Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [WCCF] HITMAN To Feature Best Implementation Of DX12 Async Compute Yet, Says AMD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[WCCF] HITMAN To Feature Best Implementation Of DX12 Async Compute Yet, Says AMD - Page 15

post #141 of 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxdarkreap3rxx View Post

"DriverEntry is the first routine called after a driver is loaded, and is responsible for initializing the driver."
Source: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff544113%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

Microsoft offers some WDK examples here: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/dn433227.aspx If you take a look at the Windows 10 ones, specifically the kernel mode video driver, you will see the DriverEntry function inside BDD_DDI.cxx here: https://github.com/Microsoft/Windows-driver-samples/blob/master/video/KMDOD/bdd_ddi.cxx
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Code:
// BEGIN: Init Code

//
// Driver Entry point
//

extern "C"
NTSTATUS
DriverEntry(
    _In_  DRIVER_OBJECT*  pDriverObject,
    _In_  UNICODE_STRING* pRegistryPath)
{
    PAGED_CODE();


    // Initialize DDI function pointers and dxgkrnl
    KMDDOD_INITIALIZATION_DATA InitialData = {0};

    InitialData.Version = DXGKDDI_INTERFACE_VERSION;

    InitialData.DxgkDdiAddDevice                    = BddDdiAddDevice;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiStartDevice                  = BddDdiStartDevice;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiStopDevice                   = BddDdiStopDevice;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiResetDevice                  = BddDdiResetDevice;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiRemoveDevice                 = BddDdiRemoveDevice;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiDispatchIoRequest            = BddDdiDispatchIoRequest;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiInterruptRoutine             = BddDdiInterruptRoutine;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiDpcRoutine                   = BddDdiDpcRoutine;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiQueryChildRelations          = BddDdiQueryChildRelations;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiQueryChildStatus             = BddDdiQueryChildStatus;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiQueryDeviceDescriptor        = BddDdiQueryDeviceDescriptor;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiSetPowerState                = BddDdiSetPowerState;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiUnload                       = BddDdiUnload;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiQueryAdapterInfo             = BddDdiQueryAdapterInfo;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiSetPointerPosition           = BddDdiSetPointerPosition;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiSetPointerShape              = BddDdiSetPointerShape;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiIsSupportedVidPn             = BddDdiIsSupportedVidPn;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiRecommendFunctionalVidPn     = BddDdiRecommendFunctionalVidPn;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiEnumVidPnCofuncModality      = BddDdiEnumVidPnCofuncModality;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiSetVidPnSourceVisibility     = BddDdiSetVidPnSourceVisibility;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiCommitVidPn                  = BddDdiCommitVidPn;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiUpdateActiveVidPnPresentPath = BddDdiUpdateActiveVidPnPresentPath;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiRecommendMonitorModes        = BddDdiRecommendMonitorModes;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiQueryVidPnHWCapability       = BddDdiQueryVidPnHWCapability;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiPresentDisplayOnly           = BddDdiPresentDisplayOnly;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiStopDeviceAndReleasePostDisplayOwnership = BddDdiStopDeviceAndReleasePostDisplayOwnership;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiSystemDisplayEnable          = BddDdiSystemDisplayEnable;
    InitialData.DxgkDdiSystemDisplayWrite           = BddDdiSystemDisplayWrite;

    NTSTATUS Status = DxgkInitializeDisplayOnlyDriver(pDriverObject, pRegistryPath, &InitialData);
    if (!NT_SUCCESS(Status))
    {
        BDD_LOG_ERROR1("DxgkInitializeDisplayOnlyDriver failed with Status: 0x%I64x", Status);
        return Status;
    }


    return Status;
}
// END: Init Code
Nvidia could use this function to verify that no AMD hardware IDs are present before initializing their driver.

first of all please excuse me for not following EVERY POST you've made. rolleyes.gif

and secondly its really ridiculous for nvidia to block their own hardware.

let's think here . .
loon 3.2
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-V Pro EVGA 980TI SC+ 16Gb PNY ddr3 1866 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
PNY 1311 240Gb 1 TB Seagate 3 TB WD Blue DVD DVDRW+/- 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
EKWB P280 kit EK-VGA supremacy Win X LG 24MC57HQ-P 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Zero [blues] EVGA SuperNova 750 G2 Stryker M [hammered and drilled] corsair M65 
AudioAudio
SB Recon3D Klipsch ProMedia 2.1  
  hide details  
Reply
loon 3.2
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-V Pro EVGA 980TI SC+ 16Gb PNY ddr3 1866 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
PNY 1311 240Gb 1 TB Seagate 3 TB WD Blue DVD DVDRW+/- 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
EKWB P280 kit EK-VGA supremacy Win X LG 24MC57HQ-P 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Zero [blues] EVGA SuperNova 750 G2 Stryker M [hammered and drilled] corsair M65 
AudioAudio
SB Recon3D Klipsch ProMedia 2.1  
  hide details  
Reply
post #142 of 799
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie View Post


Although the amount of ASC that AoTS uses is pretty damn small, and not much of an indicator.
Source on the bold part? Again, another claim of yours without anything to back it up.

You dudes act like you all don't have a search engine or something. It's well-known that Nvidia is using that 80% market share to bully developers not to use Async Compute:
http://www.dsogaming.com/news/oxide-developer-nvidia-was-putting-pressure-on-us-to-disable-certain-settings-in-the-benchmark/

Edited by MoorishBrutha - 2/11/16 at 1:30pm
post #143 of 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post

So its not OK to work with game developer partners to get games to run better on your hardware (Nvidia, GameWorks) but when it benefit you (AMD, Async Compute), its OK to have the partners code the game to work better on your hardware.

The double standard here... rolleyes.gif
You don't even know what GameWorks function is. How surprising. rolleyes.gif

Async compute could also benefit Nvidia if they supported it,so it is no one but Nvidia's fault. rolleyes.gif
post #144 of 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lex Luger View Post

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't ALL gameworks titles allow you to turn off the gameworks effects?

What are you crying about?

Just turn them OFF if you don't like the performance hit. They don't add much anyway. STOP CRYING!

I bleed green, but I still welcome async compute and hope it helps out AMD's GPU performance on 7000 series and up.

People are stupid as hell. "Ultra" or "Very High" are the same. Gameworks is just extra pretty graphics if you have the power. Whether that be on game launch or replaying the game years later. Personally, I love Gameworks. I can go back to a game in 3 years with a more powerful card and play on settings even higher than what I originally played at.
post #145 of 799
More "valid points" by Postal.. FC4 and WD are now GE titles. rolleyes.gif This man taking more L's than Meek Mill.. lachen.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lex Luger View Post

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't ALL gameworks titles allow you to turn off the gameworks effects?

What are you crying about?

Just turn them OFF if you don't like the performance hit. They don't add much anyway. STOP CRYING!

I bleed green, but I still welcome async compute and hope it helps out AMD's GPU performance on 7000 series and up.

I always turn off physx, gameworks, tressfx, and whatever else they come up with because they add HUGE latency and destroy your minimum framerate, even if Im still able to average 60 FPS.

It's not about turning things on or off.. That's pretty damn obvious. It's about Nvidias black-box method which inhabits AMD's/developers ability to optimize effectively, and as has been pointed out, most GameWorks titles are completely broken. You'd think most would be able to spot the trend by now..
post #146 of 799
This thread blew up fast! So much unnecessary information, my head almost popped.

I can't wait to see some benchmark numbers on this game. I won't be buying it because of it coming in "episodes" but I really want to see some numbers. It would be nice to have an actual game for people to argue about instead of everyones theory on how things will work.
Computer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790k Gigabyte Z97X Gaming 7 Nvidia GTX 1080ti FE (EK block) CORSAIR Vengeance 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Evo Mushkin Reactor Custom Loop Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Ben Q BL3201PT Logitech G110 EVGA 1300w Thermatake Core P5 
MouseAudio
LOGITECH G502 PROTEUS CORE Corsair 2100 
  hide details  
Reply
Computer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790k Gigabyte Z97X Gaming 7 Nvidia GTX 1080ti FE (EK block) CORSAIR Vengeance 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Evo Mushkin Reactor Custom Loop Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Ben Q BL3201PT Logitech G110 EVGA 1300w Thermatake Core P5 
MouseAudio
LOGITECH G502 PROTEUS CORE Corsair 2100 
  hide details  
Reply
post #147 of 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by looniam View Post

first of all please excuse me for not following EVERY POST you've made. rolleyes.gif

and secondly its really ridiculous for nvidia to block their own hardware.

let's think here . .

Gotta hover over me and select "Follow Member" thumb.gif

I was referencing Nvidia blocking driver initialization when AMD cards are present to avoid "SLI" between say a 980 Ti and Fury X. Pretty sure that's what the original context was.
post #148 of 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargonplay View Post

Thank you for saving me the shame of going through the entirety of such failed attempt of fanboyism.
It didn't failed as hard as your post though, also that patch came in because of Network Issues, the crashes were coming from the servers not the game, get your facts straight, Single Player was a blast to play even at those times.

The one error in my list of four doesn't do anything to the others on the list, or to illustrate the point that it isn't AMD or Nvidia at fault for bad game performance, but the developer. As for your claims on Netcode being patched in BF4 in that initial stability patch I referenced, nope.

BF4 released on 10-29-2013. In Jan. 2014 they released a stability update that was preventing people from playing, one of many updates. The first Netcode update came in June(ish) of 2014, all the way into 2015. The issues with BF4 Netcode, and how long it was/is a problem, is damn near legendary at this point.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 5820K AsRock Extreme6 X99 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti Windforce OC 16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 EVO 250GB - HDD Speed Edtition Samsung SM951 512 GB - I still hate Samsung!  Noctua NHD14 Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Achieva Shimian QH270-Lite Overlord Computer Tempest X27OC  Acer Predator XB270HU Filco Majestouch 2 Ninja 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-1250 Fractal Design R5 Razer Naga Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudio
AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition Creative Sound Blaster Zx 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 5820K AsRock Extreme6 X99 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti Windforce OC 16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 EVO 250GB - HDD Speed Edtition Samsung SM951 512 GB - I still hate Samsung!  Noctua NHD14 Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Achieva Shimian QH270-Lite Overlord Computer Tempest X27OC  Acer Predator XB270HU Filco Majestouch 2 Ninja 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-1250 Fractal Design R5 Razer Naga Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudio
AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition Creative Sound Blaster Zx 
  hide details  
Reply
post #149 of 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie View Post

The one error in my list of four doesn't do anything to the others on the list, or to illustrate the point that it isn't AMD or Nvidia at fault for bad game performance, but the developer. As for your claims on Netcode being patched in BF4 in that initial stability patch I referenced, nope.

BF4 released on 10-29-2013. In Jan. 2014 they released a stability update that was preventing people from playing, one of many updates. The first Netcode update came in June(ish) of 2014, all the way into 2015. The issues with BF4 Netcode, and how long it was/is a problem, is damn near legendary at this point.

Could have sworn it had some bad memory leaks too. Unless that was 3. Or another game.
post #150 of 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by GorillaSceptre View Post

It's not about turning things on or off.. That's pretty damn obvious.

Then I don't see the issue. If an effect, Gameworks or not, doesn't run well on your rig, its common sense to just turn it off. I don't see why people have to go on internet message boards and whine endlessly that it's NVIDIA's fault that their computer cant handle it.
First Build
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3-4370 ASROCK H97M PR04 380x Nitro Corsair 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Crucial M500 120GB Seagage 320GB Caviar Blue 1TB Windows 8.1 x86-64 
PowerCase
XFX 550W PS07B 
  hide details  
Reply
First Build
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3-4370 ASROCK H97M PR04 380x Nitro Corsair 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Crucial M500 120GB Seagage 320GB Caviar Blue 1TB Windows 8.1 x86-64 
PowerCase
XFX 550W PS07B 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Game News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [WCCF] HITMAN To Feature Best Implementation Of DX12 Async Compute Yet, Says AMD