Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [BitTech] Farewell to DirectX?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[BitTech] Farewell to DirectX? - Page 3

post #21 of 107
There is no way devs will start using assembly to make games on a specific GPU. Its just not going to happen.

Instead, it would be worth looking at turning DirectX 11 API into an assmebly language driven beast.

Everytime a new manufacturer has a new GPU, they submit their edited DirectX library to review from Microsoft. That would be way smarter than forcing the game developers to incorporate madness into their game design.

Thats just my opinion. Its entirely an option and would require GPU manufactures to step up. DX12 API calls executed in assembly language I think is the closest we will ever see this. We have them writing drivers already, lets just make the DX libraries a requirement too!
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Reply
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Reply
post #22 of 107
Microsoft adding bloat and efficiency draining features to their products? Perish the thought!

/sarcasm

It will always be ideal, in terms of performance anyway, to just boot the computer straight into a game application. That's always more or less been the original point of DirectX - completely bypass the clunky Windows hardware interface and give as much direct access to the hardware as possible.

But, things being what they are today, the DX developers may have lost sight of that. Or maybe it just isn't possible given the complexity of modern 3D programming to give a completely low-level, general use API.

If it were possible, though, I think the best solution would be an integrated, tiered system of hardware access. The first tier would be the standard DX API, followed by some sort of driver-level access, then simply straight hardware control. These are all, of course, possible now, but some kind of standardization of all this into DX would help things a bit. I think at one point, DX could expose video memory directly to the programmer, but I'm not sure if it does this anymore.

Edit: Didn't really reflect on the complexities of programming on all GPU cores; TBH I'm not even sure what low-level access to these would even look like. It seems there would have to be at least some kind of driver interface to even know where to send instructions, but at this point I'm pretty ignorant of the subject.
Edited by dharmaBum - 3/16/11 at 8:21am
Callisto
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.7ghz @ 1.37v MSI P67A-GD65 EVGA GTX 680 Mushkin Enhanced Redline 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 1866 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Intel SSD 40GB; Seagate Cavier Green 1TB Scientific Linux 6.3/Windoze7 22" Samsung SyncMaster 2232BW Corsair TX850 
  hide details  
Reply
Callisto
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.7ghz @ 1.37v MSI P67A-GD65 EVGA GTX 680 Mushkin Enhanced Redline 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 1866 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Intel SSD 40GB; Seagate Cavier Green 1TB Scientific Linux 6.3/Windoze7 22" Samsung SyncMaster 2232BW Corsair TX850 
  hide details  
Reply
post #23 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by RagingCain View Post
There is no way devs will start using assembly to make games on a specific GPU. Its just not going to happen.

Instead, it would be worth looking at turning DirectX 11 API into an assmebly language driven beast.

Everytime a new manufacturer has a new GPU, they submit their edited DirectX library to review from Microsoft. That would be way smarter than forcing the game developers to incorporate madness into their game design.

Thats just my opinion. Its entirely an option and would require GPU manufactures to step up. DX12 API calls executed in assembly language I think is the closest we will ever see this.
I'm not really sure microsoft will allow companies to re-write directx on their own.
I'm not sure I like it. Its too open the bugs and problems which will affect microsoft themselves.

Also re-writing it in asm will take... ages. DirectX is a pretty big beast of a code.

But yes, I agree that it needs to be much more efficient.
But also, don't forget that we require from it more than the consoles.
You expect it to perform insanely well at 2560X1600, while consoles only has to worry about 1080P, and maybe 2xaa max in most games.

Let alone you are sometimes limited by the engine you are using for 3D.
Too many variables tbh.
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #24 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by dharmaBum View Post
Microsoft adding bloat and efficiency draining features to their products? Perish the thought!

/sarcasm

It will always be ideal, in terms of performance anyway, to just boot the computer straight into a game application. That's always more or less been the original point of DirectX - completely bypass the clunky Windows hardware interface and give as much direct access to the hardware as possible.

But, things being what they are today, the DX developers may have lost sight of that. Or maybe it just isn't possible given the complexity of modern 3D programming to give a completely low-level, general use API.

If it were possible, though, I think the best solution would be an integrated, tiered system of hardware access. The first tier would be the standard DX API, followed by some sort of driver-level access, then simply straight hardware control. These are all, of course, possible now, but some kind of standardization of all this into DX would help things a bit. I think at one point, DX could expose video memory directly to the programmer, but I'm not sure if it does this anymore.
Its keeping with the themes brought up by .NET, you do have access to meat and potatoes programming but its also handled automatigically if left alone. Which means... the devs are given a choice of efficiency (difficulty with respect to time) vs. simplicity (allows more features with respect to time).

I primarily believe that there is truth in the article, BUT, if you give a Dev two ways to do something (a dev on a limited time frame) and there is an easy and harder way to do it. My money is on the guy doing it the easy way as long as it works.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post
I'm not really sure microsoft will allow companies to re-write directx on their own.
I'm not sure I like it. Its too open the bugs and problems which will affect microsoft themselves.

Also re-writing it in asm will take... ages. DirectX is a pretty big beast of a code.

But yes, I agree that it needs to be much more efficient.
But also, don't forget that we require from it more than the consoles.
You expect it to perform insanely well at 2560X1600, while consoles only has to worry about 1080P, and maybe 2xaa max in most games.

Let alone you are sometimes limited by the engine you are using for 3D.
Too many variables tbh.
Indeed I agree, however, rather than think of modding or re-writing the code, Microsoft would setup the DXAssembly foundation and each GPU Manufacturer would release a library or "Class", if you want to think about it objectively, in which the DxAPI Assembly language is catered specifically to this GPU. The Lib was provided by a reputable vendor such as nVidia or AMD, and has WHQL certification. I don't see how this is much different with what we do with drivers these days.

We probably will never see it, was just my thoughts on the subject.

I also disagree that we have 10 times the potential of a console but we don't show it, or there is so much overhead. The fact of the matter is all of that is relative to the game, relative to the drivers, relative to the image quality, and relative to the hardware.

If developers spent the level of scrutiny they had to learn to program on these consoles, we would have dozens of not only higher quality titles, but better running titles on the PC. They have the ability to be lazy on the PC as our more powerful GPUs compensate for their lack of efficiency. To me it seems they are obsessed with getting more raw performance out of the consoles, and honestly don't even give PCs a second thought once it works and is patched up.
Edited by RagingCain - 3/16/11 at 8:32am
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Reply
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Reply
post #25 of 107
If only, if only...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kand View Post
Lazy devs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by article
Huddy says that one of the most common requests he gets from game developers is: 'Make the API go away.'
IntelAsylum R2.1
(14 items)
 
M11xR2
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k ASRock Z77 Extreme6 MSI GTX 970 GAMING 4G 16GB Ripjaw X 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
R0: 2x1TB WD Se Samsung 840 EVO LG UH12LS28 BDD Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell E2414H x2 M$ Sidewinder x4 Seasonic 600W CM HAF 932A 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitec M705 MouseMat 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7 GT335m 1gb 4gb ddr3 Sandisk 128GB SSD 
OS
Windows/Linux/Depends 
  hide details  
Reply
IntelAsylum R2.1
(14 items)
 
M11xR2
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k ASRock Z77 Extreme6 MSI GTX 970 GAMING 4G 16GB Ripjaw X 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
R0: 2x1TB WD Se Samsung 840 EVO LG UH12LS28 BDD Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell E2414H x2 M$ Sidewinder x4 Seasonic 600W CM HAF 932A 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitec M705 MouseMat 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7 GT335m 1gb 4gb ddr3 Sandisk 128GB SSD 
OS
Windows/Linux/Depends 
  hide details  
Reply
post #26 of 107
That would be wonderful
post #27 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by RagingCain View Post
There is no way devs will start using assembly to make games on a specific GPU. Its just not going to happen.

Instead, it would be worth looking at turning DirectX 11 API into an assmebly language driven beast.

Everytime a new manufacturer has a new GPU, they submit their edited DirectX library to review from Microsoft. That would be way smarter than forcing the game developers to incorporate madness into their game design.

Thats just my opinion. Its entirely an option and would require GPU manufactures to step up. DX12 API calls executed in assembly language I think is the closest we will ever see this. We have them writing drivers already, lets just make the DX libraries a requirement too!
I agree. i remember using low level programing in my university for a project, i was making an automated production line.

It was a lot of lines in assembly just to make a division or any basic function.

Nowadays, developers are whining about piracy to justify the fact of crappy pc games, i can't imagine them using low level programing.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k Asus p8p67 Deluxe MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozr III SLI Corsair Vengeance 8GB 1866 Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Spinpoint F3 Raid0 WD green 2tb OCZ vertex 120gb Lite on DVD Burner Lightscribe  Windows 7 ultimate 64 bit ASUS VK286Q Led Monitor 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G510 Corsair AX 850W Cooler Master HAF-X Logitech G700 
Mouse Pad
Razer Vespula 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k Asus p8p67 Deluxe MSI GTX 570 Twin Frozr III SLI Corsair Vengeance 8GB 1866 Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Spinpoint F3 Raid0 WD green 2tb OCZ vertex 120gb Lite on DVD Burner Lightscribe  Windows 7 ultimate 64 bit ASUS VK286Q Led Monitor 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G510 Corsair AX 850W Cooler Master HAF-X Logitech G700 
Mouse Pad
Razer Vespula 
  hide details  
Reply
post #28 of 107
yes please
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
amd i5-750@3.6ghz gigabyte P7P55D Nvidia HD5770 4gb kingston XMS 
Hard DriveOSCaseMouse
500gb seagate black gentoo none logitech deathadder 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
amd i5-750@3.6ghz gigabyte P7P55D Nvidia HD5770 4gb kingston XMS 
Hard DriveOSCaseMouse
500gb seagate black gentoo none logitech deathadder 
  hide details  
Reply
post #29 of 107
So... it's better to do a software render using the computational power of rendering hardware instead of just using the hardware rendering??????
ASUS
(13 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i7 720QM Radeon Mobile 5730 8GB DDR3 1333 Corsair force 3 ssd 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
DVD Super Multi Windows 7 Enterprise/Ultimate 16" 1366 x 768 LED backlight LCD Logitech MK320 
CaseMouse
N61JQ-X1 Razer Abyssus 
  hide details  
Reply
ASUS
(13 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i7 720QM Radeon Mobile 5730 8GB DDR3 1333 Corsair force 3 ssd 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
DVD Super Multi Windows 7 Enterprise/Ultimate 16" 1366 x 768 LED backlight LCD Logitech MK320 
CaseMouse
N61JQ-X1 Razer Abyssus 
  hide details  
Reply
post #30 of 107
So next generation consoles could be faster than PC's due to the slow draws of the DirectX API.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Game News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [BitTech] Farewell to DirectX?