Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 125 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,762 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Source

Quote:
For now, you can likely find that DirectX 12 is not a magic cure for all the PC gamers' problems , and the performance of individual components, and even the two hostile camps, in individual games will be the greatest extent depend on the developers: some games will run faster on computers Nvidia card, while others - for configurations with AMD cards, and sometimes will drop in performance after switching to newer API. The only question arises, what the situation is different from the present.
*google translate

Worth a read.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,492 Posts
Hope I'm not late the hate party.

DX12 was never intended to cure cancer, this is pure clickbait, the article and many developers make it sound as if the only and perfect API would be one capable of taking over their jobs to code and optimize itself.

The fact is DX12 is way better suited to take performance from our current and future GPUs, so much in fact that we are finally seeing especial hardware like ACEs being used and not wasted on idle 100% of the time. I would say the fact alone that the CPU is finally more multithreaded is worth it IMO, we have long hit a wall where IPC is getting scarce and hard to come by, same as clock speeds so you must ask yourself, "whats left?" as to which the answer would be "Cores, extra cores", DX12 is the first step into the future, where we wont be limited by clocks or IPC as we are today, 64 Cores is possible, 30GHz is not.

The only downside I've ever thought of is the fact we're trading a master API for a Low level API, and with "Master API" I refer to previous DirectX version as a Butler, one that would serve as a 3rd party that would make sure all of your commands are being carried out, your schedule, orders and endeavors are all in time without issues like translating into foreign languages you can't understand, we could have gained the advantages of DX12 over APIs like DX11 if Devs, Microsoft and IHVs would all come to an agreement.

As we move into the future, how would games behaving spectacularly on Polaris, Vega, Pascal and Volta will behave on architectures made 10 years later? will we enter a time where we will need to use emulators to play Battlefield 5 on the newer GPU architectures because low levels APIs today like DX12 are so different that aren't compatible with newer architectures requiring DirectX 14? a time where X or Y game would need a X or Y GPU to work?

I never play old games, and Emulators to brute force anything so old would come without any noticeable performance penalty, I say we made the right move trading compatibility with performance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie View Post

This just in! Game performance still relies on developers doing their jobs, even in DX 12!
Exactly. If anything it relies on them doing their jobs more than before, on previous APIs.

Imo, at this stage they're still mostly designing their games around the previous APIs, while including functionality from the new, and still haven't learned how to use the new ones yet. To me, this is pretty much expected for now.

I'm mostly impressed by the adoption rate so far. In comparison to DX11. Which took years. Mainly due to a certain pair of boxes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodean View Post

Exactly. If anything it relies on them doing their jobs more than before, on previous APIs.

Imo, at this stage they're still mostly designing their games around the previous APIs, while including functionality from the new, and still haven't learned how to use the new ones yet. To me, this is pretty much expected for now.

I'm mostly impressed by the adoption rate so far. In comparison to DX11. Which took years. Mainly due to a certain pair of boxes.
Im sick of seeing this nonsense. Consoles dont hold back pc gaming, PC gaming holds back PC gaming.
 

·
User
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
Companies over-hyping stuff,big news.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoLomgbbq View Post

Im sick of seeing this nonsense. Consoles dont hold back pc gaming, PC gaming holds back PC gaming.
He's right,in the specific case of DX11.

PS4 was launched in 2013,even HD 6970 back in 2010/2011 was a DX11 GPU.

PS3 packed a GTX 7800 or something close to that...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,398 Posts
What we saw so far is that if a game is sponsored by AMD we see big benefits from DX12 (Hitman and Ashes of Singularity especially).

If it's an nVidia title, we see lose of performance going from DX11 to Dx12 (Tomb Rider).

GoW isn't a real DX12 game.

That's all we can tell for now.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: LAKEINTEL

·
Performance is the bible
Joined
·
7,135 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ha-Nocri View Post

What we saw so far is that if a game is sponsored by AMD we see big benefits from DX12 (Hitman and Ashes of Singularity especially).

If it's an nVidia title, we see lose of performance going from DX11 to Dx12 (Tomb Rider).

GoW isn't a real DX12 game.

That's all we can tell for now.
Apples and oranges.

DX12 is an API. And right now AMD titles are running well on well... AMD.
Tomb raider is not a nvidia title. It is just as well be a AMD title. AMD have been really promoting all tomb raider titles for showcasing their tressFX/purehair.

Also since DX12 needs to be completely made and optimised by the developers, different developers might make it run better or worse, depends on how they are implementing things.

Nvidia GW titles have nothing to do with this, as GW is an added bonus on top of the running API, and those can be turned off to give you the normal DX11/DX12 benefits regardless.
Also they have not shown any settings done or what was active or not, so those assumptions are pretty baseless.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,181 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodean View Post

Exactly. If anything it relies on them doing their jobs more than before, on previous APIs.

Imo, at this stage they're still mostly designing their games around the previous APIs, while including functionality from the new, and still haven't learned how to use the new ones yet. To me, this is pretty much expected for now.

I'm mostly impressed by the adoption rate so far. In comparison to DX11. Which took years. Mainly due to a certain pair of boxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoLomgbbq View Post

Im sick of seeing this nonsense. Consoles dont hold back pc gaming, PC gaming holds back PC gaming.
You're both kind of right.

Consoles help push forwards PC Gaming and Gaming in general, and they can also hold it back

Look at the games that have released throughout the current console generation on Consoles and PC, they're leaps and bounds above last generation titles, especially multi-platform titles.

The new consoles have given the developers new technology to work with, you could possibly call it the lowest common denominator.
The PlayStation 4 and the Xbox One set a new benchmark in terms of hardware for developers to work with, instead of the ancient Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3, which had a life cycle of around 7-8 years.

However these consoles have GPU hardware that had existed a year prior to their release, which wasn't even the best on offer. And in the same year more powerful GPUs had also released.

Because consoles are expected to have life cycles that are longer than 3 years, the developers will continue to optimize and get the best performance they can out of the systems, the last console generation showed this very well.

However their ancient hardware with many limitations did hold back gaming in general, in terms of the complexity of the games, this affects the multi-platform titles on PCs quite alot.

Undoubtedly, if the current console generation had more powerful hardware more would be done with, but they have still done some great things with what they have, all while raising the benchmark in gaming.

The console games you are seeing now are effectively running on upgraded and customized 2012 GPU technology, power that had existed a year prior on PC that wasn't even the highest end available. With the bar being raised higher with AMD's launch of the 290X almost a month before the PlayStation 4's launch.

It's a weird situation which has it's advantages and it's disadvantages. But if anything, consoles do help PC Gaming and Gaming in general. But as they age, they can do more harm than good with the limited and ageing resources they have.
 

·
User
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
  • Rep+
Reactions: LAKEINTEL

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,248 Posts
postal is right no matter how much we all fight about APIs, etc.
if the devs dont do their job well enough, then nothing can save the perf of the game.
 

·
FOCAL ARIA FTW
Joined
·
9,351 Posts
A decade later we conclude that games don't work well if programming is sloppy or drivers are bad
biggrin.gif
. What will we conclude in 2030? Water is wet ?
biggrin.gif
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: LAKEINTEL

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,816 Posts
This is pretty beastly tbh:



But AMD gets killed in GoW (DX12 only):



Hope the high-end Polaris is comparable to Pascal and can OC worth a damn. Will probably end up buying one anyway to play with.
 

·
Top kek
Joined
·
3,578 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowHardCanItBe View Post

Welcome to the real world. Progress is incremental.
That actually makes it look worse.
Ugh, why ? You get 30% more performance, the CPU is utilized in total 20% more on all threads. If its eye candy, mind that thisis just reworked base engine, that exchanges DX 11 for DX12.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: LAKEINTEL
1 - 20 of 125 Posts
Top