Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti TUF Gaming review
MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X TRIO review
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB (FE) review
Corsair 2000D RGB Airflow Mini-ITX - PC chassis review
ASUS PG27AQDM Review - 240Hz 1440p OLED monitor
MSI MAG X670E Tomahawk WiFi review
Mountain Makalu Max mouse review
Strange Brigade: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Posted by: on: 08/31/2018 03:36 PM [
48 comment(s) ]
AMD has added a funny new game towards its software lineup, Strange Brigade is bundled with their selected cards. We wanted to fab a bit of a performance review as the game supports Vulkan, DirectX but also has a DirectX ASync Compute switch available. That all by itself is handy to check out the current state of Vulkan, and DirectX 12.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
cryohellinc
Senior Member
Posts: 3534
Senior Member
Posts: 3534
Posted on: 08/31/2018 03:54 PM
Great optimization there! How's the game btw?
Great optimization there! How's the game btw?
fatboyslimerr
Junior Member
Posts: 15
Junior Member
Posts: 15
Posted on: 08/31/2018 04:06 PM
Maybe it's just me but I thought DX12 and, to an extent, Vulcan were both able to leverage more cores and weren't just about those GHz. Less CPU overhead or at least more balanced CPU overhead or something like that.
It would be more interesting to see these APIs tested on say a 1060, 1080, 570 and Vega 64 with say an FX 8300, Ryzen 5 and something like i7 2600 vs your standard test bench.
Maybe it's just me but I thought DX12 and, to an extent, Vulcan were both able to leverage more cores and weren't just about those GHz. Less CPU overhead or at least more balanced CPU overhead or something like that.
It would be more interesting to see these APIs tested on say a 1060, 1080, 570 and Vega 64 with say an FX 8300, Ryzen 5 and something like i7 2600 vs your standard test bench.
Brisse
Member
Posts: 99
Member
Posts: 99
Posted on: 08/31/2018 04:32 PM
IMO you are not praising Vulkan highly enough here. It is an open and portable standard, unlike d3d12 which is proprietary locked down crap. The fact that the developers implemented it alongside d3d12 and that it performs on par is awesome for those of us who doesn't use Windows. While this game has no Linux-port as far as I know, it would still run awesomely on Linux using compatibility layers like Proton or Wine. With Vulkan, it would have pretty much zero extra overhead since the graphics API doesn't have to be translated by the compatability layer. A shame it has Denuvo though, as it's rootkit-like functionallity often causes trouble for compatibility layers. Here's to hoping they remove that crap ASAP.
Doom 2016 is a great example of how awesome compatibility layers can be when using Vulkan:
IMO you are not praising Vulkan highly enough here. It is an open and portable standard, unlike d3d12 which is proprietary locked down crap. The fact that the developers implemented it alongside d3d12 and that it performs on par is awesome for those of us who doesn't use Windows. While this game has no Linux-port as far as I know, it would still run awesomely on Linux using compatibility layers like Proton or Wine. With Vulkan, it would have pretty much zero extra overhead since the graphics API doesn't have to be translated by the compatability layer. A shame it has Denuvo though, as it's rootkit-like functionallity often causes trouble for compatibility layers. Here's to hoping they remove that crap ASAP.
Doom 2016 is a great example of how awesome compatibility layers can be when using Vulkan:
Raider0001
Senior Member
Posts: 513
Senior Member
Posts: 513
Posted on: 08/31/2018 04:37 PM
Maybe it's just me but I thought DX12 and, to an extent, Vulcan were both able to leverage more cores and weren't just about those GHz. Less CPU overhead or at least more balanced CPU overhead or something like that.
It would be more interesting to see these APIs tested on say a 1060, 1080, 570 and Vega 64 with say an FX 8300, Ryzen 5 and something like i7 2600 vs your standard test bench.
U do not really need CPU power for games, these are not that complicated tasks (like calculating proteins), U just need something to handle the graphic cards driver according to the performance it is capable of doing and then some for the AI and sound and engine
Maybe it's just me but I thought DX12 and, to an extent, Vulcan were both able to leverage more cores and weren't just about those GHz. Less CPU overhead or at least more balanced CPU overhead or something like that.
It would be more interesting to see these APIs tested on say a 1060, 1080, 570 and Vega 64 with say an FX 8300, Ryzen 5 and something like i7 2600 vs your standard test bench.
U do not really need CPU power for games, these are not that complicated tasks (like calculating proteins), U just need something to handle the graphic cards driver according to the performance it is capable of doing and then some for the AI and sound and engine
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 3343
I have not heard of the game either,but it looks like something I would like to play.Thanks for the review.