• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation Update Brings Improved Performance to Ryzen

the54thvoid

Super Intoxicated Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
13,121 (2.39/day)
Location
Glasgow - home of formal profanity
Processor Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI MAG Mortar B650 (wifi)
Cooling be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4
Memory 32GB Kingston Fury
Video Card(s) Gainward RTX4070ti
Storage Seagate FireCuda 530 M.2 1TB / Samsumg 960 Pro M.2 512Gb
Display(s) LG 32" 165Hz 1440p GSYNC
Case Asus Prime AP201
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply be quiet! Pure POwer M12 850w Gold (ATX3.0)
Software W10
Prey should be the first bona fide gaming test of AMD sympathetic coding for both GPU and CPU. Here's hoping they don't intentionally hobble my gtx 1080ti/Ryzen combo.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
9,899 (1.70/day)
Location
Essex, England
System Name My pc
Processor Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard Asus Rog b450-f
Cooling Cooler master 120mm aio
Memory 16gb ddr4 3200mhz
Video Card(s) MSI Ventus 3x 3070
Storage 2tb intel nvme and 2tb generic ssd
Display(s) Generic dell 1080p overclocked to 75hz
Case Phanteks enthoo
Power Supply 650w of borderline fire hazard
Mouse Some wierd Chinese vertical mouse
Keyboard Generic mechanical keyboard
Software Windows ten
It's a little depressing that the only reason people have heard of/buy your game is because of benchmarking. I literally do not know anyone that owns this game aside from myself and benchmarkers, and most of us have never actually played it.

Hey it worked for crisis, completely average shooter but it was so over the top at the time that people got it just to see if they could run.

It's a nice jump from a patch alone, but I own AOTS and it's always seemed more like an AMD gfx demo than a game. I'm also a bit skeptical of other devs spending 400+ hours to optimize their games for Ryzen. The AOTS devs are very connected to AMD so they are definitely a special case. I'm far more interested in the performance in more mainstream games like BF1, Rise of Tomb Raider, ME: A, etc. that aren't significantly subsidized by 1 vendor to get special treatment and give misleading results. Granted most games get that to a smaller degree with "Best played on...", but not usually to the degree of AOTS.


400 hours could be distributed over 400 employees potentially so the work can be done In less than 24 hours.

Still even 4 people working on it that's only two weeks of work :)
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
2,995 (0.78/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X ||| Intel Core i7-3930K
Motherboard ASUS ProArt B550-CREATOR ||| Asus P9X79 WS
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S ||| Be Quiet Pure Rock
Memory Crucial 2 x 16 GB 3200 MHz ||| Corsair 8 x 8 GB 1333 MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1060 3GB ||| MSI GTX 680 4GB
Storage Samsung 970 PRO 512 GB + 1 TB ||| Intel 545s 512 GB + 256 GB
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG278QR 27" ||| Eizo EV2416W 24"
Case Fractal Design Define 7 XL x 2
Audio Device(s) Cambridge Audio DacMagic Plus
Power Supply Seasonic Focus PX-850 x 2
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard CM Storm QuickFire XT
Software Ubuntu
It's a nice jump from a patch alone, but I own AOTS and it's always seemed more like an AMD gfx demo than a game. I'm also a bit skeptical of other devs spending 400+ hours to optimize their games for Ryzen. The AOTS devs are very connected to AMD so they are definitely a special case. I'm far more interested in the performance in more mainstream games like BF1, Rise of Tomb Raider, ME: A, etc. that aren't significantly subsidized by 1 vendor to get special treatment and give misleading results. Granted most games get that to a smaller degree with "Best played on...", but not usually to the degree of AOTS.
Yes, that game is nothing more than a "tech demo"/benchmark. "No one" uses it except for benchmarking.

In terms of rendering performance, the only way to "optimize for Ryzen" would be to remove bloat; removing wasted CPU-cycles. 400 hours to optimize probably means they spent 50-100 hours browsing through the code, a few hours tweaking a few functions and then the remaining in QA. They have clearly found some low-hanging fruit, no one will do a major overhaul of production code for something minor, and that would require >10k hours. Most games would not have enough low-hanging fruit to help out enough.

400 hours could be distributed over 400 employees potentially so the work can be done In less than 24 hours.

Still even 4 people working on it that's only two weeks of work :)
You clearly have never worked on a large software project. Even if you had 400 developers in a code base, just the overhead of starting the work would consume more than 400 hours…
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
9,899 (1.70/day)
Location
Essex, England
System Name My pc
Processor Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard Asus Rog b450-f
Cooling Cooler master 120mm aio
Memory 16gb ddr4 3200mhz
Video Card(s) MSI Ventus 3x 3070
Storage 2tb intel nvme and 2tb generic ssd
Display(s) Generic dell 1080p overclocked to 75hz
Case Phanteks enthoo
Power Supply 650w of borderline fire hazard
Mouse Some wierd Chinese vertical mouse
Keyboard Generic mechanical keyboard
Software Windows ten
You clearly have never worked on a large software project. Even if you had 400 developers in a code base, just the overhead of starting the work would consume more than 400 hours…

Whilst to assumption about me is correct I did use the word potentially in my statement.

That's why I offered up the more realistic example of a four person team but still I accept I could be wrong about that as well.

Still though they've achieved this improvement with about a month of time with Ryzen, 400 hours over a month isn't all that much especially for a studio that only seems to have the one game to work on.
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
2,995 (0.78/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X ||| Intel Core i7-3930K
Motherboard ASUS ProArt B550-CREATOR ||| Asus P9X79 WS
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S ||| Be Quiet Pure Rock
Memory Crucial 2 x 16 GB 3200 MHz ||| Corsair 8 x 8 GB 1333 MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1060 3GB ||| MSI GTX 680 4GB
Storage Samsung 970 PRO 512 GB + 1 TB ||| Intel 545s 512 GB + 256 GB
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG278QR 27" ||| Eizo EV2416W 24"
Case Fractal Design Define 7 XL x 2
Audio Device(s) Cambridge Audio DacMagic Plus
Power Supply Seasonic Focus PX-850 x 2
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard CM Storm QuickFire XT
Software Ubuntu
Still though they've achieved this improvement with about a month of time with Ryzen, 400 hours over a month isn't all that much especially for a studio that only seems to have the one game to work on.
Yes, one of my points was that 400 hours is "nothing" for a big project. As the project grows larger, changes becomes more time consuming and risky, so in 400 hours you can't really do a lot with a game engine. Larger projects always have to do a lot of QA for all changes. So if you have found something that yields a measurable performance gain it has to be some low-hanging fruit. Most game engines wouldn't have that, so you can't expect most developers to spend 400 hours and get similar gains.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
9,899 (1.70/day)
Location
Essex, England
System Name My pc
Processor Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard Asus Rog b450-f
Cooling Cooler master 120mm aio
Memory 16gb ddr4 3200mhz
Video Card(s) MSI Ventus 3x 3070
Storage 2tb intel nvme and 2tb generic ssd
Display(s) Generic dell 1080p overclocked to 75hz
Case Phanteks enthoo
Power Supply 650w of borderline fire hazard
Mouse Some wierd Chinese vertical mouse
Keyboard Generic mechanical keyboard
Software Windows ten
Yes, one of my points was that 400 hours is "nothing" for a big project. As the project grows larger, changes becomes more time consuming and risky, so in 400 hours you can't really do a lot with a game engine. Larger projects always have to do a lot of QA for all changes. So if you have found something that yields a measurable performance gain it has to be some low-hanging fruit. Most game engines wouldn't have that, so you can't expect most developers to spend 400 hours and get similar gains.

I'm not expecting performance improvements like this across the board, it would just be nice to see other games that are clearly underperforming get some patches.

The games where performance is adequate likely won't be touched.
 

HTC

Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
4,664 (0.76/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name HTC's System
Processor Ryzen 5 5800X3D
Motherboard Asrock Taichi X370
Cooling NH-C14, with the AM4 mounting kit
Memory G.Skill Kit 16GB DDR4 F4 - 3200 C16D - 16 GTZB
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse 6600 8 GB
Storage 1 Samsung NVMe 960 EVO 250 GB + 1 3.5" Seagate IronWolf Pro 6TB 7200RPM 256MB SATA III
Display(s) LG 27UD58
Case Fractal Design Define R6 USB-C
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair TX 850M 80+ Gold
Mouse Razer Deathadder Elite
Software Ubuntu 20.04.6 LTS
According to this, the AotS improvements do not originate from thread scheduling fixes.

This means that there's the possibility that there may be more performance gains should a windows patch covering thread scheduling be released later on.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
430 (0.08/day)
Location
Belgium
System Name Illidan
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
Motherboard Gigabyte B550 Aorus Pro V2
Cooling Scythe Mugen 4
Memory G.Skill Trident Z 32GB DDR4 3000MHz 14CL
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT
Storage Crucial P1 1TB + Sandisk Ultra II 960GB + Samsung EVO Plus 970 2TB + F3 1TB + Toshiba X300 4TB
Display(s) Iiyama G-MASTER G4380UHSU-B1
Case Corsair 750D Airflow
Audio Device(s) Sony WH1000-XM4
Power Supply Seasonic Focus PX-850
Mouse Logitech G604
Keyboard Corsair Vengeance K70 (Cherry MX Red)
Software Windows 11 Pro
'Tech demo' or not, I'm glad they show it's possible within reasonable amount of work/time. Ryzen has a lot of computing power spread across those 8 cores and it's nice they have it translated to real world gaming performance. This can only benefit us all.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
3,409 (0.83/day)
Location
Athens, Greece
System Name 3 desktop systems: Gaming / Internet / HTPC
Processor Ryzen 5 7600 / Ryzen 5 4600G / Ryzen 5 5500
Motherboard X670E Gaming Plus WiFi / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (1) / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (2)
Cooling Aigo ICE 400SE / Segotep T4 / Νoctua U12S
Memory Kingston FURY Beast 32GB DDR5 6000 / 16GB JUHOR / 32GB G.Skill RIPJAWS 3600 + Aegis 3200
Video Card(s) ASRock RX 6600 + GT 710 (PhysX) / Vega 7 integrated / Radeon RX 580
Storage NVMes, ONLY NVMes / NVMes, SATA Storage / NVMe, SATA, external storage
Display(s) Philips 43PUS8857/12 UHD TV (120Hz, HDR, FreeSync Premium) / 19'' HP monitor + BlitzWolf BW-V5
Case Sharkoon Rebel 12 / CoolerMaster Elite 361 / Xigmatek Midguard
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Chieftec 850W / Silver Power 400W / Sharkoon 650W
Mouse CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Keyboard CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Software Windows 10 / Windows 10&Windows 11 / Windows 10
This is an indication, but not a proof, about what we might see in the future, in most AAA titles. And that's consistent performance from Ryzen, not some odd cases where Ryzen performs like an overclocked FX. I think this example makes it easier to go with AMD over Intel, even if gaming is important for the person buying a new computer. Only people who need the absolute maximum of frames per second score, should still stay with Intel.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
2,717 (0.54/day)
Location
Greece
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 5600@80W
Motherboard MSI B550 Tomahawk
Cooling ZALMAN CNPS9X OPTIMA
Memory 2*8GB PATRIOT PVS416G400C9K@3733MT_C16
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon RX 6750 XT Pulse 12GB
Storage Sandisk SSD 128GB, Kingston A2000 NVMe 1TB, Samsung F1 1TB, WD Black 10TB
Display(s) AOC 27G2U/BK IPS 144Hz
Case SHARKOON M25-W 7.1 BLACK
Audio Device(s) Realtek 7.1 onboard
Power Supply Seasonic Core GC 500W
Mouse Sharkoon SHARK Force Black
Keyboard Trust GXT280
Software Win 7 Ultimate 64bit/Win 10 pro 64bit/Manjaro Linux
No one ever said ryzen is bad for gaming. Is just that Intel similar and lower priced are better.
I can remember of many posts talking about Ryzen being weak for gaming. And they tended to forget that a new platform is getting better with newer BIOS and update in OS and games. Ryzen has another good point also: RAM speed scaling due to its arch.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2004
Messages
385 (0.05/day)
Location
Belgium, Leuven
Processor I7-6700
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Pro4S
Cooling 2*120mm
Memory G.Skill D416GB 3200-14 Trident Z K2 GSK
Video Card(s) Rx480 Sapphire
Storage SSD Samsung 256GB 850 pro + bunch of TB
Case Antec
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Z
Power Supply be quit 900W
Mouse Logitech G5
Keyboard Logitech G11
Very good job by AMD, if I hadn´t bought me a 6700 last year, I would be buying a Ryzen right now.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
3,595 (1.16/day)
So, once again, this awful game emerges. :(
I'm really not surprised Oxide decided to make this patch. They're struggling to sell this game at all... Yet, it always was a favorite of AMD GPU owners, so I'm not surprised Ryzen crowd also had to be taken care of.

I'm sorry to say this, but I don't think these AoS benchmarks are doing any good to Ryzen marketing strategy.

We know that most games today are hardly benefiting from more than 4 cores.
AMD released Ryzen saying that in games it's on par with 6900K (costing twice as much). And it is true, although most graphs ignored the fact that a cheaper 7700K is also in the same league gaming-wise (sometimes faster...).

Now we're back to AoS, which clearly has been optimized for more than 4 cores since release.
But what happened?
Even after this patch Ryzen looks like a competitor to 7700K which has half the cores. 6900K is way faster...

So maybe it's not about games not being optimized for 8 cores? Maybe Ryzen is simply fairly slow and difficult for coders - it only has the multi-thread advantage in some price segments.
At this point I'm quite interested how Ryzen will look when more games make use of 8C/16T potential. :p

BTW:
This test was made using the "Crazy preset" which is said not to change much in terms of gaming experience - it's basically a built-in benchmark. The original Ryzen review used the "Extreme preset" in which the gap between 7700K and 6900K was much wider. I'd prefer to see that one remade - to check where the Ryzen lands this time.
 

Frick

Fishfaced Nincompoop
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
19,675 (2.86/day)
Location
w
System Name Black MC in Tokyo
Processor Ryzen 5 7600
Motherboard MSI X670E Gaming Plus Wifi
Cooling Be Quiet! Pure Rock 2
Memory 2 x 16GB Corsair Vengeance @ 6000Mhz
Video Card(s) XFX 6950XT Speedster MERC 319
Storage Kingston KC3000 1TB | WD Black SN750 2TB |WD Blue 1TB x 2 | Toshiba P300 2TB | Seagate Expansion 8TB
Display(s) Samsung U32J590U 4K + BenQ GL2450HT 1080p
Case Fractal Design Define R4
Audio Device(s) Plantronics 5220, Nektar SE61 keyboard
Power Supply Corsair RM850x v3
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Dell SK3205
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Rimworld 4K ready!
Hey it worked for crisis, completely average shooter but it was so over the top at the time that people got it just to see if they could run.

Two things: One. I am not a shooter fan, but I still finished Crysis. TBH I loved it. It was mediocre on normal difficulty, but if you turned it to the highes difficulty, the game for some reason completely changed and became glorious. It felt designed for the highest difficulty. Everything fell in place then. Two. It ran on everything, not just on the highest settings. I played the MP Demo on an Athlon 64 3000+ at 2.4Ghz, 1GB RAM and a Radeon x1950pro, on 1280x1024 on High settings. I know exactly what you mean though, I just want things to be correct.
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
3,809 (0.75/day)
Processor AMD 5900x
Motherboard Asus x570 Strix-E
Cooling Hardware Labs
Memory G.Skill 4000c17 2x16gb
Video Card(s) RTX 3090
Storage Sabrent
Display(s) Samsung G9
Case Phanteks 719
Audio Device(s) Fiio K5 Pro
Power Supply EVGA 1000 P2
Mouse Logitech G600
Keyboard Corsair K95
Yes, that game is nothing more than a "tech demo"/benchmark. "No one" uses it except for benchmarking.

Tech demo or not the game is actually fun once you get over the learning curve. I used to play it a lot last year when I had more free time. Then the game got more and more advanced, the ai is too smart now, or its effing cheating? lol Then I got too busy, my kid joined a mtb team and I literally have not played a game in a year. But ashes as I remember it is a large game, its for diehard warfare gamers on a massive scale. That's why not many play it because its not a simple romp thru game.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
3,595 (1.16/day)
Tech demo or not the game is actually fun once you get over the learning curve. I used to play it a lot last year when I had more free time. Then the game got more and more advanced, the ai is too smart now, or its effing cheating? lol Then I got too busy, my kid joined a mtb team and I literally have not played a game in a year. But ashes as I remember it is a large game, its for diehard warfare gamers on a massive scale. That's why not many play it because its not a simple romp thru game.

I remember reviews of AoS that ended up in mediocre scores like 6/10 and they didn't really mention the high AI level as a major drawback. What they actually said is that this game is BOOOORING. :)

AoS looks and feels like a (heavily multi-thread) benchmark which was later turned into a game. So you can control this vast amount of units and the game is quite challenging technically, but there isn't much else. It lacks a story, design finesse and some brain-challenge as well (other than having to click a lot).

Overall, you could right that this game is too difficult/time-consuming for many to play. As you've said: in time people tend to have other things to do than just playing games.
The issue with AoS is that it also hasn't been BOUGHT very often in the first place. :)
 
Top