DirectX 12: The future of it within the console gaming space (specifically the XB1)

I thought it all rather had to do with the GPU than the game. My GPU is fairly modern, less than two years old. Still it is a rather average Intel HD3000 but my favourite game ever, Heroes of Might and Magic V can be resource hungry at times -GPU usage, RAM usage is really low-. I learnt how to handle that (shadow quality is the big issue for this GPU, and it has to be set as low as possible, 'cos the rest of the effects run really well without putting too much stress on the GPU) but if my GPU uses a new version of DirectX to run the game I thought that, by accessing some low level features it, it would be less demanding on my GPU.

 

Point is: Anything already running on XB1 is probably capable of any feature DX12 will allow other PCs to do. (unless the feature is terribly inefficient for the XB1 HW, but then DX12 won't help either) And XB1 probably does it more "efficiently" than any PC running DX12, being more bare bones than DX12.

But then if the API running on XB1 is shitty as hell, I could envision DX12 helping, but that's assuming Microsoft is more fail than we can possibly imagine in developing the XB1.

 

Beta is correct. Each game is its own self contained OS and code. If any existing game is to get any benefits of updated SDKs or Direct 12 or what have you, then they need to be specifically rewritten to take advantage of those updates. Only new games being developed around the newer items will benefit from them.

 

if they work on further reducing over head even on the console os it could bring in speed increases that will allow more games to hit 1080p /60 fps . But the system wont get more powerful just more efficient with the power already there.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that DX12 brings their equivalent of bindless resources to PC and XB1. It seems like a natural thing to pursue for both platforms, assuming that they don't already have something like that for XB1.

 

Hasn't it already been thoroughly established that 1080p60 on consoles makes no sense to developers? The kind of 1080p60 that never budges on framerate means you are leaving done performance on the table and brings no benefit to marketing since neither images or online video will show off those benefits (bit rate of online video is do poor it doesn't matter and YouTube doesn't do 60fps video).

 

I really hope this means that the hardware specs for PC GPUs running D3D12 includes 32MB of on-die super fast RAM. Preferably more.

I expect to be disappointed though.

 

Dude you crack me up!

 

I heard with this new DX12 upgrade you will be able to play two different games at once on two different displays.

Should be amazing...

Dude, you are kidding right?

 

Just needs to be 256MB and 1TB/s. There ought to be some sort of power savings implications there too.

 

April Fools is early I see.

 

Hummm... I see many people here still visit MisterXmedia. But hey...Some still believe in the easter bunny, and Santa.

Here's a declaration from AMD Vice President claiming that "as far as is company can see, there will not be a DirectX 12".

http://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/1...4-part-of-next-bundle-amd-vice-president.html

I believe that since AMD is the company that builds the Xbox One SOC, they would know about any new tech that could be DX12 related.

I believe this more than proves it that DX12 is nothing more than a lower level DX 11.2, maybe with some adicional standarizations, but that doesn´t require new hardware, and is beeing ready as a response to Mantle.

 

AMD's involvement in creating XB1's SoC is independent of MS's PC software division's efforts in creating APIs for PC. AMD's involvement as a major IHV in the PC space is more reason that they'd know if there was a DX12 on the roadmap, because one assumes MS would tell the IHVs what it is planning so the IHVs can work on drivers etc. If the IHVs haven't been included in DX12's development, that suggests to me that DX12 doesn't require any hardware that isn't present in DX11. I'd go as far to say this points to DX12 being something of a feature-identical rewrite with the emphasis of improving efficiency. I know plenty of long-term applications that get bogged down in fixes and patches that benefit from clean rewrites, so it's definitely a plausible possibility that that's what DX12 is.

 

Yep this is exactly where my expectations are at the moment as well.

 

The major benefits of lower overhead draw-calls in Mantle is better frame times in *CPU limited* situations (with less of a performance benefit when solely GPU limited).

So if DX12 is just a lower overhead API (than DX 11.X), then DX12 is *more* likely to help a CPU limited game at 30 FPS game hit 60 FPS, rather than GPU limited game at 720p game hit 1080p on Xbox One

 

I wonder if DirectX 12 would have some API's/support for dealing with on chip memory buffers like X1's esram. I don't think that's going to show up anytime soon in the desktop space, but it could in mobile.

NVIDIA made the claim that Volta will have stacked memory. Is that all the GPU memory or an intermediated buffer? (I'm guessing most GPUs will have 4-8gbs by then) I don't know, but if it acts like a buffer some sort of software management will be necessary and it would make sense that' it's an API like DirectX.

 

Volta appears to be moving all the VRAM off the PCB and onto a Interposer near the GPU silicon die.

 

They are selling GPUs, if he say "hey! DX12 will be announced next year!" people will wait until that announcement and will not buy a current gen GPU.

It is bussines.

 

He probably did.
But I wouldn't be surprised to see esram/edram or bigger caches in future GPUs because it needs less power than active logic. Just a matter of cost/performance/power sweet spot with future process steps.

 

It's not that simple to achieve bindless in an architecture-agnostic fashion. If MS nailed it, it'd be pretty cool thing to see out of DX12. Otherwise we'll have to wait for DX13.