With DOOM having no built in benchmark we had to set up a course to run so that our results would stay consistent.
Now it’s time to see how things shake out when we toss them on the test bench and see what they can really do in this latest launch from ID.
#Doom opengl 4.3 drivers
So, unlike before we now have both parties updated drivers for doom on hand. AMD actually released drivers for the final release of DOOM a few days before the game launched, a welcome change I might add, while Nvidia’s came along on Thursday leading the game launch. We previously reported the GPU performance during the open beta where Nvidia had updated drivers for it, but AMD did not. However, for those people (like me) who play older games or use source ports of old games, Nvidia is still the better choice simply because most of them rely on OpenGL.DOOM 4, or simply known as DOOM, has finally released. On the GPU side, Nvidia still has the overall upper hand for now but AMD is also improving on that front, especially as more games are moving towards Vulkan. Infact nowadays, it would be an unwise decision to buy an Intel CPU over an AMD CPU. On the CPU side, AMD is doing a fantastic job. All I can hope is, that it won't be a mistake - CPUs won't be, but GPUs due to their drivers, are questionable. Not because I hate NVIDIA or Intel or whatever, but simply out of curiosity and because I want to try out something new - I've spent 15 years on them, I think it's really time to try out something new and break the monotony.
#Doom opengl 4.3 full
And I don't really use GL-based applications or play a lot of games depending on it (although with classic Doom for instance, this will lock me out of some source ports such as GlBoom, so I'll have to move to GZDoom for anything more advanced for good), so maybe, in the future, my next build will indeed be a full AMD PC.
Their new CPUs are solid and much cheaper than Intel's in some cases too.
#Doom opengl 4.3 software
The fun thing is, that AMD kinda got away with it, as GL is ever-approaching its eventual retirement and complete replacement, and when only legacy software will depend on it, it won't matter anymore. Luckily though, more of them are, get this, receiving Vulkan support. One example of be emulators, quite a few rely on it, so if you're into that culture, it probably doesn't look too good. Emphasis on apps, there's quite a few which rely on the API, so if you were to depend on it for productivity, hobbies, whatever, you were screwed with AMD. But they've also ignored some important aspects as a result, because GL is used by plenty of games, especially older ones when DX wasn't as popular as it is nowadays - and a lot fewer people play only the latest, bleeding-edge games or utilize similar applications. And from what I read, the reason why AMD didn't invest much in OpenGL is because most modern big budget/AAA games don't use that API (they use either DX or Vulkan). This is pretty much what I have read as well. The proprietary drivers still suck when it comes to GL, however. On Linux the open-source AMD drivers actually offer pretty good GL performance, but as expected, it still isn't as good as NVIDIA's - although a definite improvement. what it is, with no optimizations whatsoever. What that means from what I gathered is that they simply support it according to the standards, but since they never invested into it unlike NVIDIA who spent a few millions (billions? Can't remember) to make GL perform really well on their own hardware, it is. I've also dug deeper into why AMD's GL support is so bad, and according to what I've discovered - so do very much correct me if it's bullshit, everyone - is that AMD has simply never invested in GL at all, in addition to their support for GL in their drivers being "incredibly standard compliant". A friend of mine used to have almost full AMD builds in the past and DX games and apps ran quite good on it.ĪMD really sucks only when it comes to OpenGL I think, their DX and especially Vulkan support is top notch - from my experience and a few benchmarks I've seen recently. I think AMD's DX support was always pretty good.
Of course it is possible for DX11 to be faster than OpenGL on AMD. When I mentioned DX11 and below to be slower, I meant in comparison to Vulkan and DX12.