DirectX 12

[Red Hawk]

It makes sense since all Windows Phone supports is Qualcomm. Also, Windows Phone uses DirectX and not a DirectX like API like the Xbone.

My guess is that it indicates that Windows is working with Qualcomm (and probably Nvidia, with their Tegra chipset) to really push DirectX 12 on Windows Phone.

 

[Carfax83]

dxwebsetup is directx 9....the entire API. That's why when you go to dxdiag it shows DX10 in Vista or DX11 in win 7/8. DX10/11 are the same API. DX11 is a subset of Dx10. DX9 is entirely separate.

DX11 is a superset of DX10.1, not a subset.

Direct3D 11 is a strict superset of Direct3D 10.1 — all hardware and API features of version 10.1 are retained, and new features are added only when necessary for exposing new functionality. This helps to keep backwards compatibility with previous versions of DirectX.

And apparently, straight DX9 is emulated in Windows 7 and Windows 8/8.1, but Windows also uses an updated version called D3D9Ex which allows Windows to run DX9 natively with full compatibility provided the program has also been updated..

Source

 

[R0H1T]

Wouldn't this just create more fragmentation, as most console ports would be DX 11.x based & that only PC exclusive titles would enjoy DX12 benefits over the next few years, kinda like reliving the last decade where DX9 hogged the limelight till virtually the end of time(certainly up until win7 was launched which really made DX11 popular)

I'm not much of a gamer but I think the popularity of win9(or whatever it's called) will actually decide how DX12 fares in comparison to its predecessors & perhaps other factors(like 3D/4K or more demanding games) will be relegated to the background !

 

[sontin]

There will always be fragmentation with different plattforms.

 

[R0H1T]

There will always be fragmentation with different plattforms.

My point is seeing the hate towards win8, even on this forum, wouldn't it be prudent to say that DX12 adoption(with game developers) would largely depend on the uptake of win9 & not necessarily on the performance benefits it'll bring ? Now the enhancements are much needed undoubtedly but will the allure of Mantle(for instance) based improvements(on DX 11.x) slow down its adoption, since the game will be catering to a larger(relatively) audience, or the benefits of DX12 outweigh the cons of increased spending on game development & a small(er) market ?

 

[Carfax83]

Wouldn't this just create more fragmentation, as most console ports would be DX 11.x based & that only PC exclusive titles would enjoy DX12 benefits over the next few years, kinda like reliving the last decade where DX9 hogged the limelight till virtually the end of time(certainly up until win7 was launched which really made DX11 popular)

I'm not much of a gamer but I think the popularity of win9(or whatever it's called) will actually decide how DX12 fares in comparison to its predecessors & perhaps other factors(like 3D/4K or more demanding games) will be relegated to the background !

If DX12 is a superset of DX11.2, much the same way that DX11 was a superset of DX10.1, then it won't be much of a problem.

You'd be able to play DX11 games on your DX12 hardware, or use a DX11 class video card on Windows 9.. And developers could develop DX12 games knowing that they would run on DX11 hardware, but with limited exposure of advanced DX12 capabilities.

It will probably take a while before native DX12 games start coming down the pipeline anyway.

 

[Morbus]

Mantle has just switched the focus of the game developers.

Has it? It seems a bit odd that developers would even target AMD GPUs, let alone Mantle, considering AMD is losing gaming market share in spades, thanks to the bitcoin craze...

 

[coercitiv]

Has it? It seems a bit odd that developers would even target AMD GPUs, let alone Mantle, considering AMD is losing gaming market share in spades, thanks to the bitcoin craze...

Good thing mining will never stop and market won't get flooded with dirt cheap AMD video cards all at once.

 

[chimaxi83]

Has it? It seems a bit odd that developers would even target AMD GPUs, let alone Mantle, considering AMD is losing gaming market share in spades, thanks to the bitcoin craze...

Backing this up with a source, and perhaps even a fact or two, would go a long way to making this post relevant. I'm looking forward to reading it.

 

[Mand]

Has it? It seems a bit odd that developers would even target AMD GPUs, let alone Mantle, considering AMD is losing gaming market share in spades, thanks to the bitcoin craze...

Considering that everybody is now talking about reduced overhead load on the CPU moving forward, I'd say that yes, it has.

 

[imaheadcase]

Backing this up with a source, and perhaps even a fact or two, would go a long way to making this post relevant. I'm looking forward to reading it.

Sure, lets see how many games have Mantle. fact checked done.

 

[Despoiler]

DX11 is a superset of DX10.1, not a subset.



And apparently, straight DX9 is emulated in Windows 7 and Windows 8/8.1, but Windows also uses an updated version called D3D9Ex which allows Windows to run DX9 natively with full compatibility provided the program has also been updated..

Source

I typed subset instead of superset. I thought that sounded weird when typing it. However, the point was that your claim that DX11 provides backwards compatibility to DX9 is just false.

 

[Black Octagon]

Sure, lets see how many games have Mantle. fact checked done.

Fact checking implies that you check the premise, otherwise said fact is merely contention.

In your case the premise is that AMD is losing significant gaming market share due to mining (fun fact: your premise also has a premise, meaning you need to back up the first premise, AND connect it to the subsequent premise, in order to impart validity to your overall claim).

So yes, relevant sources are sill needed

 

[Carfax83]

I typed subset instead of superset. I thought that sounded weird when typing it. However, the point was that your claim that DX11 provides backwards compatibility to DX9 is just false.

It wasn't completely false. If you read the link, DX9.0L comes with Windows Vista, Windows 7 and was designed specifically to run DX9 applications on those operating systems provided that they are updated to work with the new driver model.

So standard DX9 must be emulated, but DX9.0L does run natively using a subset of D3D 10.

 

[Despoiler]

It wasn't completely false. If you read the link, DX9.0L comes with Windows Vista, Windows 7 and was designed specifically to run DX9 applications on those operating systems provided that they are updated to work with the new driver model.

So standard DX9 must be emulated, but DX9.0L does run natively using a subset of D3D 10.

Not quite. DX9.0L (the L is for Longhorn aka Vista) is the development name for a transitional DX9 API. Direct9Ex is the commercial/launch name of DX9.0L. DX9L/Ex gave access to the new WDDM found in Vista, but maintained compatibility with DX9 namely for Vista's Aero interface. DX10 is a separate API and provides no compatibility to DX9. DX9L, 9Ex, and DX10 are Vista only.

 

[ArizonaSteve]

Unless the new API can be ported to the consoles it will be a non-starter. Look how long we've been stuck with DX9.

 

[MutantGith]

For the average user, heck, even the mostly clued in tehcnically savy user however, the difference between which Dll library is doing the heavy lifting between Dx 9.0L, Dx9.0EX, DX 10.1... etc is somewhat moot.

The operating system, by default, comes with the option to support older render paths without having to jump through particularly exotic hoops. Edge cases regarding bad installs, hardware conflicts or the like excluded, there is no separate, binned out class of games that will not run on a windows OS that supports a higher version of Direct X than the game in question.

The point is that at present, people have no problem handling directX 9.0c, SM 3.0 type games on 8.1 or windows 7. Those OS's support DX 11, sure, but they still run 9.0 games. Much older games, harkening back to direct X 7 or so, sometimes not so much, but those are almost always a candidacy for software emulation anyway.

While old games may not be able to access any of the new advantages of a newer iteration, it's typically been the case that older code paths have at least some level of support baked into the OS, and the average user doesn't have to worry about it too much (note, not not at all, just not a frequent issue).

Drilling down into which version of which developer build of which library is being accessed in each patch level of each OS is... extremely specific. I think the higher level takeaway of importance is that it isn't super likely that everyone is going to have to dual boot into win 9 and 7 or 8.1 or else abandon access to all their existing games. Nor are they likely to have to completely upgrade their graphics card to even run the new OS. Now, if developers want to make the silly choice to render massive tracts of the market unable to play their game by making games ONLY DX 12 compliant in the near future...that's their folly. But I think the same beaten dead horse that continually points out how easy it is for PC games to be ported from consoles...consoles that are running sub- 7850 class APU's makes it unlikely that that market will also be abandoned.

Three or four years after launch, some DX-12 only features are lilkely, but even then, it will be slow, steady, and likely irrelevant, as most people will have had plenty of time to catch the upgrade bus and keep up.

 

[Spjut]

Unless the new API can be ported to the consoles it will be a non-starter. Look how long we've been stuck with DX9.

That has more to do with the long dominance of Windows XP.

 

[el etro]

DX10 hardware specifications is still under DX9 Hardware specifications, no?

 

[Morbus]

Good thing mining will never stop and market won't get flooded with dirt cheap AMD video cards all at once.

As if... I don't know how it WAS in the states, but here in Europe you'd get half the year AMD cards with better prices, and then the other half of the year it was nVidia cards that were more competitive. It's still like that now.

I honestly have no idea where in the world nVidia cards carry a premium for just being nVidia, but honestly speaking, I wouldn't mind paying 5 or 10% more, just to avoid the troubles I've had during my years on the red side... Drivers-wise.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Oh goodie just what we needed something that won't be used anytime soon and it will make cards even more expensive. Yay!

I have been toughly disappointed with mid range cards for 3 years now

 

[CakeMonster]

Wouldn't this just create more fragmentation, as most console ports would be DX 11.x based & that only PC exclusive titles would enjoy DX12 benefits over the next few years, kinda like reliving the last decade where DX9 hogged the limelight till virtually the end of time(certainly up until win7 was launched which really made DX11 popular)

I'm not much of a gamer but I think the popularity of win9(or whatever it's called) will actually decide how DX12 fares in comparison to its predecessors & perhaps other factors(like 3D/4K or more demanding games) will be relegated to the background !

There's no issue here. When DX12 is done (god know how long), we will have to wait for the cards with the hardware support to hit the market (god knows how long after the spec), and then we will have to wait for the DX12 hardware market saturation to be big enough for a decent portion of developers to bother using it in games (even longer), and by then the next generation of consoles should be just around the corner, or more likely, already released.

 

[moonbogg]

I just read that the actual implementation of DX12 into real AAA games will coincide with the Milky Way-Andromeda collision event, seemingly half way through the cosmic episode and should result in some good story lines for the AAA titles.

 

[bystander36]

There's no issue here. When DX12 is done (god know how long), we will have to wait for the cards with the hardware support to hit the market (god knows how long after the spec), and then we will have to wait for the DX12 hardware market saturation to be big enough for a decent portion of developers to bother using it in games (even longer), and by then the next generation of consoles should be just around the corner, or more likely, already released.

When there is a need for something, everything happens faster. Even DX11 did not take long to be used. DX11 was there the moment the first DX capable cards were sold (AMD 5000 cards), and the first game came soon after with Dirt 2.

With Mantle exposing the problems of DX, I'm sure it won't take all that long. DX9 was also used quite quickly. DX10, on the other hand, took a long time and never did become widespread.

We'll have to wait and see about Dx12.

 

[TreVader]

Wouldn't this just create more fragmentation, as most console ports would be DX 11.x based & that only PC exclusive titles would enjoy DX12 benefits over the next few years, kinda like reliving the last decade where DX9 hogged the limelight till virtually the end of time(certainly up until win7 was launched which really made DX11 popular)

I'm not much of a gamer but I think the popularity of win9(or whatever it's called) will actually decide how DX12 fares in comparison to its predecessors & perhaps other factors(like 3D/4K or more demanding games) will be relegated to the background !

This is a good point. Why even bother coding for DX12 if it's a) only supported in some tiny number of super high end PCs or worse yet possibly b) is only available for windows 9


Either one kills the significance of any changes in modern games, and at least one is likely