3 ms·
Doom 4 is an outlier, the RX480 doesn't consistently gain that much from Vulkan or DX12. You could just as easily point to Tomb Raider DX12, where the 1060 beat
by jsheard 10y ago
Doom 4 is an outlier, the RX480 doesn't consistently gain that much from Vulkan or DX12. You could just as easily point to Tomb Raider DX12, where the 1060 beats the 480 by about 20%.
According to Guru3D the two cards perform almost identically in Ashes of the Singularity and Total War: Warhammer, both AMD-sponsored DX12 games.
- bryanlarsen 10y agoTomb Raider doesn't use async compute. And whether Doom 4 is an outlier or just an example of the difference between Vulkan and DX12 is yet to be determined. My conjecture is that the big difference between Vulkan and DX12 is that nVidia has put more of it's driver engineering magic into DX12 than it has into Vulkan. Metal won't have that nVidia driver engineering magic, so I believe that DOOM4 is the best benchmark we have of performance and power consumption for Metal. But one benchmark can be misleading for a wide variety of reasons.
- jsheard 10y agoTomb Raider had async compute implemented for GCN and Pascal in a post-release patch, and benchmarks on that patch still pegged the 1060 as ~20% faster than the 480: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-review http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nvidia... And conversely, the developers of Doom said their async path is currently only tuned for GCN and will be enabled on Pascal in a future patch. We've seen from 3DMark Time Spy that Pascal does benefit from async compute, so there's performance being left on the table there.