Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Toms/BT] DirectX Holding Back Game Performance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Toms/BT] DirectX Holding Back Game Performance

post #1 of 61
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Outside a few current developers who have announced that PC game development will take priority over console versions, a good chunk of the gaming industry is developing titles for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 first and then porting them over to the PC thereafter. The result is that PC versions are only slightly superior to their console counterparts on a visual sense even though a high-end graphics card has at least ten times the horsepower of the Xbox 360's Xenos GPU and the PlayStation 3's GeForce 7-series architecture.

What this means is that-- although PC graphics are better than the console version-- developers can't tap into the PC's true potential because they can't program hardware directly at a low-level, forced to work through DirectX instead. But there are benefits to working with APIs including the ability to develop a game that will run on a wide range of hardware. Developers also get access to the latest shader technologies without having to work with low-level code.
Tom's Hardware

Bit-Tech's interview with AMD's head of GPU developer relations, Richard Huddy

I think these guys have been reading our minds. Game innovation has slowed to a crawl in the last year. We deserve better games, as I'm currently having to entertain myself-*gasp*-OUTDOORS until Crysis 2. (And if that sucks I guess I'll be getting in shape till BF3)
Nytehawk Redux
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 3.8GHz P6X58D Premium EVGA GTX 580 3GB SLI 9GB Patriot Viper 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
120gb Phoenix Pro SSD//640gb WD Black//1tb F1 Plextor DVD-RW SATA Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 3x Acer 22" portrait 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G11 White Antec TPQ 1200W NZXT Phantom White Razer Deathadder 3.5g 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries XL 
  hide details  
Reply
Nytehawk Redux
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 3.8GHz P6X58D Premium EVGA GTX 580 3GB SLI 9GB Patriot Viper 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
120gb Phoenix Pro SSD//640gb WD Black//1tb F1 Plextor DVD-RW SATA Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 3x Acer 22" portrait 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G11 White Antec TPQ 1200W NZXT Phantom White Razer Deathadder 3.5g 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries XL 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 61
Repost

http://www.overclock.net/video-game-...l-directx.html
Lawlputer
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X3 720 BE 3.5Ghz Asus Crosshair IV Formula VisionTek 6950 2GB G.SKILL 2x4GB Ripjaws X DDR3 2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Vertex WD Caviar Green WD Caviar Green WD Caviar Green 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOptical DriveOS
WD Caviar Black Pioneer DVD Burner LiteOn DVD Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64-Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VW266H 25.5" Microsoft Reclusa Gaming Keyboard Antec Truepower Quattro 850W CoolerMaster HAF 932 Limited AMD Edition 
Mouse
Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
Lawlputer
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X3 720 BE 3.5Ghz Asus Crosshair IV Formula VisionTek 6950 2GB G.SKILL 2x4GB Ripjaws X DDR3 2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Vertex WD Caviar Green WD Caviar Green WD Caviar Green 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOptical DriveOS
WD Caviar Black Pioneer DVD Burner LiteOn DVD Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64-Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VW266H 25.5" Microsoft Reclusa Gaming Keyboard Antec Truepower Quattro 850W CoolerMaster HAF 932 Limited AMD Edition 
Mouse
Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 61
Thread Starter 
pwnt
Nytehawk Redux
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 3.8GHz P6X58D Premium EVGA GTX 580 3GB SLI 9GB Patriot Viper 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
120gb Phoenix Pro SSD//640gb WD Black//1tb F1 Plextor DVD-RW SATA Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 3x Acer 22" portrait 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G11 White Antec TPQ 1200W NZXT Phantom White Razer Deathadder 3.5g 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries XL 
  hide details  
Reply
Nytehawk Redux
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 3.8GHz P6X58D Premium EVGA GTX 580 3GB SLI 9GB Patriot Viper 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
120gb Phoenix Pro SSD//640gb WD Black//1tb F1 Plextor DVD-RW SATA Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 3x Acer 22" portrait 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G11 White Antec TPQ 1200W NZXT Phantom White Razer Deathadder 3.5g 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries XL 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 61
What does DirectX have to do with it if the PS3 does it all in OpenGL?
Bye Bye 775
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k @ 4.5GHz ASUS P8P67 PRO MSI GTX 660 Ti Power Edition  2x4gb Ripjaws@1866MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
840Pro 128 | 3xWD Vraptor | 1.5TB Green LG 6X Blu-ray /HD-DVD combo Win7 Ultimate 64bit 2 x U2311H 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G710+ Corsair HX620 Corsair 600t Logitech G500 
  hide details  
Reply
Bye Bye 775
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k @ 4.5GHz ASUS P8P67 PRO MSI GTX 660 Ti Power Edition  2x4gb Ripjaws@1866MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
840Pro 128 | 3xWD Vraptor | 1.5TB Green LG 6X Blu-ray /HD-DVD combo Win7 Ultimate 64bit 2 x U2311H 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G710+ Corsair HX620 Corsair 600t Logitech G500 
  hide details  
Reply
post #5 of 61
Consoles Anything with DirectX 9 will always be the weakest link.

Software is only as good as the programmer, or whoever makes the game. Don't blame the toolset, blame lazy developers and consoles for keeping us on DirectX 9. DX10 and DX11 are much easier to code for, and easier to add better graphics too, because they are already there, they don't need to be created from scratch.

Textures, however, do. If a game is multiplatform, the textures will most likely look crappy. Devs make it easier on themselves by creating one set of textures for use on each platform, and if the weakest link (one of the consoles) can't hack the high res textures, they get dumbed down for everyone.

If a dev creates high res textures for the high-performance platform first, to find out they don't give good performance on a console, then they create a new set of textures for the weaker platform, and you still get the good ones on PC. Look at Metro 2033, Just Cause 2 and other games that fully or mostly utilise DX10 or DX11.

Just Cause 2 is a shining example of what you can do with time and dedication. The game is DX10 only, it performs brilliantly on every platform. The visuals are stunning, even if the game itself isn't much more than mindless destruction.

Happy now you bloody whiners?

Consoles will always be the weakest link.
Edited by linkin93 - 3/20/11 at 2:03am
post #6 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by linkin93 View Post
Consoles will always be the weakest link.
Have you read the article at all?
Battle Station
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Dual Xeon E5520 Quad Core @ 2.27GHz ASUS Z8NA-D6 Aspeed AST2050 6 GB DDR3 
Hard Drive
2 x 500 GB 
  hide details  
Reply
Battle Station
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Dual Xeon E5520 Quad Core @ 2.27GHz ASUS Z8NA-D6 Aspeed AST2050 6 GB DDR3 
Hard Drive
2 x 500 GB 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7 of 61
MS won't drop Directx, it's one of the main reasons PC gamers use Windows.

I agree with AMD, Directx is holding us back, it's kinda like Java opposed to C. C is way faster.
post #8 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenthos View Post
MS won't drop Directx, it's one of the main reasons PC gamers use Windows.

I agree with AMD, Directx is holding us back, it's kinda like Java opposed to C. C is way faster.
Java is platform independent....
post #9 of 61
Just because you read the article and surmised an opinion does not mean every will share that same opinion. You need to change the title to fit the title of the article. No changing the title as per the rules of posting.


Quote:
Originally Posted by linkin93 View Post
Consoles will always be the weakest link.
Something tells me you didn't read the article:

Quote:
'It can vary from almost nothing at all to a huge overhead,' says Huddy. 'If you're just rendering a screen full of pixels which are not terribly complicated, then typically a PC will do just as good a job as a console. These days we have so much horsepower on PCs that on high-resolutions you see some pretty extraordinary-looking PC games, but one of the things that you don't see in PC gaming inside the software architecture is the kind of stuff that we see on consoles all the time.

On consoles, you can draw maybe 10,000 or 20,000 chunks of geometry in a frame, and you can do that at 30-60fps. On a PC, you can't typically draw more than 2-3,000 without getting into trouble with performance, and that's quite surprising - the PC can actually show you only a tenth of the performance if you need a separate batch for each draw call.



And PCs don't have "ten times the horsepower." Its not running games at 10x the resolution or 10x the frame rate and how many people have a GTX 580 or a 6970? According to Steam hardware polls, they are of the absolute minority so it hardly means that we will see some amazing new breakthrough if every developer switched from a high-level programming language to a low-level one. You still have to develop games for the most common denominator and I wager that most gamers still have 8800GTs, 4870s, etc. which, if you look at the specifications, are no were close to having 10x the shaders or bandwidth of consoles.

Furthermore, the reason Direct3D is so popular is because you don't have to program at near-machine-code or low level to get great results. Developers could bypass the API but why spend millions doing so when an API is already made...

Quote:
Of course, there are many definite pros to using a standard 3D API. It's likely that your game will run on a wide range of hardware, and you'll get easy access to the latest shader technologies without having to muck around with scary low-level code. However, the performance overhead of DirectX, particularly on the PC architecture, is apparently becoming a frustrating concern for games developers speaking to AMD.
In my opinion, Innovation has always started on consoles rather than PC and this just solidifies my feelings even more:
Quote:
But it's still very hard to throw tremendous variety into a PC game. If you want each of your draw calls to be a bit different, then you can't get over about 2-3,000 draw calls typically - and certainly a maximum amount of 5,000. Games developers definitely have a need for that. Console games often use 10-20,000 draw calls per frame, and that's an easier way to let the artist's vision shine through.'
Quote:
Consoles also have a major bonus over PCs here, which is their fixed architecture. If you program direct-to-metal on the PlayStation 3's GPU, then you know your code will work on every PS3. The same can't be said on the PC, where we have numerous different GPU architectures from different manufacturers that work in different ways.

Edited by BizzareRide - 3/19/11 at 1:15am
Po' Pimpin'
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
i5 2500k @ stock Biostar TZ68K+ [A3] 4GB  Sandforce 1222 64GB SSD 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG 22x DVD-+RW  Stock Windows 7 x64 Acer S211HL 1080p 
PowerCaseMouse
600w Diablotek Linkworld Electronic Inland 
  hide details  
Reply
Po' Pimpin'
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
i5 2500k @ stock Biostar TZ68K+ [A3] 4GB  Sandforce 1222 64GB SSD 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG 22x DVD-+RW  Stock Windows 7 x64 Acer S211HL 1080p 
PowerCaseMouse
600w Diablotek Linkworld Electronic Inland 
  hide details  
Reply
post #10 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by JTD92 View Post
Java is platform independent....
I know, I was just trying to explain in terms of speed.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Software News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Toms/BT] DirectX Holding Back Game Performance