| Page 1 of 2 |
Mutantius
VIP Member
Posts: 18594
Location: In Elektro looking for beans
|
 Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 19:10 Post subject: The death of directX? AMD does not think nor know so! |
|
 |
This is a strange story that is difficult to make sense of. An AMD Vice President of Global Channel Sales, Roy Taylor, has said that there will be no DirectX12 at any time in the future.
Of course you could say what does a VP of Global Channel Sales know about what Microsoft is up to, even if he did work for NVIDIA for ten years previously. On the other hand, why would he say something so provocative in an interview with German magazine, Heise.de.
In discussing the new trend for graphics card manufacturers to release top quality games bundles registered to the serial number of the card, Taylor explains that his is the way to go now that the DirectX update cycle is no longer driving the market.
"..the computer industry has benefited over the years from the constant updating of DirectX. Over and over again a new DirectX has refreshed the industry; new graphics cards need more powerful processors and more RAM. But there will be no DirectX 12. That's it. To our knowledge there are no plans for DirectX 12 If someone wants to correct me - wonderful. But now we really need excellent games like Crysis or Bioshock Infinite 3, on the one hand to encourage the industry and also to reward our buyers. Never Settle is therefore strategically very important for us and will continue to include top titles."
So basically the argument seems is that no more DirectX releases means a smaller market for new and cutting edge graphics cards and that bundling games, like AMD's recent Never Settle bundle, is designed to keep the market moving.
For some reason the interviewer doesn't persuade the matter of no DirectX 12.
So AMD seems to be basing its marketing on the assumption that there will be no further development of DirectX. This is not the first time that this rumor has surfaced. Back in January Microsoft sent a letter to its MVPs saying
"DirectX is no longer evolving as a technology. Given the status within each technology, further value and engagement cannot be offered to the MVP community."
This was later clarified in a second email to mean that XNA was being discontinued but DirectX was an on going concern:
โDirectX is no longer evolving as a technology.โ
That is definitely not true in any way, shape or form. Microsoft is actively investing in DirectX as the unified graphics foundation for our key platforms, including Xbox 360, Windows Phone and Windows. DirectX is evolving and will continue to evolve. For instance, right now weโre investing in some very cool graphics code authorizing [sic] technology in Visual Studio. We have absolutely no intention of stopping innovation with DirectX
So DirectX is going to be the unified graphics foundation, but that doesn't mean that there will be a DirectX 12.
There is a huge amount of confusion over what DirectX is. Over time, the "Direct" brand accumulated any technology that was multimedia- related and now, over slightly less time, it seems to be shedding those components. Today we have Direct2D and Direct3D, which seem to be important graphics libraries and the rest are either deprecated, if you read the fine print, or in some other sort of limbo.
It is clear that AMD is suggesting that there will be no future version of Direct3D because it is only this that impacts its graphics hardware. So perhaps it is true that 3D graphics has become so mature that no new features are needed and hence no DirectX 12 is needed. Microsoft will continue to make use of it, integrate it and exploit it, but not extend it.
To be clear, it isn't a fact that there will be no DirectX 12, but AMD seems to be planing its future business on that basis.
As always, some clarity would be welcome, but Microsoft isn't good at clarity when it comes to changes to frameworks that developers might not like.
Saw the story on bluesnews here
http://www.bluesnews.com/s/140749/amd-says-no-more-directx
"Why don't you zip it, Zipfero?" - fraich3
Last edited by Mutantius on Sun, 14th Apr 2013 04:38; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 19:26 Post subject: |
|
|
Death? Absolutely not.
It's pretty mature technology and there aren't any major additions they can add that would make graphics much better. That's up to the developers.
Most developers are just getting a proper grasp on DirectX11, with the advent of next gen, and new possible features aren't even being considered.
Plus the need to advance DirectX isn't as high as it used to be. With with libraries like CUDA, OpenCL, DirectCompute or others so you are free to program the GPU as you wish for the most part. Most things that are missing in DirectX can be performed using those.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34485
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 19:54 Post subject: |
|
|
DX10 and DX11 didn't really bring a whole lot to the table that really mattered. I mean tesselation? Who the fuck can even notice it in games. Shit is usually moving so fast that the only way you notice is if you stop and stare at a dead body.
People can hate on AMD for the tressfx being a stupid addition to a game with comments like "hhuuurrr look at the nice hair" but really..it's just another step towards making games more life like. People complain that gfx aren't good enough for a game to play, but when a game does come out with a new idea to push realism, they scoff at it, especially if it taxes their system.
I really don't see a point in DX12 until all devs are getting used to and master the recent ones, hell...how many games are still coming out as DX9 that look amazing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 19:59 Post subject: |
|
|
| SpykeZ wrote: | | I mean tesselation? Who the fuck can even notice it in games. |
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 19:59 Post subject: |
|
|
TressFX is a step to make games "life like" as much as PhysX and ApeX are. 
Also, the TressFX is anything but realistic. Have you actually enabled it?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:04 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | TressFX is a step to make games "life like" as much as PhysX and ApeX are.
Also, the TressFX is anything but realistic. Have you actually enabled it? |
Ya, and it looks better than static hair. Difference between that and Physx is you don't need proprietary hardware to run it, and physx has been a joke since day one with shitty unrealistic "physics." Shoot the ground and "pepples" the size of baseballs pop up.
I'm pretty sure people just need to invest more in Havok. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:08 Post subject: |
|
|
That's a nice dramatic title there Volff, a little too much if you ask me because he didn't say it's dead; dead would imply that it's being overtaken by something else (OGL) and that's certainly not the case 
He's right though, there is no immediate need for a D3D12. There's not much it could add which current/near-future hardware could actually run at an acceptable level in real-time. D3D11 already brought most of what D3D9 needed.
| SpykeZ wrote: | | DX10 and DX11 didn't really bring a whole lot to the table that really mattered. I mean tesselation? Who the fuck can even notice it in games. Shit is usually moving so fast that the only way you notice is if you stop and stare at a dead body. |
So, so, so, SO wrong. Why the fuck do people always go "HURR DURR DX11 DOES NOTHING LOL TESSELLATION SUCKS" yet that's only D3D11's marketing gimmick?
D3D has a fucking crapton of performance improvements under the hood (a game with D3D9 level graphics runs much faster under D3D11). It also has a lot of improvements when it comes to what can be done with/to textures. DirectCompute is also a pretty big deal.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sin317
Banned
Posts: 24322
Location: Geneva
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:09 Post subject: |
|
|
unless they want to build an entirely new API from scratch, i dont think directx is "dead" lol (and by dead i mean , not evolving further).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:10 Post subject: |
|
|
| SpykeZ wrote: | | LeoNatan wrote: | TressFX is a step to make games "life like" as much as PhysX and ApeX are.
Also, the TressFX is anything but realistic. Have you actually enabled it? |
Ya, and it looks better than static hair. Difference between that and Physx is you don't need proprietary hardware to run it, and physx has been a joke since day one with shitty unrealistic "physics." Shoot the ground and "pepples" the size of baseballs pop up.
I'm pretty sure people just need to invest more in Havok. |
Not sure what hair you've seen, but neither does real hair look like the TressFX in Tomb Raider. Also "real hair" is as necessary as tessellation, by your definition, since "everything moves so fast". I'd prefer properly written tessellation because it increases geometry detail a lot more. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:10 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:12 Post subject: |
|
|
| Werelds wrote: | That's a nice dramatic title there Volff, a little too much if you ask me because he didn't say it's dead; dead would imply that it's being overtaken by something else (OGL) and that's certainly not the case
He's right though, there is no immediate need for a D3D12. There's not much it could add which current/near-future hardware could actually run at an acceptable level in real-time. D3D11 already brought most of what D3D9 needed.
| SpykeZ wrote: | | DX10 and DX11 didn't really bring a whole lot to the table that really mattered. I mean tesselation? Who the fuck can even notice it in games. Shit is usually moving so fast that the only way you notice is if you stop and stare at a dead body. |
So, so, so, SO wrong. Why the fuck do people always go "HURR DURR DX11 DOES NOTHING LOL TESSELLATION SUCKS" yet that's only D3D11's marketing gimmick?
D3D has a fucking crapton of performance improvements under the hood (a game with D3D9 level graphics runs much faster under D3D11). It also has a lot of improvements when it comes to what can be done with/to textures. DirectCompute is also a pretty big deal. |
Because mutithreaded improvements mean shit to most people, and DirectCompute gets called "TressFX by AMD"
And afair, there is still not one game to properly use geometry shader.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34485
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:13 Post subject: |
|
|
Geometry shader (DX10) and compute shader (DX11) are mostly used for more subtle effects though so it's understandable that most people don't see much of a difference, even tessellation the way it's currently mostly used (Nice of Assassins Creed 3 to do things a bit differently.) isn't very noticeable in most situations.
Which can also work really well, it's there but you just see the whole picture, not the individual effects, better immersion or something akin to that. 
Oh and yeah those geometry shaders and compute shaders are also often used on effects that really hit performance, depth of field in Metro 2033, fur in Lost Planet, HDAO in Stalker: Clear Sky and so on. 
(But I'm sure it can be used for much more, which I guess also works for tessellation to for example control model polygon count more dynamically - maybe also replace parallax which has some drawbacks or limitations when GPU's become even more powerful in a generation or two.)
"Next-gen" console hardware should at least boost the number of DirectX 11 supportive titles though how well they'll use the API remains to be seen.
(Then again the x86 common architecture might improve optimization, that would be quite nice but that's a different issue.)
EDIT: Oh and right, Lost Planet wasn't the only game to use geometry shaders, Crysis 1 had a console command to use it for it's shadows, not that it made much of a difference.
(gs_shadows or what it was, I don't remember.)
(I think Clear Sky and Call of Pripyat used it for some stuff too but I don't know the X-Ray engine all too well.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:21 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | Werelds wrote: | That's a nice dramatic title there Volff, a little too much if you ask me because he didn't say it's dead; dead would imply that it's being overtaken by something else (OGL) and that's certainly not the case
He's right though, there is no immediate need for a D3D12. There's not much it could add which current/near-future hardware could actually run at an acceptable level in real-time. D3D11 already brought most of what D3D9 needed.
| SpykeZ wrote: | | DX10 and DX11 didn't really bring a whole lot to the table that really mattered. I mean tesselation? Who the fuck can even notice it in games. Shit is usually moving so fast that the only way you notice is if you stop and stare at a dead body. |
So, so, so, SO wrong. Why the fuck do people always go "HURR DURR DX11 DOES NOTHING LOL TESSELLATION SUCKS" yet that's only D3D11's marketing gimmick?
D3D has a fucking crapton of performance improvements under the hood (a game with D3D9 level graphics runs much faster under D3D11). It also has a lot of improvements when it comes to what can be done with/to textures. DirectCompute is also a pretty big deal. |
And afair, there is still not one game to properly use geometry shader. |
Well my main point is just that. Keep coming out with new DXs yet almost no one is utilizing the new technology. Might be ignorant to say but I would assume this is all being held back because all we get is lame console ports anymore. Wouldn't they have to rebuild the game to add a new DX to it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:22 Post subject: |
|
|
It's not ignorant, it's exactly the case. Console ports don't support new DX features. But you saying there is no need for DX12 is ignorant, because you propose to stall technology because that technology has not been used properly for the most part.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 20:29 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | But you saying there is no need for DX12 is ignorant, because you propose to stall technology because that technology has not been used properly for the most part. |
hmmm...I just woke up and half asleep haha, guess I didn't think what I said out too much eh? Retard comment retracted haha. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 21:01 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | Because mutithreaded improvements mean shit to most people, and DirectCompute gets called "TressFX by AMD"
And afair, there is still not one game to properly use geometry shader. |
Absolutely true on all counts there (although DC has been used by Civ 5 as well and there's several games which run their PPAA via DC  ). Still doesn't make D3D11 useless; it is in fact the most useful D3D update since D3D9a; 9c was good, but not this good.
D3D11 is just a very complete product as it stands; there's still plenty of smaller things they can add, but none of them are "12.0 worthy" - they should've been in 11.1 () or come in an 11.2 or something like that.
I can't think of anything they can add to D3D that would run acceptable and improve IQ a lot. Maybe there's things like PRT or stuff like that could be interesting if done well, but even the most high-end chips can easily be brought to their knees when you use D3D to its fullest even with reasonable settings (so no Crysis 2-like tessellation or even doing 64 tessellation samples on everything). Nvidia and AMD also don't have much room for big improvements in the near future. 20nm is expensive, not a particularly big jump forward from 28nm and the next half node is 14nm; which we most likely won't see until 2015 (IIRC, Samsung only had a 14nm chip tape out for the first time last December, TSMC is behind them). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 21:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Once the consoles are out and people start actually optimizing for DX11, like they did for DX9, you will suddenly see a lot of place where there can be added more features at low cost.
Also, DX10 was at one point to have support for hardware accelerated ray tracing. Talk about revolutionizing realtime computer graphics. It was removed due to pressure by nVidia and AMD, because they could not create the hardware in time (while Intel was ready to present a new hardware for that).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Sat, 13th Apr 2013 21:11 Post subject: |
|
|
Hahaha, Larrabee? You mean the product that never was, because while it could ray-trace, it *sucked* at everything else?
Ray tracing is the next logical step, but for that we definitely need 14nm. Intel's design for Larrabee is exactly what we need next (it was a very interesting architecture, Anand did some good articles on it if you're interested), but to fit that into a reasonable chip, 28nm just is still too big; at least without sacrificing the power GPUs have now
Edit: also, if you want to see what's left of Larrabee, look for "Xeon Phi"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyb3r
Posts: 615
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sun, 14th Apr 2013 00:28 Post subject: |
|
|
agreed werelds tho the issue with Dx11 is that the new features are only semi optimized at this point and tbh there aint a game that uses even half the potential of what DX11 is capable of it's allways the same old story devs allways lag behind dx version but that's mostly due to it taking a while to develop a full engine capable of abusing the potential of said dx version
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Sun, 14th Apr 2013 00:57 Post subject: |
|
|
| Cyb3r wrote: | | the issue with Dx11 is that the new features are only semi optimized at this point |
What? There isn't much to optimise. Tessellation is what it is, there's no optimising it further in software. DC can improve somewhat, but that's about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 14th Apr 2013 01:43 Post subject: |
|
|
I dont think ms wants to give other interfaces like opengl the possibiliy to raise. Thats something the linux gaming community is waiting for, for a long time... wouldnt be the smartest strategy from ms.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mutantius
VIP Member
Posts: 18594
Location: In Elektro looking for beans
|
| Posted: Sun, 14th Apr 2013 04:39 Post subject: |
|
|
Changed title for lulz and for Werelds <3
"Why don't you zip it, Zipfero?" - fraich3
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34485
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Sun, 14th Apr 2013 12:20 Post subject: |
|
|
| JBeckman wrote: | | Isn't tessellation using a multiplier? |
More or less, yeah. Just like MSAA, it takes X samples to do its thing.
That's not something that goes into D3D though, that's up to the developers. The algorithm itself is as optimised as it can get. The engines need to dynamically adjust the number of samples used, based on distance to an object (64 samples is always overdone, but even at a medium distances you don't need 16 or 32 samples to make it look good; only at very close ranges do you need that many samples). Same way CryTek needed to not suck and tessellate the water under the map |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 14th Apr 2013 12:24 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sun, 14th Apr 2013 15:09 Post subject: |
|
|
| FireMaster wrote: | | OpenGL please |
Crap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 15th Apr 2013 16:18 Post subject: |
|
|
AND YOUR FORGETTING ABOUT dx9 dx9a dx9b and dx9c
same will be with dx 11 dx11.1 dx11.2 etc...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Mon, 15th Apr 2013 16:30 Post subject: |
|
|
9.0a and b didn't do much.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
Posts: 51051
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Mon, 15th Apr 2013 16:32 Post subject: |
|
|
| Hfric wrote: | AND YOUR FORGETTING ABOUT dx9 dx9a dx9b and dx9c
same will be with dx 11 dx11.1 dx11.2 etc... |
And AC1's DX10.1 
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
