Someone help me understand this. Wasn't low level APIs

>>55825456
Well the person testing didn't bother to use an even close to mid-tier AMD CPU, of course the CPU is going to bottleneck on those results. The half-way decent CPU/Rx 480 combo on Vulcan blows all other results out of the water according to this graphic so... Yeah Vulcan works. You just can't use an ancient low-tier CPU and expect Vulcan to compensate for your failures in life.

>>55825539
But the nvidia card pulls way ahead on the weaker CPUs

>b-b-bit nvidia use the cpu power for compensation

AMDfags are so stupid

>>55825539
Instead of shitting on the person doing the test and people who don't have the best hardware, why don't you just admit that AMD can't optimize their driver for shit. CPU bottleneck is becoming an increasingly AMD exclusive problem.

>>55825858
>tfw only have a humble i5-4460

nvidia is just a must.

>>55825798
Nvidia doesn't have async enabled on the doom vulkan.

>>55825890
Apparently it just kills performance as evidenced by AMD.

>>55825539
It's not like that i5 750 is a mid tier Intel CPU either...

>>55825939
still ~15% more floating point performance than a 5ghz fx-9590

l
m
f
a

>>55825909
Wrong conclusion. If you want to see if vulkan/async kills performance, you'll have to do an opengl vs vulkan comparison.

>>55826007
What good is async if you're going to rape the shit out of the processor and anything except a 4.5GHz high end i7 will crumble?

Any CPU below a 2500k is irrelevant. It's fucking 2016.

>>55826026
2500k is irrelevant. Any CPU below i7 6700k is.

>>55826040
anything slower than a Xeon E5-2687W v4 may as well throw it in the bin it's 2016 get with it peopl

>>55826062
Yea I can't argue with that, that's a pretty good processor. Maybe I'll upgrade to that one day.

>>55826026
I'm still using an i7 870. Still performs pretty good

>>55825456
HAHAHAHAHAHA

File: Z10PE-D8 WS_3D.png (2MB, 1844x1531px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1844x1531px

>>55825456
>you need the latest cpu with vulkan if you want beat nvidia with poorlaris

AMDFAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH

>>55825456
it looks like AMD gained just as much with vulkan with nvidia when you are super cpu limmitted and pulls ahead if you are using anything that is more than a 5 year old cpu

>>55827020
I wish in could see this tested with an i5 2500 or i3 4160

>>55825456
>benchmarking CPUs released in 2009

>>55825456
amd's gains rely solely on the utilization of the ACE's in GCN. if they can't be fed sufficiently then you don't get those massive gains like you see with a high end i7.

>>55827459
>cpu released in 2009
>still staying above 60 frames per second
I don't see why they shouldn't

File: az.png (36KB, 647x522px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 647x522px

>>55827459
you do realise that there will be people rocking shitty cpu like that, right? i very much doubt they'd go for a the most budget mainstream cards on the market if they had high end i7's. hell, i know a guy who is going to be buying a 1060/480 to pair with this cpu in pic related. there's a massive influx of people upgrading their pc's now for some reason and pc gaming has become way, way more popular in the last year probably due to the current consoles being quite shit (720p & 900p 'current gen' xbox/ps4 lmao) and also because of the increased popularity of moba's.

>>55825539
is 4690k still good?

>>55825456
I have an i7 860 + gtx 670, would I be fine with a gtx 1070?
My cpu is overclock

>>55827602
yes

>>55827629
Thank you

>>55827755
awww :3

>>55827580
of course it is, i5 6600k isn't that much better

>>55827551
>96c
rest in peace

>>55827970
>Believing the jew programmers who created Speccy
But still,
>AMD