3 Replies Latest reply on Jul 18, 2016 10:21 PM by brucer

    Would AMD like to comment on 3Dmark Time Spy Async Compute (Or lack of it)?

    deadman3000

      Apparently the rumor is that 3Dmark Time Spy DX12 benchmark is not leveraging AMD's async compute (Not using parallelism). But instead is using methods geared more towards Nvidia's preemption and concurrency.

       

      [computerbase.de] DOOM + Vulkan Benchmarked. - Page 23

       

      'I should note that the primary performance benefit as implemented in Time Spy is via concurrency, so everything here is dependent on a game having additional work to submit and a GPU having execution bubbles to fill.'

       

      Futuremark Releases 3DMark Time Spy DirectX 12 Benchmark

       

      The above seems to indicate that 3Dmark is biased towards Nvidia's solution to async computer and the options in Time Spy to 'disable' async compute in the custom options is more of an auto/on toggle rather than an option to explicitly disable/enable async compute.

       

      Furthermore games such as Doom and even Rise of the Tomb Raider clearly show an advantage towards AMD architecture. The face of the matter is that GPU's such as the Fury X are showing significant performance gains as high as 27% in 4K for 60 fps gaming whereas a GTX 1070 barely gains anything and does not reach much about 40 fps. If Nvidia does not supply an updated driver that disputes this fact I can only conclude that 3Dmark is favoring Nvidia hardware and not making full use of AMD's.

       

      Can you please clear this up for us and perhaps reach out to 3Dmark on this?

       

      I am enjoying the new found gains using my R9 290 but it annoys me to see the spread of misinformation by certain invested interests.