Ashes of the Singularity: Unlinked Explicit Multi-Adapter with AFR

Based off of Oxide’s Nitrous engine, Ashes of the Singularity will be the first full game released using the engine. Oxide had previously used the engine as part of their Star Swarm technical demo, showcasing the benefits of vastly improved draw call throughput under Mantle and DirectX 12. As one might expect then, for their first retail game Oxide is developing a game around Nitrous’s DX12 capabilities, with an eye towards putting a large number of draw calls to good use and to develop something that might not have been as good looking under DirectX 11.

That resulting game is Ashes of the Singularity, a massive-scale real time strategy game. Ashes is a spiritual successor of sorts to 2007’s Supreme Commander, a game with a reputation for its technical ambition. Similar to Supreme Commander, Oxide is aiming high with Ashes, and while the current alpha is far from optimized, they have made it clear that even the final version of the game will push CPUs and GPUs hard. Between a complex game simulation (including ballistic and line of sight checks for individual units) and the rendering resources needed to draw all of those units and their weapons effects in detail over a large playing field, I’m expecting that the final version of Ashes will be the most demanding RTS we’ve seen in some number of years.

Because of its high resource requirements Ashes is also a good candidate for multi-GPU scaling, and for this reason Oxide is working on implementing DirectX 12 explicit multi-adapter support into the game. For Ashes, Oxide has opted to start by implementing support for unlinked mode, both because this is a building block for implementing linked mode later on and because from a tech demo point of view this allows Oxide to demonstrate unlinked mode’s most nifty feature: the ability to utilize multiple dissimilar (non-homogenous) GPUs within a single game. EMA with dissimilar GPUs has been shown off in bits and pieces at developer events like Microsoft’s BUILD, but this is the first time an in-game demo has been made available outside of those conferences.

In order to demonstrate EMA and explicit synchronization in action, Oxide has started things off by using a basic alternate frame rendering implementation for the game. As we briefly mentioned in our technical overview of DX12 explicit multi-adapter, EMA puts developers in full control of the rendering process, which for Oxide meant implementing AFR from scratch. This includes assigning frames to each GPU, handling frame buffer transfers from the secondary GPU to the primary GPU, and most importantly of all controlling frame pacing, which is typically the hardest part of AFR to get right.

Because Oxide is using a DX12 EMA AFR implementation here, this gives Ashes quite a bit of flexibility as far as GPU compatibility goes. From a performance standpoint the basic limitations of AFR are still in place – due to the fact that each GPU is tasked with rendering a whole frame, all utilized GPUs need to be close in performance for best results – otherwise Oxide is able to support a wide variety of GPUs with one generic implementation. This includes not only AMD/AMD and NVIDIA/NVIDIA pairings, but GPU pairings that wouldn’t typically work for Crossfire and SLI (e.g. GTX Titan X + GTX 980 Ti). But most importantly of course, this allows Ashes to support using an AMD video card and an NVIDIA video card together as well. In fact beyond the aforementioned performance limitations, Ashes’ AFR mode should work on any two DX12 compliant GPUs.

From a technical standpoint, Oxide tells us that they’ve had a bit of a learning curve in getting EMA working for Ashes – particularly since they’re the first – but that they’re happy with the results. Obviously the fact that this even works is itself a major accomplishment, and in our experience frame pacing with v-sync disabled and tearing enabled feels smooth on the latest generation of high-end cards. Otherwise Oxide is still experimenting with the limits of the hardware and the API; they’ve told us that so far they’ve found that there’s plenty of bandwidth over PCIe for shared textures, and meanwhile they’re incurring a roughly 2ms penalty in transferring data via GPUs.

With that said and to be very clear here, the game itself is still in its alpha state, and the multi-adapter support is not even at alpha (ed: nor is it in the public release at this time). So Ashes’ explicit multi-adapter support is a true tech demo, intended to first and foremost show off the capabilities of EMA rather than what performance will be like in the retail game. As it stands the AFR-enabled build of Ashes occasionally crashes at load time for no obvious reason when AFR is enabled. Furthermore there are stability/corruption issues with newer AMD and NVIDIA drivers, which has required us to use slightly older drivers that have been validated to work. Overall while AMD and NVIDIA have their DirectX 12 drivers up and running, as has been the case with past API launches it’s going to take some time for the two GPU firms to lock down every new feature of the API and driver model and to fully knock out all of their driver bugs.

Finally, Oxide tells us that going forward they will be developing support for additional EMA modes in Ashes. As the current unlinked EMA implementation is stabilized, the next thing on their list will be to add support for linked EMA for better performance on similar GPUs. Oxide is still exploring linked EMA, but somewhat surprisingly they tell us that unlinked EMA already unlocks much of the performance of their AFR implementation. A linked EMA implementation in turn may only improve multi-GPU scaling by a further 5-10%. Beyond that, they will also be looking into alternative implementations of multi-GPU rendering (e.g. work sharing of individual frames), though that is farther off and will likely hinge on other factors such as hardware capabilities and the state of DX12 drivers from each vendor.

The Test

For our look at Ashes’ multi-adapter performance, we’re using Windows 10 with the latest updates on our GPU testbed. This provides plenty of CPU power for the game, and we’ve selected sufficiently high settings to ensure that we’re GPU-bound at all times.

For GPUs we’re using NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX Titan X and GTX 980 Ti, along with AMD’s Radeon R9 Fury X and R9 Fury for the bulk of our testing. As roughly comparable cards in price and performance, the GTX 980 Ti and R9 Fury X are our core comparison cards, with the additional GTX and Fury cards to back them up. Meanwhile we’ve also done a limited amount of testing with the GeForce GTX 680 and Radeon HD 7970 to showcase how well Ashes’ multi-adapter support works on older cards.

Finally, on the driver side of matters we’re using the most recent drivers from AMD that work correctly in multi-adapter mode with this build of Ashes. For AMD that’s Catalyst 15.8 and for NVIDIA that’s release 355.98. We’ve also thrown in single-GPU results with the latest drivers (15.0 and 358.50 respectively) to quickly showcase where single-GPU performance stands with these newest drivers.

CPU: Intel Core i7-4960X @ 4.2GHz
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty X79 Professional
Power Supply: Corsair AX1200i
Hard Disk: Samsung SSD 840 EVO (750GB)
Memory: G.Skill RipjawZ DDR3-1866 4 x 8GB (9-10-9-26)
Case: NZXT Phantom 630 Windowed Edition
Monitor: Asus PQ321
Video Cards: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X
ASUS STRIX R9 Fury
AMD Radeon HD 7970
NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680
Video Drivers: NVIDIA Release 355.98
NVIDIA Release 358.50
AMD Catalyst 15.8 Beta
AMD Catalyst 15.10 Beta
OS: Windows 10 Pro
A Brief History & DirectX 12 Ashes GPU Performance: Single & Mixed High-End GPUs
Comments Locked

180 Comments

View All Comments

  • mosu - Thursday, October 29, 2015 - link

    Did you ever owned or touched an Iris HD 6000? or at least know someone who did?
  • wiak - Friday, October 30, 2015 - link

    eDRAM...
    if AMD goes HBM2 like they did in the past with ddr3 sideport memory

    just a taught
    AMD Zen 4-8 Core with Radeon (2048+ shaders, 2 or 4GB HBM2 (either as slot on mb or ondie like fury)

    i think i read somewhere there will be a single socket for APUs and CPUs,
    so amd lineup can be a Zen CPU with 8-16 cores for perf system and a Zen APU with 4-8 cores, 2048+ shaders and hbm2 for mainstream/laptops computers
  • Michael Bay - Thursday, October 29, 2015 - link

    If it actually could, we would be able to buy it. No such luck.
  • Revdarian - Thursday, October 29, 2015 - link

    Well, it has currently two offerings, one called Xbox One, and the other one that is more powerful is called the Playstation 4.

    Those are technically APU's, developed by AMD, and can be bought at the moment. Just saying, it is possible.
  • Midwayman - Monday, October 26, 2015 - link

    Seems like it would be great to do post effects and free up the main gpu to work on rendering.
  • Alexvrb - Monday, October 26, 2015 - link

    Agreed, as far as dGPU and iGPU cooperation goes I think Epic is on to something there. Free 10% performance boost? Why not. Now for dGPU + dGPU modes, I am not killed on the idea of unlinked mode. Seems like developers would have their work cut out for them with all the different possible configurations. Linked mode makes the most sense to me for consistency and relative difficulty to implement. Plus anyone using multiple GPUs is already used to using a pair of the same GPUs.

    Regardless of whether they go linked or unlinked though... I'd really like them to do something other than AFR. Split-frame, tile-based, something, anything. Blech.
  • Refuge - Monday, October 26, 2015 - link

    For high end AAA Titles likened mode would be optimum, I agree. Allows for their fast releases, and still gives a great performance boost. Their target demographic is already used to having to jump through hoops to get the results they want. Getting identical GPU's won't affect them.

    For games with extended lifetimes like MMO's such as WoW, Swtor, etc, etc. Unlikened mode is worth the investment, as it allows your game to hit a MUCH wider customer base with increased graphical performance. These are crowds that are easy to pole for data so they would easily know who they are directing their efforts towards, and the lifespan of the game make the extra man hours a worthy investment.
  • Gadgety - Tuesday, October 27, 2015 - link

    @alexvrb And game testers have their work cut out for them as well, testing all sorts of hardware configurations.

    In addition game developers will likely see the need for new skill sets, and likely this will benefit larger outfits being able to cope with developing and tuning their games to various hard ware combinations.
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, October 27, 2015 - link

    I suspect most small devs will continue to use their engine in the normal way, not taking any more advantage of most of the DX12 multi-GPU features any more than they did SLI/XFire in DX11 or prior. The only exception I see might be offloading post-processing to the IGP. That looks like a much simpler split to implement; and might be something they could get for free from the next version of their engine.
  • nightbringer57 - Monday, October 26, 2015 - link

    Wow. I didn't expect this to work this well.

    Just out of curiosity... Could you get a few more data points to show how a Titan X + Fury X/Fury X + Titan X would fare?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now