMD, I however hate when people want Nvidia to "step down" so AMD (their main competitor) can "catch up".
    Why do i should ever get an AMD processor when Intel/Nvidia runs better in everything? Intel has proprietary technology and look at them, AMD doesn't stand a chance. If AMD tough a bit better for its future they would not give x64 architecture like that and their processors would be more popular.
    People want competition, I want competition just as any, but without decent ones I could care less at the moment
    This last year when i saw AMD HBM i was actually suprised to see something new from them. then you look better at the results and its outclassed by some standard GDDR5 VRAM GPUS
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 3
  7. Pfo

    Pfo Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    237
    What prevents AMD from buying a license to use GameWorks? Including the license that gives them access to the source code? Nothing...

    Also, very important, and why I keep posting here: this statement from @LFCavalcanti that your quoting is one I take issue with because he can't prove it's true, in fact several of his own sources are claiming the opposite. There are worthwhile things to debate here, we don't need to poison that debate with false statements.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. Pfo

    Pfo Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    237
    Well first off, it's not only available for NVidia card owners. GameWorks runs on Nvidia and AMD GPUs. Second, I'm not in a position to say if it's worth it. I'd have to see what the visual results look like and what impact, if any, they have on performance before I could make a judgment. Third, none of this integration would have to take place at the expense of new DX11 models, bug fixes or improving multiplayer.
     
  9. Draygo

    Draygo Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,297
    Lotta misinformation and hearsay in the OP.

    NVIDIA does not prevent developers from working with AMD. Game works also does not perform badly on AMD - just not as good.

    With that said I do agree with the general idea that it should be in Keens best interest to steer away from game works, just like you rarely see a games use NVIDIA's physics API. Long term its too risky. NVIDIA implements OpenGPU.
     
  10. PLPM

    PLPM Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    852
    [​IMG]

    For **** sake.

    We are not talking about diferent car brands, we are talking about hardware that alienates other hardware, HOW? EASY. If a road goes one direction (Nvidea), to the right, and other road another direction (AMD), left, BUT they meet at the same destination, straight ahead (Rendering/Graphics). It´s wasteful to go left or right, why not just straight and save more fuel/whatever (Money) for the guy making the trip (customer), AND the guys paving the roads (the brand themselves) well. Because they would need to pave a road that could help the other brands too, BUT it´s the most logical and easy way for making everything simpler for EVERYONE, set an standar so there´s no wasted potential between roads, software.

    Having only red OR blue to paint something is... bad. AMD had the balls to pave part of that road by opening 64x. It´s something that ultimately helps everyone... UNLESS a brand cuts the means to get resources for making that road and finishing it (Gameworks and such, by alienating) is like putting shitty gas stations only along the Nvidea road due to having acess to a monopoly that AMD doesn´t AND putting some speedbumps everywhere just to be sure it works.

    Is it a good move for Nvidea to make a monopoly? Sure.
    Is it good for the customer/guy making the trip? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

    And saying to buy the gameworks license... No, just... no.
    Gameworks is only there to **** up AMD. At least, in the way it is set up. AMD might be bad at processors and high-end cards, no doubt. But at least it´s not pulling this kind of shaddy moves like Nvidea is doing.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  11. LFCavalcanti

    LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    What prevents NVidia from stopping their shady business and think about the consumer and not their own wallets? See, double logic.

    This is even worse, because in the long term it would benefit both companies.

    You can't prove your argument is true either. You're also avoiding to answer the questions I asked... and I asked them several times here before. If you're only posting here to troll around, better stop and get back to subject.

    No they are not, you didn't even read those articles, so much that you posted the same link I already posted in OP...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. LFCavalcanti

    LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    Benchmarks on both Fallout 4 and Witcher 3 disagree very much with this statement. The effects performance is poor even in NVidia cards.

    The part about "working with AMD", as discussed above, was not publicly acknowledged by NVidia, of course, but several developers(using GameWorks) refused or didn't answered offers from AMD to help improve performance or implement their API counterparts. That should tell you that something is wrong, CDPR was clearly needing help with Witcher 3's performance and even then refused help.

    There's another clear case of that with ARK Survival Evolved, Wildcard was asked about collaborating with AMD to improve performance several times, their answer was elusive at best. Things were so strange that when AMD showed much better results in DX12 than NVidia, the release for DX12 was suddenly withheld, with no clear explanation and it was practically ready as stated by developers.

    Not only risky, but the time and effort would be better used fixing the game.(My opinion).
     
  13. Pfo

    Pfo Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    237
    @LFCavalcanti You can't prove that something doesn't exist, it's logically impossible, burden of proof is on you to prove this secret contract exists, or that you can't optimize for AMD when you implement GameWorks, or that you can't collaborate if you implement GameWorks, or that you can't provide alternatives alongside Gameworks. You claim it's in the links you provided, perhaps you should read them because it's not, or you can tell me specifically which article, which line it's one because I've read them like 4 times now and none of these things are in them. This isn't me trolling, this is you telling lies and refusing to back down.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. SirLANsalot

    SirLANsalot Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    280
    He did state at the end of the article that there are ways around that.
     
  15. KissSh0t

    KissSh0t Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,785
    Yes for some time you could do it with hacked drivers, you cannot anymore due to Nvidia going out of their way to make sure you cannot do this... unfortunately...

    Unless someone has figured out how to do it again which I am not aware of, although I doubt that... but please if I am incorrect prove me wrong.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Running

    Running Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    60
    NVidia could decide not to sell them the license.
    But...

    Then the entire discussion is pointless.

    If Keen wants to optimize for one brand and then also optimize for another and again for yet another etc. but skip a few brands because they don't have the resources available and estimate that there wouldn't be much benefit in doing so... that's business as usual.

    Then we can still discuss whether GameWorks is good or not. :)
     
  17. LFCavalcanti

    LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    Buddy, if you want to quote scientific research principles, remember that the "impossible logic" goes both ways, you can't prove something doesn't exists, neither that it exists, that only applies when you have no evidence to formulate a theory. The evidence shows that there's more probability that NVidia is using it's superior budget and control over the market to deny AMD room for partnership with Game Developers than otherwise.

    Again, those links I posted are neutral ones I picked, I don't know why you're so pedantic with this statement in specific when the real problem lies in other aspects. Perhaps you're an NVidia Fanboy, employee, just want to troll. Doesn't matter, this has become pointless and a rather ridiculous discussion.

    Why don't you answer my questions?

    1 - Do you think is really viable for KSH to implement GameWorks, while we need them focused on fixing the huge amount of problems/bugs we have?

    2 - Even if they have the time, do you think it's fair to implement effect that will be beneficial for just one portion of the playerbase?


    If you're going to answer those question, let's talk, if not, go on and say something clever, be proud to have the final word, because I'll waste no more time in this pointless debate.
     
  18. LFCavalcanti

    LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    Yeah, then we will see the same scenario when Microsoft, that holds the CA for certificates for UEFI boot systems holding to issue the certificate for Linux for over a year, without providing a justification neither being obligated to do what was already paid for.

    Canonical(Ubuntu) felt this excess of control from Microsoft, this happens every time one company holds he market against competition.

    I've been asking the same questions for him about the viability of GameWorks for several posts now, he doesn't answer.
     
  19. Pfo

    Pfo Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    237
    I did answer those questions, you can check this thread. I'll repeat my answer: I can't say for certain, I would have to see what the end result is in terms of graphics and performance.

    A basic principle in logic is that you can't prove that something doesn't exist, or didn't happen, because the case where it really doesn't exist or just not finding it appear the same with no way to differentiate them. The opposite is not true: if the thing exists and you've found it you have the proof. You can say it's probable all you want but this is just your opinion and it's conspiracy theory nonsense.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  20. LFCavalcanti

    LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    So, you don't have actually anything useful to say about the implementation, your only goal was to ignore everyone else here and target me, trolling about one aspect of the situation?

    Good lord, I need to refrain myself from entering in these loophole discussions.
     
  21. Pfo

    Pfo Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    237
    I just take issue when people use false statements to support their point of view. It's dishonest.
     
  22. PLPM

    PLPM Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    852
    What?
    False statements like saying the implemented Nvidea Hairworks in Witcher 3 is a resource hog?

    False statements like saying that AMD´s performance is destroyed by hairwork´s implementation?

    Are you really THAT adamant on seeing what´s going on? This is not some shaddy "My AMD fanboi friends told me Nvidea did *THIS*" No, it is: we can see were things went wrong.

    Gameworks off = 87.4 Nvidea and 75.8 AMD

    Gameworks on = 62.2 Nvidea and 29.4 AMD

    Are you going to say that is dishonest too, false statements? Because... well. I don´t know what kind of internet master you are to be calling people dishonest like that.

    *Edit* Ok, I missunderstood Pfo´s comment. Sorry guys :woot:
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2016
  23. Pfo

    Pfo Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    237
    I never said those statements were false, in fact I agreed with them. What I said was false (and, again, can't believe I'm saying this again, for like the 10th time) was this idea that if you implement GameWorks that you can't collaborate with AMD for optimizations, or that you can't provide alternative implementations for AMD and bypass GameWorks. Please be careful to actually read what I write.
     
  24. PLPM

    PLPM Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    852
    You´re right, I kind of completely lost the sense of direction on that comment. Apologies Pfo.

    Still, I wouldn´t call him dishonest, maybe incorrect if this was shown to be an incorrect claim (if it was). But, just as all company business contracts, this is usually shaddy stuff (not in the actual "wrong" sense, just in the "hidden" sense.) What we know is that AMD tanks performance without a reason, and Nvidea too, and that there has been a lot of controversy as of lately regarding the two brands.

    Now, as far as I know, YOU CAN optimize a game for both brands, but only some of it if you implement something like Gameworks; with gameworks AMD can´t do much due to being locked out of the code. So even if AMD tries, it can´t do much about it.

    This is THE best case scenario.
    ...
    Worse case scenario would be that Developers are actually not able to collaborate at all, and AMD is locked out of the picture.

    And sure, you could use a Nvidea card along an AMD one to bypass one of the issues... But that´s putting pressure on the customer to buy TWO graphic cards instead of one.
    Even worse, it was "fixed" by Nvidea.

    I still feel that calling LFCavalcanti outright dishonest because he may be wrong by using "false statements" (which I could agree, they MIGHT be false from a tecnichal point of view, but, from a practical one, it seems very much true) uncalled for.
    ...

    Nevertheless, we all pretty much agree on the same thing :D.
     
  25. Ronin1973

    Ronin1973 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,965
  26. LFCavalcanti

    LFCavalcanti Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,378
    Hey there!

    I don't think this is NVidia embracing open source APIs, more like big game developers announcing they will use Vulkan, because of it's features regarding portability and performance. Plus Valve will use it to encourage more games being available on Linux because of the SteamOS and Steam Machines. It's a commercial decision, a necessary one.

    At least my expectations now are towards what AMD will announce on the GPU side to keep up with NVidia and how the marketing of both companies will develop. Game Works was more on suppressing developers from collaborating with AMD than providing better tools.
     
  27. Potter

    Potter Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    496

    That founders edition is the new term for reference model, just FYI. It's not anything special, it just means it's completely stock.

    Most of their claims of it being faster and better than the Titan X or 980 SLI was based in terms of VR and "relative game performance". It was showcased in a demo of Doom at 1080x1920, and I honestly was not that impressed. I'm sure drivers need to mature and a few other factors are probably at play, but at 1080 I would think that this super hyped up card could stay above 150 at the minimum.

    I'm excited for the 1080, but I do think that it beating the Titan X by a considerable amount has yet to be seen in benchmarks and legitmate, unbiased reviews. So far all we've seen of this card is the fluff of Nvidia's presentation of the new architecture. And, I might add, that presentation was SUPER over hyped.

    That being said, I don't think Nvidia will ever bow to cross platform compatibility. Without significant push-back from AMD in terms of competition, Nvidia kind of has an iron grip on the market right now.
     
  28. Marneus

    Marneus Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    382
    President Teddy Roosevelt does not approve your post
     
  29. Neffarion

    Neffarion Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    126
    Their linux drivers are already the best out there and they are pushing Vulkan far more then DX12 so your 'will never bow to cross platform compatibility' statement is made up

    Also Nvidia Ansel would be glorious in a game like this, having the ability to get extremely high res screenshots is just too good
     
  30. Potter

    Potter Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    496
    That's great, and also entirely irrelevant.


    Well I never stated that they wouldn't bow to cross platform compatibility, so I'm not the one making things up. All I said was I don't see it happening, implying that while it certainly could I don't think it's likely. They aren't going cross platform with things like gameworks, which is what is relevant to the discussion. This should have been obvious to you.

    While we are on the topic of Vulkan, that isn't something that Nvidia made, like Gameworks. It's something that will be hopefully widely utilized in future games/applications, so Nvidia is making sure that their hardware runs it well so they aren't passed up for the competition. That's not bowing to cross platform compatibility, it's remaining relevant in the industry.
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.