not `DX11` only really heavy tessallation , which is only a part of DX11
And what are the other "parts"? Direct2D, heterogenous gfx support, GPCPU, some multicore cpu support tweaks and that's about it. Most of the DX11 stuff can be done in DX10 except for tesselation (the relevant part)i believe and that is where AMD sadly gets crushed.
Anyway, tessellation itself isn't necessary a weak area of AMD: note that I specifically said "geometry throughput", something which is independent of tessellation. The likes of the GTX 480 (and no doubt the 580) can setup 4 triangles per clock, whereas the best that AMD are currently offering is still only 1 triangle per clock. AMD could produce a GPU that's incredibly good at handling the process of tessellation (which itself isn't that hard) but until they do something about their setup engine, their performance in this area is always going to be capped the 1 tri/clk rate, especially when compared to NVIDIA.
Tessellation, in its current form in D3D11, can be done in D3D10; the improvement lie in the level of access to the control points in the patch (namely the hull shader and, to a lesser extent, the domain shader). Most of what they do was handled by relatively fixed function instructions in earlier D3D releases. Tessellation's a big thing at the moment because NVIDIA decided it would be.Most of the DX11 stuff can be done in DX10 except for tesselation (the relevant part)i believe and that is where AMD sadly gets crushed.
Last edited by Neeyik; 10-31-2010 at 03:36 PM.
The Heaven benchmark is a bit bonkers when it comes to using tessellation ("It's a flat surface! Give 1000 times more polygons!") but it's a test nonetheless. However, reviewers tend to use it inappropriately for when comparing geometry/tessellation performance: what one should do is remove as much of the pixel load as possible so that all of the remaining workload is in the form of geometry processing. Unfortunately that's not easy to do because you can't run it windowed and wireframe in the benchmark mode: all you can do is drop the detail settings right down and up the tessellation level as high as possible.
Another good test would be to look at NVIDIA cards in the benchmark where one keeps the core or shader clock at the default level but seriously reduces the rate of the other. Unfortunately I can't do that with my 460 (or more correctly, I can't see the option in Afterburner to unlink the clocks) but it would good if somebody could carry out these tests to see what clock reduction had the biggest affect on Heaven when heavily geometry loaded.
The GeForce GTX 580 mystery is clearing :-
http://www.nordichardware.com/news/7...-clearing.htmlGeForce GTX 580 will most likely be the most powerful single-GPU graphcis card on the market in 2010. Now that we have the complete specifications for NVIDIA's GF110 GPU it becomes clear that NVIDIA is attempting to do what it failed to with GTX 480 - going all in - to win the performance war against AMD.
While AMD is working on optimizing the Northern Islands architecture that beside better performance also brings new features, NVIDIA has an own agenda. To prepare its Fermi architecture for a new power struggle to maintain its position as the maker of the world's fastest snabbaste single-GPU graphics card. A big PR bonus NVIDIA has been able to use over the last six months.
If the increase in frequency and the so far unconfirmed information we've come across NVIDIA's work will result in a graphics card called GeForce GTX 580 that builds on a new optimized circuit called GF110. In this post we will try to summarize the information that we have so far and speculate in what this could mean for NVIDIA and the graphics market.
It's gonna be a monster as Cayman XT also appears to be, exciting times ahead and good to see the big players really locking horns, things have been rather dull of late.