• How different do games look in DX11 and DX12? Err... not very
    16 replies, posted
[url]http://www.pcgamesn.com/ashes-of-the-singularity/how-different-does-ashes-of-the-singularity-look-in-dx11-and-dx12-err-not-very[/url]
No fucking kidding, it's almost like graphical effects are made by the game developers and not the hardware
Hasn't the major pushing point between DX11 and 12 been more efficient pipelining or something like that?
[QUOTE=kyle877;49375121]Hasn't the major pushing point between DX11 and 12 been more efficient pipelining or something like that?[/QUOTE] Much higher "overhead" (I forgot what that means) with less power consumption, clears out the largely single-thread dependent DX11 rendering for multithreaded optimizations and Asynchronous shaders (Which AMD has had since 7000 series / GCN1.0) An interesting note, is that when pushed to DX12, an r9 290x was able to catch up to a GTX980 on the Ashes benchmark.
I'm actually curious if there is an article in the universe that's worse than this one
please kill this bot
[QUOTE=Daemon White;49375142]Much higher "overhead" (I forgot what that means) with less power consumption, clears out the largely single-thread dependent DX11 rendering for multithreaded optimizations and Asynchronous shaders (Which AMD has had since 7000 series / GCN1.0) An interesting note, is that when pushed to DX12, an r9 290x was able to catch up to a GTX980 on the Ashes benchmark.[/QUOTE] Well when speaking threads and parallelism I thought overhead was the work and time it takes to ensure concurrency, like using locks and barriers to ensure that a parallel program arrives at the correct result i.e. doesn't have data races or deadlocks. In that sense a large overhead would be a bad thing for performance, as it takes more time to make the program work correctly. Maybe they have a different interpretation, it should be less though as Cold said below.
[QUOTE=Daemon White;49375142]Much higher "overhead" (I forgot what that means) with less power consumption, clears out the largely single-thread dependent DX11 rendering for multithreaded optimizations and Asynchronous shaders (Which AMD has had since 7000 series / GCN1.0) An interesting note, is that when pushed to DX12, an r9 290x was able to catch up to a GTX980 on the Ashes benchmark.[/QUOTE] Less driver overhead, not more. Excess/indirect computation-time/resource-use when perform an operation. [editline]23rd December 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Asgard;49375065]No fucking kidding, it's almost like graphical effects are made by the game developers and not the hardware[/QUOTE] Well from a consumer standpoint this was true for previous directx transitions. Dx10, Dx11 came combined with hardware features, so there where visual differences in the games that supported them. They outline it pretty well the article, the title is just clickbait.
[QUOTE=Coffeee;49375183]please kill this bot[/QUOTE] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498700[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498662[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498686[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498682[/url] yeah let's ignore these decent articles on the front page mr. edgy McGivemeagrees
[QUOTE=Daemon White;49375142]Much higher "overhead" (I forgot what that means) with less power consumption, clears out the largely single-thread dependent DX11 rendering for multithreaded optimizations and Asynchronous shaders (Which AMD has had since 7000 series / GCN1.0) An interesting note, is that when pushed to DX12, an r9 290x was able to catch up to a GTX980 on the Ashes benchmark.[/QUOTE] Wasn't it also able to use 2 graphics cards from different brands together and yeld better results than 2 of the same brand aswell?
[QUOTE=redBadger;49376166][url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498700[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498662[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498686[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498682[/url] yeah let's ignore these decent articles on the front page mr. edgy McGivemeagrees[/QUOTE] 3 of those are just regurgitated press releases anyone could do, the other was old news before it went up
[QUOTE=redBadger;49376166][url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498700[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498662[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498686[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498682[/url] yeah let's ignore these decent articles on the front page mr. edgy McGivemeagrees[/QUOTE] Copy and pasted Press releases and plagurized Kotaku articles a good post/bot does not make so your argument is invalid.
[QUOTE=Daemon White;49375142]Much higher "overhead" (I forgot what that means) with less power consumption, clears out the largely single-thread dependent DX11 rendering for multithreaded optimizations and Asynchronous shaders (Which AMD has had since 7000 series / GCN1.0) An interesting note, is that when pushed to DX12, an r9 290x was able to catch up to a GTX980 on the Ashes benchmark.[/QUOTE] Because maxwell doesn't do asynchronous anything.
[QUOTE=Bruhmis;49375179]I'm actually curious if there is an article in the universe that's worse than this one[/QUOTE] Eh it's because a lot of people still rmember the dx9 vs dx10 era where a lot of games did look significantly better running under dx10. But they don't realise the reasons for that.
[QUOTE=Asgard;49375065]No fucking kidding, it's almost like graphical effects are made by the game developers and not the hardware[/QUOTE] Which is exactly what the article is saying.
[QUOTE=redBadger;49376166][url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498700[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498662[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498686[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1498682[/url] yeah let's ignore these decent articles on the front page mr. edgy McGivemeagrees[/QUOTE] That news we can get anywhere else?
The advances in parallelism alone far outweigh "better graphics".. Eugh PcGamesN.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.