421–430 of 444 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fps in CSGO isn’t really so dependent on the GPU as more modern games, so comparing with a different game might be more accurate.
I'm curious, do you know of a study that has proven that single core CPU or other is the bottleneck in CS:GO?
I interned at NVIDIA in 2009 on the kernel mode driver team. Was super fun there in terms of the project work and the people. If the code still exists, I created the main class that schedules work out to the GPU on Windows. That level of programming gave such rewarding moments in between difficult debugging sessions. When I wanted to test a new kernel driver build I needed to walk into some massive room with all of t…
I do wonder though, why has moore's law stopped in its tracks? Using CS:GO benchmark, a 1070 got 218 FPS, while a 4090 is at 477 FPS. Only a ~2.2x increase in FPS in 6 years? :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, didn't expect to get so many comments. It's just interesting to me that we have 500hz monitors, yet games are still coming out that only run at ~70 fps on a 3080, etc. I used CS:GO as a comparison just because it was an example capable of coming near 500 FPS. Avg FPS are not going up fast enough in my opinion. I understand some games purposefully limit FPS for physics calculations, but there are many that do not…
> It’s just interesting to me that we have 500hz monitors, yet games are still coming out that only run at ~70fps on a 3080, etc. Of course new games are running at 70 fps. Most games are absolutely not designed for 500hz, and have zero reason to do that. Cs:go wan’t designed for 500fps, I bet the designers of cs:go never intended people to play at 500fps, or even imagined that would ever happen; it wasn’t possible w…
The whole "science says the human eye cannot see beyond 30fps :)" is actually a very old meme at this point. You are correct that high FPS/Hz is about decreasing latency, but you underestimate the importance of it. 144hz is a very clear improvement over 60hz and the PC ecosystem is going to move over to it as a new standard relatively soon. You don't need to be playing a hyper-competitive FPS to notice it either, any game with significant movement will do.
> Because games are triple-buffering and sometimes monitors are too, and there’s another frame of latency for controller inputs to be recognized, you might still have 10ms or more of latency between controller input and changes on-screen, even if your game is rendering at 500hz. This means you could get away with 100fps if you had zero latency. When your fps is 60hz and there’s 5 frames of latency, you don’t see responses to your controller until almost 100ms later(!).
You're assuming VSync or something. There's no guarantee that the input will line up with the next frame, so an input latency of 10ms while running at 100 fps equals a worst-case latency of roughly 20ms, not 10ms. That's why the higher fps & hz numbers really matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Between those 2 GPUs, the fp32 perf went up 12.7x according to TechPowerUp’s specs. The SM count went up 8.5x (which represents Moore’s law and note is almost exactly in line with Moore’s prediction), and the clock rate went up 1.5x. The FPS of CSGO (or any game) is not a good measure of Moore’s law. Games have all kinds of complexities and caveats that will prevent them from scaling linearly. I used to write some of…
Wow, didn't expect to get so many comments. It's just interesting to me that we have 500hz monitors, yet games are still coming out that only run at ~70 fps on a 3080, etc. I used CS:GO as a comparison just because it was an example capable of coming near 500 FPS. Avg FPS are not going up fast enough in my opinion. I understand some games purposefully limit FPS for physics calculations, but there are many that do not…
Graphical fidelity in games improves until it maxes out current hardware. This is natural. You can always turn the settings down to get higher FPS, but you can't turn down the high FPS you get in older games into more modern graphics.
> Avg FPS are not going up fast enough in my opinion.
FPS isn't the one and only metric. Audiences generally care more about graphical fidelity. FPS just has to be good enough and stable. Typically that sweet spot is 60fps, though we're slowly moving to 144fps being the standard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When was that? Surely it must have been at least a decade before the GTX 970 "4GB" but maybe after all the driver cheating in the late 90s and early 2000s. I no longer buy nvidia hardware but I do enjoy stock price getting higher. I just wish I had the sense to buy more, a lot more, stock when it was much cheaper. How does a chicken shit like me make big money :(
The tantrum over 970 has gotten even sillier since Microsoft used exactly this same bus structure (with fast/slow segments) on the Xbox series X and S. That’s a product designed and manufactured by AMD, eight?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is - excuse my French - fucking insane. The current PE ratio of 244 is pants on head ridiculous. That's 244 years worth of exceptionally high profit just to break even. Your great great great great great great great great grandchildren could take over your shares at the same value as today and the company would still be overpriced. That's centuries worth of technological change and high volatility baked into th…
Also Tesla a lot more room to grow in term of revenue (they're still a small % of cars solds) than nvidia (already dominates gaming and datacenter). I admit I'm biased in favor of Tesla however.
We also need more Nvidias. More competition in the chipset industry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
CS:GO also doesn't use any of the new approaches that reduce CPU time in those operations and more effectively saturate the GPU. Compare CS:GO against Doom:Eternal, which runs at high fps while providing massive improvements to visuals.
Does Doom: Eternal have multiplayer? How do people feel about it as a competitive shooter?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You seem to be moving the goalposts. First it was using in production, now it's building foundation models.. I'm not moving the goal posts but maybe I wasn't clear. When we talk about corporations adopting fine-tuning and inference that's not especially relevant to H100 sales which is the main cash-cow (~10B of revenue at 80-90% margins) and Nvidia's massive market cap growth. What is relevant is corporations like…
Companies are using both A100 and H100 for inference. The datacenter numbers include both, and I don't believe they break it down further. And no, by and large, large enterprises are not building out large clusters - but they are much of the demand for all those cloud provider build outs. No, no one is using CUDA directly. But if you are a vendor with a new equivalent, it's no small feat integrating it with a framewo…
PyTorch has gotten a lot better on TPUs this year, I don’t believe there’s much of a performance hit now. Jax and TF (I don’t use the latter anymore) of course work. I never used Gaudi2 but it apparently works.
All of this to say, is it possible that Intel gets their fabs working and strategically partners with their long-time partner MS and OpenAI to extend Triton to Gaudi3 or 4 and be a threat to Nvidia within 2-3 years? Absolutely.
Is it similarly possible that Google increases development on Jax and TPUv5? Sure.
Neither of these possibilities, regardless if you think they’re probable or improbable, would need a decade to catch up to Nvidia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s just interesting to me that we have 500hz monitors, yet games are still coming out that only run at ~70fps on a 3080, etc. Of course new games are running at 70 fps. Most games are absolutely not designed for 500hz, and have zero reason to do that. Cs:go wan’t designed for 500fps, I bet the designers of cs:go never intended people to play at 500fps, or even imagined that would ever happen; it wasn’t possible w…
Looks like you were specifically a console game dev? PC games have not aimed for 30fps either ever or at least for the last 2 decades. Consoles are hilariously far behind PC in this aspect. The whole "science says the human eye cannot see beyond 30fps :)" is actually a very old meme at this point. You are correct that high FPS/Hz is about decreasing latency, but you underestimate the importance of it. 144hz is a very…
> an input latency of 10ms while running at 100fps equals a worst-case latency of roughly 20ms, not 10ms. That’s why the higher fps & hz numbers really matter.
Yes exactly, I agree and this was the point I was trying and I guess failing to make. Latency is typically multiple frames, so at 100hz, latency can easily be longer than known science-meme perception times. Even with vsync there’s up to one frame to recognize inputs, then another frame to produce new game state & submit the render, then 1 or 2 more for double or triple buffering, then maybe supersampling and/or denoising, then whatever the monitor does, and I might be missing some steps that add latency. So I suspect 500hz has nothing to do with seeing smoother motion compared to 144hz, and everything to do with getting overall control latency down to below, say, 10ms.
Does that really work though? Does CS:GO and do other modern games poll the controller at the display refresh rate? I know it’s pretty common for a lot of games to decouple rendering from game state. That can mean a lot of different things, but one of the implications might be that controller latency is limited to one or two frames of, say, 60hz game state updates, followed by 3-5 frames of 500hz display refresh. Is latency in today’s PC games limited by the game state update, regardless of what the display refresh rate is?
I’m curious where the perceptual limits really are, and what the max framerate we actually need is. Suppose an imaginary world where worst case input-to-screen latency is 2 frames. Then in that case, how high should the FPS be? What if there was zero latency - like if the next rendered frame magically reflected mid-frame controller inputs and magically displayed with no latency - then what should the ideal FPS be? Would there be any benefit to going higher than 144, or would we be wasting electrons?