1. Head to the 33rd Modeling Contest Poll and drink to your heart's desire.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Choose your means of doom in the 17th Mini Mapping Contest Poll.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. A slave to two rhythms, the 22nd Terraining Contest is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. The heavens smile on the old faithful. The 16th Techtree Contest has begun.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. The die is cast - the 6th Melee Mapping Contest results have been announced. Onward to the Hive Cup!
    Dismiss Notice
  6. The glory of the 20th Icon Contest is yours for the taking!
    Dismiss Notice
  7. Check out the Staff job openings thread.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
60,000 passwords have been reset on July 8, 2019. If you cannot login, read this.

Specific gaming desktop build

Discussion in 'Computer Tech' started by sethmachine, Dec 5, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BlargHonk

    BlargHonk

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,119
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    That's where you're wrong actually. It does everything else you say, but it also allows multiple queues to execute during the same cycle for different sectors of the GPU if there is incomplete usage. Also don't call it Hyper-Threading, it's simultaneous multithreading, and yes it's a good analogy but is an incomplete one.
    Not sure where you got that from. All the whitepapers I've seen have mentioned GCN as a whole. Capability was increased over time (1.1 especially), but even the oldest GCN cards can still do async just fine.
    http://developer.amd.com/wordpress/media/2012/10/Asynchronous-Shaders-White-Paper-FINAL.pdf
    http://partner.amd.com/Documents/MarketingDownloads/en/AMD_Radeon_DX12_9-15.pdf
    They took a bet it wouldn't be used outside of a few rare compute scenarios, and it turned tits up for them.
    They do make a good number of inhouse projects as well. They're an odd company.
     
  2. Dr Super Good

    Dr Super Good

    Spell Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    26,100
    Resources:
    3
    Maps:
    1
    Spells:
    2
    Resources:
    3
    As far as I can tell, all documentation of the feature outside of the official Direct3D specification (which is unrelated, they only hint command queues can possibly do as it is a specification) say that asynchronous compute only reclaims cycles which would otherwise have been lost due to pipeline stalls. They constantly use words like "interleave" which is a hyper threading term as opposed to "parallel" for describing how command queues are executed. They do use "parallel" to describe the command queues themselves but that is obvious given that is required by Direct3D 12.

    Let us look at an extract...
    We immediately find the feature is aimed at Direct Compute, with the graphic command queue being assigned a separate different unit. Secondly copy operations probably executed in parallel under the old system already, just that they could not be fed in parallel due to the old model having only a single command queue (so only a gain in feeding efficiency). Finally they state "interleaved" which is a hyper threading term. This means that they do not really run multiple command queues on the shader engines, but rather 1 command stream and swap to another if the that one blocks in a very efficient way.

    One can immediately see that their implementation of command queues functionality is very efficient for Direct Compute tasks with graphics tasks. Not only can you schedule a lot of them for logical execution in parallel (in the same sense hyperthreading allows you to schedule two threads for logical execution in parallel although only one may execute at a time) but you can also set them to various priority levels to manage where GPU resources go.

    Possibly when running very small or simple Direct Compute commands it may share the shader resources to execute them in parallel. However this will not help the graphic commands at all.

    The big question is how much Direct Compute is actually used in gaming?
    Has it? as far as I know most games perform comparably with their cards except one. Even that performs better having their GPU working on it along with an AMD one than with AMD cards alone.
     
  3. Velmarshal

    Velmarshal

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,531
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    This is why we only get topics from asspberg guy.
    People can't ask even simple questions without someone going 110% reddit circlejerk.
     
  4. Deathcom3s

    Deathcom3s

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    1,282
    Resources:
    1
    Models:
    1
    Resources:
    1
    This, pretty much. I'm not even sure why I bother replying in here anymore.
     
  5. Seconded... Although this asspberg kid needs to study about computers more than asking piece of shit confusing questions.
     
  6. Gilles

    Gilles

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    8,464
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Dear God people.

    sethmachine, the max build that was listed in the article you linked is perfectly acceptable in my opinion. I would have to do some research since I'm not up to date on GPUs right now, but based on the other choices for that PC, it's safe to say it's probably a good buy.

    don's build was also fine, but I don't like gigabyte motherboards (personal experience), and video card is overkill. I personally don't buy cards over $300, but I definitely wouldn't buy one over $600. I really don't think you're getting your money's worth. If I had to take a stab, I'd say generally you're getting a decent deal at ~$300-400, but at ~$600 you're paying that $300 extra for only slightly better output. There may be exceptions, but I think this rule applies most often.
     
  7. BlargHonk

    BlargHonk

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,119
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    The proper answer was given in the third post. That's why.
     
  8. Deathcom3s

    Deathcom3s

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    1,282
    Resources:
    1
    Models:
    1
    Resources:
    1
    The guy clearly isn't an expert on the subject and simply wanted some advice, and you went ahead and started throwing all sorts of numbers and acronyms at the guy.

    Perhaps if you actually tried to help him by speaking in terms that he'll understand it would be more effective.

    Either way, this thread has gone on for too long and hasn't produced any real, productive and helpful results. I'm sorry that it devolved into this OP, I hope you were able to find some answers amongst the needless noise.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.