Ashes of the Singularity Beta Phase 2 DirectX 12 Performance Review

DirectX 12 uses more VRAM?

Ashes of the Singularity Beta Phase 2 DirectX 12 Performance Review

DirectX 12 uses more VRAM?

 

When moving to our higher end GPUs  we started by looking at the VRAM consumption of the title when using DirectX 12, which give us very similar results to when we were using the lower end GTX 960 and R9 380 GPUs. Right now we do not know if this increase in VRAM use is limited to only this game or if it will affect other DirectX 12 titles, but we will certainly be looking into it when more DirectX 12 games launch.  

At 1080p we can see that VRAM consumption increases significantly when using DirectX 12, increasing by as much as 350MB on AMD's Fury X and as much as 600MB on Nvidia, which means that on higher resolutions that we actually run out of memory on our AMD R9 Fury X. 

At 4K Standard settings and above we actually run out of VRAM on our R9 Fury X, which is a real shame given how well this GPU usually performs at 4K. 

Please note that we do not know at this time if these increases in VRAM use or due to the beta nature of this title or if it will affect any other titles, but we will be looking into this when more DirectX 12 titles launch. 

 

Ashes of the Singularity Beta Phase 2 DirectX 12 Performance Review  Ashes of the Singularity Beta Phase 2 DirectX 12 Performance Review  Ashes of the Singularity Beta Phase 2 DirectX 12 Performance Review  

«Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next»

Most Recent Comments

24-02-2016, 19:03:03

NeverBackDown
I don't think you mentioned this in the article(read it all but might have missed it), but AMD has the Async Compute feature not only in there drivers but on a hardware level as well which is why they gain so much, whereas Nvidia have neither atm.

Personally I think the Mantle development was invaluable to AMD. Not only on the software side but the hardware side as well, allowing them to think ahead and put in features like there advanced queue scehduler's in there GPUs even though it wasn't being used until now. Luckily it worked out for them in the end.Quote

25-02-2016, 17:25:44

knight 2_6
I think there may have been some other problem with the 4k Standard setting results. I've seen 2 other articles showing the Fury X averaging 55 fps at 4k high quality settings, beating the 980Ti by nearly 10 fps. I noticed it first when I compared the results here with an AnandTech article. I then poked around a bit to see if anyone else reported similar results to the AnandTech article. I found 2 other articles that also had the Fury X beating the 980 Ti results by 10 fps or more. Maybe there was a software bug that was holding the Fury X back during the last 4k runs, but the 14 fps results definitely seem to be an exception to the performance others have reported.Quote

25-02-2016, 17:47:56

Kushiro
That ship.. So adorable.Quote
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.