DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed

Some interesting performance claims are surfacing surrounding Microsoft's upcoming DirectX 12. One such report comes in a tweet from Brad Wardell showing over a 900% improvement over DirectX 11 on an unreleased GPU playing an unspecified game. The Stardock boss says: "Did a test of DirectX 11 vs. DirectX 12 on an unreleased GPU with an 8core CPU. DX11: 13fps, DX12: 120fps. Lighting and lens effects." Thanks DSOGaming.
View : : :
87 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  ] Older
87.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 20, 2015, 16:51
87.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 20, 2015, 16:51
Feb 20, 2015, 16:51
 
Quboid wrote on Feb 20, 2015, 12:11:
NetHead wrote on Feb 20, 2015, 09:37:
HorrorScope wrote on Feb 18, 2015, 19:29:
Quboid wrote on Feb 18, 2015, 19:18:
Let me guess, it's a 900%* increase.

* In a very specific case which isn't remotely representative.

Most likely, but lets hope it is true as the 1440P Oculus is going to need some nuts to run it.

I'm not sure Quboid's guessing is really required. Just like Mantle allows over 10 times more draw calls, it doesn't mean games or hardware are suddenly going to be even 2 times as fast in general. Actually looking at 10 times and 900% I wouldn't be surprised if this Brad is just talking about draw calls and being a click-baiting tuckfard for attention.

This is probably all the Mantle stuff all over again, been there done that etc, also we won't be specific about the claims since people will just reply "already been done".

Anyone who hopes, nevermind believes, that going from one API to the next version is going to improve overall performance by any factor is, well I don't really want to say rude things right now.

The only graphics API news I'm remotely interested in is seeing why they're making a noise about the new OpenGL, or it's replacement or whatever (yes I'm trying hard not to use the word "Next", oh dammit)

True. Re-reading the tweet, it looks like he is referring to a specific case and didn't mean to imply anything else.

It's amazing how many people in these comments missed that.
Avatar 17249
86.
 
Re: Into the Black
Feb 20, 2015, 13:00
Slick
 
86.
Re: Into the Black Feb 20, 2015, 13:00
Feb 20, 2015, 13:00
 Slick
 
Slashman wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 20:53:
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 15:18:

more stuff

Well I'm thrilled that you think it is impossible for people to actually make poor decisions and that we can always take whatever some random random corporate entity says as fact.

I seem to recall previous versions of DirectX having tech demos. I recall all sorts of gaming tech having tech demos that proved any number of wonderful applications for a certain technology were possible. Then I recall the actual product not being all that great or revolutionary. But why should I let past experiences influence my thinking when I can ride the wave of hype?

jesus christ, do you know what the word PLAUSIBLE means? because i've written it in all caps about 20 times so far in this thread.

/thread
Avatar 57545
85.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 20, 2015, 12:11
Quboid
 
85.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 20, 2015, 12:11
Feb 20, 2015, 12:11
 Quboid
 
NetHead wrote on Feb 20, 2015, 09:37:
HorrorScope wrote on Feb 18, 2015, 19:29:
Quboid wrote on Feb 18, 2015, 19:18:
Let me guess, it's a 900%* increase.

* In a very specific case which isn't remotely representative.

Most likely, but lets hope it is true as the 1440P Oculus is going to need some nuts to run it.

I'm not sure Quboid's guessing is really required. Just like Mantle allows over 10 times more draw calls, it doesn't mean games or hardware are suddenly going to be even 2 times as fast in general. Actually looking at 10 times and 900% I wouldn't be surprised if this Brad is just talking about draw calls and being a click-baiting tuckfard for attention.

This is probably all the Mantle stuff all over again, been there done that etc, also we won't be specific about the claims since people will just reply "already been done".

Anyone who hopes, nevermind believes, that going from one API to the next version is going to improve overall performance by any factor is, well I don't really want to say rude things right now.

The only graphics API news I'm remotely interested in is seeing why they're making a noise about the new OpenGL, or it's replacement or whatever (yes I'm trying hard not to use the word "Next", oh dammit)

True. Re-reading the tweet, it looks like he is referring to a specific case and didn't mean to imply anything else.
Avatar 10439
84.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 20, 2015, 10:56
84.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 20, 2015, 10:56
Feb 20, 2015, 10:56
 
Quinn wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 07:17:
So a certain game reaches only 13fps on an unreleased GPU with an 8core CPU on DX11... and 120fps on DX12?

It might be -- it just might be! -- that said game is programmed specifically for DX12? It's a dead fucking giveaway. In other words, the statement means absolutely nothing.

I'm not saying DX12 won't be able to live up to its promises. I'm saying this vague statement means no fuck at all.

Watch, it's like, the double digit framerate is software mode--all CPU with GPU acceleration disabled. Then suddenly they turn on DX12 and BAM! Things go faster. Whodathunkit?
Avatar 55267
83.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 20, 2015, 09:37
83.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 20, 2015, 09:37
Feb 20, 2015, 09:37
 
HorrorScope wrote on Feb 18, 2015, 19:29:
Quboid wrote on Feb 18, 2015, 19:18:
Let me guess, it's a 900%* increase.

* In a very specific case which isn't remotely representative.

Most likely, but lets hope it is true as the 1440P Oculus is going to need some nuts to run it.

I'm not sure Quboid's guessing is really required. Just like Mantle allows over 10 times more draw calls, it doesn't mean games or hardware are suddenly going to be even 2 times as fast in general. Actually looking at 10 times and 900% I wouldn't be surprised if this Brad is just talking about draw calls and being a click-baiting tuckfard for attention.

This is probably all the Mantle stuff all over again, been there done that etc, also we won't be specific about the claims since people will just reply "already been done".

Anyone who hopes, nevermind believes, that going from one API to the next version is going to improve overall performance by any factor is, well I don't really want to say rude things right now.

The only graphics API news I'm remotely interested in is seeing why they're making a noise about the new OpenGL, or it's replacement or whatever (yes I'm trying hard not to use the word "Next", oh dammit)
82.
 
Re: Into the Black
Feb 19, 2015, 20:53
82.
Re: Into the Black Feb 19, 2015, 20:53
Feb 19, 2015, 20:53
 
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 15:18:

more stuff

Well I'm thrilled that you think it is impossible for people to actually make poor decisions and that we can always take whatever some random random corporate entity says as fact.

I seem to recall previous versions of DirectX having tech demos. I recall all sorts of gaming tech having tech demos that proved any number of wonderful applications for a certain technology were possible. Then I recall the actual product not being all that great or revolutionary. But why should I let past experiences influence my thinking when I can ride the wave of hype?
81.
 
Re: Into the Black
Feb 19, 2015, 16:01
81.
Re: Into the Black Feb 19, 2015, 16:01
Feb 19, 2015, 16:01
 
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 14:56:
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 09:23:


You are so easy magoo
80.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 19, 2015, 15:21
Slick
 
80.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 19, 2015, 15:21
Feb 19, 2015, 15:21
 Slick
 
Creston wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 12:23:
unspecified this on unspecified that running unspecified whatever. Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and take that with a fairly large bag of salt.

Unless a game was specifically coded to take advantage of DX12, it won't even make any difference, right? I'll get excited about it in 2019 when some games may finally use it.


jesus christ, this has got to be another sign of the apocalypse. Creston echos my points, and holds up a balanced view of reason. and Cutter explaining actual muted interest in this topic earlier...

we're done for.
Avatar 57545
79.
 
Re: Into the Black
Feb 19, 2015, 15:18
Slick
 
79.
Re: Into the Black Feb 19, 2015, 15:18
Feb 19, 2015, 15:18
 Slick
 
Slashman wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 14:41:
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 09:04:
alright I think i've over extended myself in this thread, and it's starting to turn into an ordeal, and i'm like 6 beers deep. here we go.

stuff

Well here's the thing for me, as someone who lived through the Doom, Wolfenstein, Wizardy etc. era of the 90s:

People's values also shifted over time. Their perception of what makes a game, or any piece of technology, have value went through many adjustments.

We live in a time and place where most of the younger crowd have little to no idea of what the core purposes of today's latest and greatest things are. They don't know what they actually extract from them or how they exploit them.

It's that oblivion that allows social media to dominate their lives and tell them what to think, how to think and how to have fun etc. That same environment has allowed larger game publishers to thrive by making the same damn thing over and over and still successfully sell it.

You think it's a simple matter of the people choosing. I think it has a lot to do with shepherding easily manipulated masses into purchasing habits that allow exploitation by the major players.

Now I'm going to be fair and say that there are some devs who refuse to play by those rules. CD Projekt Red is a prime example. How is it possible to make AAA quality games and give away all DLC free if the market demands extra monetization to just break even?

There is a lot of crap in today's modern gaming market that is sleazy and underhanded. Not all DLC is a rip-off, but there is a hell of a lot of it that absolutely doesn't merit payment to own. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who have fallen into this pattern of 'if it says it makes game x better and I liked game x, then it must be worth the money' insta-buy-without-thought!!

Being skeptical about something until you have some kind of definitive proof is just plain common sense. Especially with claims like the one in the headline.

alright, so allow me to offer a dissenting opinion from someone who also lived and gamed through the 90's.

you mention that social media dominates people's lives, and tells them what to think about x game etc etc. are you referring to this right here? because this is a microcosm of "social media" which tell gamers that: "everything is shitty and unfair, you deserve more, most gaming companies are crooks etc." THAT'S the messaging that's been going on in case you haven't been paying attention over the last 5 years.

yes, i think it's a simple matter of people choosing. people were just as affected by the latest issue of nintendo power magazine to buy X new game as they are today to buy X new game from a kotaku article. it is absolutely a simple matter of individual choice. this notion that marketers have somehow removed free will from the equation, and that people are just conned into this and that against their will is dystopian at best, and downright apocalyptic at worse. i'm pretty sure that's one of the 7 signs of the apocalypse, people losing their free will and becoming slaves to videogame advertisments.

people don't generally buy something they don't enjoy, unless they have no time to do their own homework, and just wanna try something that was recommended by a friend, or something that got a good review, or just something popular. that's not specific to video games. people go see bad movies all the time, they weren't conned into doing so.

this idea that gamers are just a mass of deluded twats running around throwing money in all the wrong places is one forged on a mountaintop of ego. thinking that your tastes in games are the standard by which everyone else's taste must be compared to. it's the ultimate pedestal.

and i really have no idea what you're talking about when you say: "today's young people have little idea of what the core purpose of today's things are?" although it sounds like it probably has something to do with scientology.

last i check the core purpose of a game in entertainment. if people are being entertained, if they're so entertained that they want to support the developers by buying horse armor. then how does that affect you in any way (it helps pay for more development for the games you enjoy, so you should be thanking them)? and furthermore, how does it affect you in any way!!!? who gives a shit if someone buys horse armour, how does it ruin YOUR day? i don't get the connection. it comes back to free will, they want to buy horse armour for whatever reason. you sit back and tell them they're wrong for how they're spending their money, because you know better, and your tastes are superior.

if this is the "older" class gamer's attitude towards everything, then consider my 32 year old ass a "yout". see you at the snowboard park dudes, right after i crack this redbull, sometimes a guy's just gotta ride the bull amirite? *airguitar*

and by the way, the argument i've been making all thread is that we HAVE some definitive proof, from a very similar technology(starswarm, mantle, 1 year ago), which show results within the same order of magnitude, so i'm postulating that these results are at the very least PLAUSIBLE. this is common sense in the face of total ambiguous skepticism. mine has the benefit of being an opinion informed on facts, instead of blind skepticism.

anyways, thanks for the post, not trying to be a dick, but i just woke up and am slightly grouchy.
Avatar 57545
78.
 
Re: Into the Black
Feb 19, 2015, 14:56
Slick
 
78.
Re: Into the Black Feb 19, 2015, 14:56
Feb 19, 2015, 14:56
 Slick
 
Luke wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 09:55:
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 09:23:

whoa there old man, don't fall off your walker.

and i find it ironic that you'd accuse me of "thinking i know better" than X, Y, or Z.

it seems that it is you who has purported to know exactly why people make decisions. you claim that people only make games nowadays "for money". that's some serious 3rd person omniscient shit going on. you think i have a big ego? you've just told us that you personally know the reasons why hundreds of thousands of people have chosen to devote their careers to gaming. it's quite uncanny.

"well you know, the only reason people are doctors nowadays is because they love making money" those pricks! and not that it matters, but i was born in 82. glad to know that ageism is still alive and rampant.

what ever DLC child , games today are boring like hell and are made to please...no not the gamers the shareholders, half baked games with lots of DLC

LOLOL. this. this. a thousand times this.

1) imply that you're really really old

2) insult others for being young (32 isn't really young, but whatev) in a childish fashion

3) tell us with your mighty oldguy wisdom that "games aren't fun", because they're designed to please the shareholders. by selling billions of dollars worth of things that... aren't fun.

4) also, there's apparently never been an expansion pack made before 2012.

damn ruffians! with their pew pew vidyagames! in my day we played pong and we loved it! nobody wants to play an over-produced mega million blockbuster AAA game anymore, they just want pong. Infact, because my demented worldview doesn't coincide with reality, i'll warp reality by saying that the millions of games bought every year (an ever increasing number) are because people are being tricked into buying garbage, because they're dumb and don't know better.

dude, you win the crotchety oldguy award. seriously. please don't die when reading this. i know it was shocking. also, your social security check is late, and stuff costs more than it used to.
Avatar 57545
77.
 
Re: Into the Black
Feb 19, 2015, 14:41
77.
Re: Into the Black Feb 19, 2015, 14:41
Feb 19, 2015, 14:41
 
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 09:04:
alright I think i've over extended myself in this thread, and it's starting to turn into an ordeal, and i'm like 6 beers deep. here we go.

stuff

Well here's the thing for me, as someone who lived through the Doom, Wolfenstein, Wizardy etc. era of the 90s:

People's values also shifted over time. Their perception of what makes a game, or any piece of technology, have value went through many adjustments.

We live in a time and place where most of the younger crowd have little to no idea of what the core purposes of today's latest and greatest things are. They don't know what they actually extract from them or how they exploit them.

It's that oblivion that allows social media to dominate their lives and tell them what to think, how to think and how to have fun etc. That same environment has allowed larger game publishers to thrive by making the same damn thing over and over and still successfully sell it.

You think it's a simple matter of the people choosing. I think it has a lot to do with shepherding easily manipulated masses into purchasing habits that allow exploitation by the major players.

Now I'm going to be fair and say that there are some devs who refuse to play by those rules. CD Projekt Red is a prime example. How is it possible to make AAA quality games and give away all DLC free if the market demands extra monetization to just break even?

There is a lot of crap in today's modern gaming market that is sleazy and underhanded. Not all DLC is a rip-off, but there is a hell of a lot of it that absolutely doesn't merit payment to own. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who have fallen into this pattern of 'if it says it makes game x better and I liked game x, then it must be worth the money' insta-buy-without-thought!!

Being skeptical about something until you have some kind of definitive proof is just plain common sense. Especially with claims like the one in the headline.
76.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 19, 2015, 14:40
Slick
 
76.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 19, 2015, 14:40
Feb 19, 2015, 14:40
 Slick
 
NegaDeath wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 11:22:
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 02:14:
I don't think anyone here has implied that this %900 would be expected to be found in GENERAL PERFORMANCE. I disagree that: "The worst" is not being realistically based on history. It's being based upon people inciting panic. As i've pointed out, %200-400 gains in FPS already exist (history), how is %900 a year later under ideal conditions not ENTIRELY PLAUSIBLE? If you really think this article is saying: "with DX12, you'll get 9000 frames per second in last year's Call of Dookie", then you need to get a grip.

-Article claims 900% FPS increase, no other details present.
-Collective groaning occurs. Multiple people point out it would only apply to specific situations.
-You chew out the doubters for not believing it.

By your actions you are making the claim we will see a 900% increase in general performance. If you don't actually believe that then maybe you shouldn't resort to bulldog mode the moment people say something you disagree with, such an attitude leads to misunderstandings.

All you've pointed out are big gains in a single synthetic benchmark on certain hardware configurations that haven't mapped out to a single real game yet, and is unlikely to in the future as the Anandtech article I linked to pointed out. They probably have more wisdom on the subject than anyone here so it's a good place to defer to.

Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 02:14:
I don't understand the mentality of saying: "X will never happen, because this other time, X didn't happen" Guh, and you all get so emotional about it.

Well see here's the problem in a nutshell. Computing isn't magic. Performance gains have been historically incremental for a logical reason. Following that 20 year pattern is sensible. If you think they can magic up massive performance increases unseen since the introduction of 3d accelerators then all the power to you. Quit being an insufferable dick to those who don't.

obviously you haven't actually read anything that i've posted in this thread, but they've been long ass posts, so it's forgivable. in short here are the following ways in which you're dead wrong:

a) i chew out doubters for not believing it? really? pretty sure i've been pointing out that with what we already know, it's at the very least plausible, and that's infact all i can say for certain.

b) i made the claim that we'll get %900 in general performance? now this shows that you really haven't read a word, as i've repeatedly denounced this. saying multiple times that "obviously no one is thinking this will be a %900 increase in general performance, you'd have to be a nitwit to think that" practically verbatim.

c) of course i haven't "mapped out" to a single real game yet, as it doesn't exist. i've been saying from the beginning that this is all speculation, that we won't see anything until the first DX12 game that was conceived during pre-production to take advantage of these new constraints on things like AI or physics count. and because this is all speculation, i point out that all we can do is look at benchmarks that we KNOW. aka starswarm, you know that thing that shows up to %400 increases when using a CPU-focused low level api (mantle), which makes a claim of %900 ENTIRELY PLAUSIBLE. i've not said anything more or less.

d) when i say: "X will never happen, because this other time, X didn't happen" i'm talking about people comparing this to say, DX10's launch. just because a new API has been botched by MS in the past, doesn't mean they'll both the next one. by that logic you'd get heartbroken once and never love again because all men are jerks. etc.

e) stop being an insufferable dick? really? i've been having like 4 simultaneous well-rounded discussions in this thread with people expressing their thoughts in "big boy" language, even when we disagree... well until you just ruined it. you might want to try reading next time before jumping to the end and pretend that you're being clever. best of luck.
Avatar 57545
75.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 19, 2015, 14:35
75.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 19, 2015, 14:35
Feb 19, 2015, 14:35
 
@ Slick.

Are there great games being made? Sure, even some from AAA studios. But the games that have made an impression on me in recent years for the most part have come from indies or smaller publishers: FTL, Rogue Legacy, Defense Grid, Minecraft, Hammerwatch, Brothers, Castle Crashers, Banner Saga, KSP, PvZ, Torchlight, World of Goo.

Just ask yourself which were superior experiences, or which offered greater value:
BF2 or BF4?
Diablo 2 or Diablo 3?
System Shock 2 or Bioshock Infinite?
Fallout or Fallout 3?
Quake 2 or Rage?
Total Annihilation or Sup Com 2?
Dungeon Keeper or the New Dungeon Keeper?

That's not to say there aren't great games being made by large publishers with the original "make a great product and they will come" mindset. Skyrim is fantastic, for example, and I enjoyed Bioshock Infinite. I have even enjoyed games designed with monetization in mind: Borderlands, the Arkham series. But too many games are designed to extract cash: CoD, BF, Grid 2, SimCity 2013, Sims, AC series, Titanfall, Infinity, Planetside 2, any MOBA, FC series, Destiny, Skylanders, virtually every mobile game in existence, etc. These games are designed from the start with DLC, microtransactions, ODRM, modability locked down, etc. These choices affect gameplay, the experience, and value. When I buy an AAA game like Grid 2, I don't expect that most of the cars in the game are behind a DLC paywall, but there you have it. I bought BF2 knowing people would mod it, extending it's life. I didn't buy BF4 because I knew it was locked down, etc.

Why do you think we are forced to crowdfund classic style games like E:D, SC, Pillars of Eternity, Torment, Shadowrun, Carmageddon, Wasteland 2, Broken Age, Divinity:OS, etc? Because major publishers determined that the ROI wasn't there. It was purely a monetary decision. It wasn't that they couldn't make a profit, it was that they couldn't make gobs of profit, like CoD does. It's not that game companies didn't care about money in the past, it's that they care too much about it today, and that corrupts the industry and a lot of gameplay experiences.

If Russia stops fighting, the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting, Ukraine ends. Slava Ukraini!
Avatar 22024
74.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 19, 2015, 13:18
74.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 19, 2015, 13:18
Feb 19, 2015, 13:18
 
Creston wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 12:23:
Unless a game was specifically coded to take advantage of DX12, it won't even make any difference, right? I'll get excited about it in 2019 when some games may finally use it.

Not necessarily. Sometimes the way software or a driver is architectured may prevent you from making specific optimizations. In theory, they may have rebuilt it from the ground up with some optimizations in mind but managed to maintain the existing API.

In theory...
73.
 
Re: Into the Black
Feb 19, 2015, 13:17
73.
Re: Into the Black Feb 19, 2015, 13:17
Feb 19, 2015, 13:17
 
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 09:04:
alright I think i've over extended myself in this thread, and it's starting to turn into an ordeal, and i'm like 6 beers deep. here we go.

Dude. Don't drink and post, like, especially you, mkay?!
72.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 19, 2015, 12:27
72.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 19, 2015, 12:27
Feb 19, 2015, 12:27
 
Creston wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 12:23:
unspecified this on unspecified that running unspecified whatever.
Preorder now, while supplies last!

This comment was edited on Feb 19, 2015, 12:34.
Steam: SpectralMeat
Avatar 14225
71.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 19, 2015, 12:23
71.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 19, 2015, 12:23
Feb 19, 2015, 12:23
 
unspecified this on unspecified that running unspecified whatever. Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and take that with a fairly large bag of salt.

Unless a game was specifically coded to take advantage of DX12, it won't even make any difference, right? I'll get excited about it in 2019 when some games may finally use it.

Avatar 15604
70.
 
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed
Feb 19, 2015, 11:22
70.
Re: DX12: 900% FPS Increase Over DX11 Claimed Feb 19, 2015, 11:22
Feb 19, 2015, 11:22
 
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 02:14:
I don't think anyone here has implied that this %900 would be expected to be found in GENERAL PERFORMANCE. I disagree that: "The worst" is not being realistically based on history. It's being based upon people inciting panic. As i've pointed out, %200-400 gains in FPS already exist (history), how is %900 a year later under ideal conditions not ENTIRELY PLAUSIBLE? If you really think this article is saying: "with DX12, you'll get 9000 frames per second in last year's Call of Dookie", then you need to get a grip.

-Article claims 900% FPS increase, no other details present.
-Collective groaning occurs. Multiple people point out it would only apply to specific situations.
-You chew out the doubters for not believing it.

By your actions you are making the claim we will see a 900% increase in general performance. If you don't actually believe that then maybe you shouldn't resort to bulldog mode the moment people say something you disagree with, such an attitude leads to misunderstandings.

All you've pointed out are big gains in a single synthetic benchmark on certain hardware configurations that haven't mapped out to a single real game yet, and is unlikely to in the future as the Anandtech article I linked to pointed out. They probably have more wisdom on the subject than anyone here so it's a good place to defer to.

Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 02:14:
I don't understand the mentality of saying: "X will never happen, because this other time, X didn't happen" Guh, and you all get so emotional about it.

Well see here's the problem in a nutshell. Computing isn't magic. Performance gains have been historically incremental for a logical reason. Following that 20 year pattern is sensible. If you think they can magic up massive performance increases unseen since the introduction of 3d accelerators then all the power to you. Quit being an insufferable dick to those who don't.
Avatar 57352
69.
 
Re: Into the Black
Feb 19, 2015, 09:55
69.
Re: Into the Black Feb 19, 2015, 09:55
Feb 19, 2015, 09:55
 
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 09:23:

whoa there old man, don't fall off your walker.

and i find it ironic that you'd accuse me of "thinking i know better" than X, Y, or Z.

it seems that it is you who has purported to know exactly why people make decisions. you claim that people only make games nowadays "for money". that's some serious 3rd person omniscient shit going on. you think i have a big ego? you've just told us that you personally know the reasons why hundreds of thousands of people have chosen to devote their careers to gaming. it's quite uncanny.

"well you know, the only reason people are doctors nowadays is because they love making money" those pricks! and not that it matters, but i was born in 82. glad to know that ageism is still alive and rampant.

what ever DLC child , games today are boring like hell and are made to please...no not the gamers the shareholders , half baked games with lots of DLC
68.
 
Re: Into the Black
Feb 19, 2015, 09:23
Slick
 
68.
Re: Into the Black Feb 19, 2015, 09:23
Feb 19, 2015, 09:23
 Slick
 
Agent.X7 wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 06:15:
Slick wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 02:20:
Agent.X7 wrote on Feb 19, 2015, 02:00:
Well, some of us are older. We remember back when PC video games were more about making something awesome to share than making mega bucks. Sure, iD wanted to make money to pay themselves, but Wolfenstien and Doom and shit were made to be awesome for people to play with the benefit of making money.

Now? Games are made to make millions, and we just pray there's some fun in there somewhere.

It's human nature. Motion pictures, video games - all art is eventually co-opted by corporations for the express purpose of making them money. It's why a lot of first time film makers have these great films that inspire us and then they are zombified by the Hollywood machine and come up with shit for ever after.

This is such garbage and you know it.

You remind me of baby boomers who say that everything was better back in the 1950's. you're remembering a world that never existed, you're deluded with a combination of rose-lensed nostalgia glasses, and intense hatred for everything currently in front of you. maybe you always wanted to become a fireman or a policeman, and you didn't, you rue and lament your lost life. You pine for simpler times, as you've all but abandoned everything good about this world. The only thing that lets you cling to life is manufacturing hyperbole on message boards. for the trolols.

"Do you remember the time when people didn't work for money?"
*projectile vomit*

Yes, I always post things that I don't really believe. The young always think they know better. Unfortunately, I grew up with the video game industry and witnessed the corporate transformation over the years. I'm not saying everything is better, it's just different.

As far as it is pertinent to this conversation, however, it just means we are skeptical because we know better.

Now get off my lawn, ya damn kid.


And by grew up with I mean Pong was my first video game, not Doom, or TOmb Raider, or Skyrim. I played Oregon Trail on an Apple, and Gold Box games on my Commodore 64 and my friends IBM clone.

whoa there old man, don't fall off your walker.

and i find it ironic that you'd accuse me of "thinking i know better" than X, Y, or Z.

it seems that it is you who has purported to know exactly why people make decisions. you claim that people only make games nowadays "for money". that's some serious 3rd person omniscient shit going on. you think i have a big ego? you've just told us that you personally know the reasons why hundreds of thousands of people have chosen to devote their careers to gaming. it's quite uncanny.

"well you know, the only reason people are doctors nowadays is because they love making money" those pricks! and not that it matters, but i was born in 82. glad to know that ageism is still alive and rampant.
Avatar 57545
87 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  ] Older