DX12 Performance Discussion And Analysis Thread

There should still also be improvements to OpenGL, so the existing codebase can use new hardware features.
 
Clukos said:
Is it possible that Arkham Knight will have a Dx12 makeover for the re-release @ October/November or is it too much to ask from Rocksteady at this point? It would be a great game to test Dx12 with if that is possible.
Click to expand...

They have not been able to release it in good condition and now you want they stop fix it as it is and use DX12 ?
 
lanek said:
They have not been able to release it in good condition and now you want they stop fix it as it is and use DX12 ?
Click to expand...

Performance is the issue with the game, graphics are identical with the console release. If Dx12 improves performance in AK, why not? Are they not capable or porting over their code to Dx12? I assume it's much similar to what they are currently running on Xbox One. In fact, i'd think having the game run on Dx12 (and possibly Dx11.x for anyone not playing on W10) is the only logical explanation for the delayed re-release.
 
Clukos said:
Performance is the issue with the game, graphics are identical with the console release. If Dx12 improves performance in AK, why not? Are they not capable or porting over their code to Dx12? I assume it's much similar to what they are currently running on Xbox One. In fact, i'd think having the game run on Dx12 (and possibly Dx11.x for anyone not playing on W10) is the only logical explanation for the delayed re-release.
Click to expand...

On a more serious note, i think they have way too much work to do for fix it, and it will just add them too much work. Pushing it to DX12 will not fix all the performance problems they have encounter, all the bugs and gameworks features.

I tend to believe that the delay is just due because they had not been able to fix everything at time.

But maybe you are right.
 
I mean it makes sense if you think about it. Game was a mess at release and it got pulled within 48 hours from Steam, that basically killed their PC sales. From a marketing standpoint when they re-release it for PC they need to have a major selling point to attract customers again, selling it as the first Dx12 AAA game might be just that. But then again they might not go the Dx12 route at all, i just hope they will just to see the performance difference in such a high budget game.
 
Clukos said:
I mean it makes sense if you think about it. Game was a mess at release and it got pulled within 48 hours from Steam, that basically killed their PC sales. From a marketing standpoint when they re-release it for PC they need to have a major selling point to attract customers again, selling it as the first Dx12 AAA game might be just that. But then again they might not go the Dx12 route at all, i just hope they will just to see the performance difference in such a high budget game.
Click to expand...

On this i totaly aggree with you, this will be a major good surprise.
 
Clukos said:
Performance is the issue with the game, graphics are identical with the console release.
Click to expand...

Also an issue. I do agree with your statements about DX12 though, it would certainly be a big help in making PC gamers look favourably on this title again.
 
I don't think they can produce a good dx12 engine, and still fix the dx11 "version"... Maybe they will re-release a solid dx11 version, with a free-dlc for the same price or something.
 
Grall said:
Well my bad then! I thought/assumed the new-and-improved stuff would be folded in under the OpenGL moniker just like was the case with DirectX, to build on their already well-known trademark and things like that. It would have made sense - at least to me. :p
Click to expand...

Me too. I thought Vulkan was just an internal
project name. Is the final API not going to be called OpenGL? Microsoft didn't come up with a new brand for DirectX 12.
 
trinibwoy said:
Me too. I thought Vulkan was just an internal
project name. Is the final API not going to be called OpenGL? Microsoft didn't come up with a new brand for DirectX 12.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but for what i have understand they wanted to completely separate the project, the name, because you will not seen retro compatibility with old OpenGL set of features..

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9038/next-generation-opengl-becomes-vulkan-additional-details-released

Vulkan_5b_575px.png
 
trinibwoy said:
Me too. I thought Vulkan was just an internal
project name. Is the final API not going to be called OpenGL? Microsoft didn't come up with a new brand for DirectX 12.
Click to expand...
No, OpenGL name would imply backwards compatibility. Every OpenGL version has been backwards compatible. People expect their OpenGL code to work with the new version, and Vulkan breaks this promise.

Khronos wanted a clean break, since the OpenGL API was a bloated mess (years of old deprecated features, because of backwards compatibity requirement). They still continue to support OpenGL, since it is a higher level API more suited for beginners and applications that do not require absolutely best performance. Right now the priority seems to be to launch Vulkan so a new OpenGL version will not be released soon.

Vulkan code base is build from stratch (based on Mantle) with no ties to OpenGL. As you can see from the post above, Vulkan has it's own official logo as well. It doesn't share the OpenGL brand (it is not "OpenGL Vulkan").

DX12 shares a lot of DX11 technology. HLSL language is practically identical, shader compiler is the same, shader intermediate language (IL) is the same. Terminology is mostly identical in DX11 and DX12 (with some new concepts of course). Vulkan terminology is closer to Mantle and it has a brand new shader pipeline with a brand new SPIR-V intermediate language. There are no technical ties to OpenGL.
 
Last edited:
Here are the facts on the ground:

1: The Khronos Group is on record: they plan for OpenGL and Vulkan to co-exist.
2: Vulkan is intended to target hardware capable of OpenGL ES 3.1 or OpenGL 4.1 or better. Hardware incapable of these will likely not be able to implement Vulkan.
3: Vulkan does not (as far as we know) provide access to any hardware functionality that OpenGL 4.5 is not also capable of accessing (plus ARB_bindless_texture).

Fact #1 really means very little. Plans change, and such a statement could simply be rhetoric to dissuade people from panicking, thinking that they must immediately jump to Vulkan or be left behind.

Fact #2 is more important. Even if Khronos immediately reneged on their plan and every IHV ditched OpenGL support on Vulkan-capable hardware, the fact remains that there is a ton of hardware out there that can't support Vulkan. Valve's Steam survey gives us a good picture of the desktop realm. GL 4.1 is approximately D3D11, and while that covers a fair portion of existing hardware, it's not even half of every computer in the survey. The mobile space is even worse shape, as ES 3.1-class hardware is pretty cutting edge, only GPUs released in the last year or so.

So for the immediate future (2 years or so), OpenGL's not going anywhere. There's just too much need to support older hardware.

Fact #3 is relevant, as this means that Vulkan usage will be primarily about performance, not functionality. Which also means that OpenGL is more-or-less complete, relative to the current landscape of GPUs. ES will be updated as mobile hardware plays catchup with desktop. But desktop GL is mostly done.

And that means that Khronos doesn't really have to do much to keep OpenGL up-to-date. It will mostly be about IHVs providing implementations. And they will have a lot of incentive to keep OpenGL implementations working than Khronos does. They don't want to break old programs. So even if Khronos's commitment to OpenGL falters, it will still exist and still have implementations for some time to come.
Click to expand...

https://www.khronos.org/message_boa...ot-OpenGL-or-not?p=31390&viewfull=1#post31390
 
Als Treiber ist eine spezielle Catalyst-Version sowie der GeForce 355.66 installiert.
Click to expand...
My German is very bad but, as I understand, they used an unreleased AMD driver... Hope to get it soon, I have tons of issues outside basis samples code...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rys
Reopening Architecture and Products + rules and guidelines changes
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
17K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
R
Building a PC with XB1X specs *spawn
Replies
10
Views
3K
Blazkowicz
B
A
Forza: A Test Case for next gen hardware discussion
2
Replies
32
Views
9K
tuna
T
L
Dazed and Computed / did the GPUs took the wrong road?
2
Replies
27
Views
10K
liolio
L
Shifty Geezer
What’s the price of switching from console to PC?
8 9 10
Replies
188
Views
32K
I.S.T.
I
Back
Top