Well, they did bash DX11 Tessellation as well, when they didn't have capable hardware. Once they did, it was all aboard that sub-pixel tessellated train!
Same old and very predictable.
For those users bashing next-gen APIs here too. Same ole.
This is why NVIDIA is bashing DX12 (like Intel did with 64 Bit when AMD commercialized Athlin 64): http://www.bitsandchips.it/english/54-english-review/6927-intel-nvidia-amd-fight?start=3
AMD has better products, at the present moment.
Yeah, in arma dx12 may make it possible to run way higher draw distances and object details.Yes, even AMD said Mantle isn't for everyone and it's quite right. You don't need roads that F1 cars can race on when all you have is light traffic.
The issue may be due tu multiple bottlenecks. In ArmA you can test yourself with the provided 2D/3D editor without any AI. Performance tanks once you increase object complexity and draw distance and it's more severe in cities and towns. I'd guess 32bit limitations, probably some API here and there, plus poor occlusion and multitrheading, all take part in that. And yes, you have poor performance while the CPU and GPU don't do much. Since it's the same engine, the same happens on Day Z, ArmA 2, Take on Helicopters, etc.
Not sure how's in Total War, but you can play test quite easy different scenarios in ArmA and perhaps even analyse the draw calls if you have the know how.
Beyond the API matter, let's not forget about GPU physics and AI, already demonstrated by nVIDIA and AMD. None of those really took off, although they hold a far greater potential even compared to DX12 or Vulkan. If an old HD4850 can run 3000 AIs with great complexity and advanced graphics at HD resolution, what could modern day GPUs do with physics and AI plus a great API?
The technology is there and doable, too bad Crysis didn't sell that well. Gaming would be a whole lot different than the same copy -> paste games year after year.
Well, they did bash DX11 Tessellation as well, when they didn't have capable hardware. Once they did, it was all aboard that sub-pixel tessellated train!
Same old and very predictable.
For those users bashing next-gen APIs here too. Same ole.
Nonsense. nVidia never bashed DX11 and/or Tessellation. It was however AMD who declared Tessellation to the most important new feature of DX11. And it was AMD who changed their opinion after nVidia has beaten them with Tessellation.
By your standard, nobody should work on Linux or OpenGL
And again, MS likes DX12 on Xbox due to the weak console CPU. Even the PS4 got a high level API beside its low level.
And feature wise, there is DX11.3. So from an IHV point of view, DX12 just means less work. Its cost moved from IHVs to developers.
Will there be future cases where DX12 shine? Quite possible, but it requires a developer that will fork out the extra money and time for it. Including extended support. But its certainly not going to be the norm by any means. And current DX12 games shows this, one flop and failure after the other.
Nonsense. nVidia never bashed DX11 and/or Tessellation. It was however AMD who declared Tessellation to the most important new feature of DX11. And it was AMD who changed their opinion after nVidia has beaten them with Tessellation.
AMD is finally reverting to using lower Tess forced at the driver to negate NV's lead when before it was optional. This is a game-plan I don't think AMD should go down, but that's my personal opinion.
Now prove it by running any dx11.3 game, oh you can't ? because unlike dx12 there's ZERO DX11.3 games out there i wonder why. now you learned something oldYou couldn't be more wrong.
Now you learned something new
Now prove it by running any dx11.3 game, oh you can't ? because unlike dx12 there's ZERO DX11.3 games out there i wonder why. now you learned something old
Dxcap viewer proofs nothing, because gtx670 also shows dx11.2 capabilities but it cannot even run bf4 on dx11.1. and after asc driver fiasco, nvidia's drivers cannot be trusted ever. they always fake features as being capable of.
don't have that card anymore to test it. but nvidia said it supports dx11.2. and you are saying they are lying ?You have no idea if there are DX11.3 games or not. Because just as DX12 they can fall back to a lower feature set.
What feature level is listed under DX11.2 for that card?
So in the end of the day, DX12 wasn't needed. Thanks for clarifying.
don't have that card anymore to test it. but nvidia said it supports dx11.2. and you are saying they are lying ?
and why would they fall back to lower api? unless the card don't support it ? oh wait , that's what happens with 670/bf4 because game is dx11.1 but card isn't. so if a game is dx11.3 but the card isn't it will fall back that means there are no cards that supports dx11.3.
man you just proved yourself that either there are no dx11.3 games or there are no dx11.3 cards. thanks for that :thumbsup:
dx12.1 is a big lie too because in order to have a 12.1 compliance you NEED to have a full dx12 compliance
remind me again WHO has a full dx12 compliance? does amd have? does nvidia have? who?
why 4 months ago they didnt exposed that? and it was dx12? can you elaborate?
i didnt say they didAMD said no card supports the full DX12 feature set. :sneaky:
The easiest way would be for MS to not restrict DX12 to W10. I've been using 10 on my laptop for a while now and it's just a horrible user experience. I can't see ever switching my main rig from 7 to 10.how can developer and consumer adoption be improved exponentially?
Now prove it by running any dx11.3 game, oh you can't ? because unlike dx12 there's ZERO DX11.3 games out there i wonder why. now you learned something old
Dxcap viewer proofs nothing, because gtx670 also shows dx11.2 capabilities but it cannot even run bf4 on dx11.1. and after asc driver fiasco, nvidia's drivers cannot be trusted ever. they always fake features as being capable of.
The easiest way would be for MS to not restrict DX12 to W10. I've been using 10 on my laptop for a while now and it's just a horrible user experience. I can't see ever switching my main rig from 7 to 10.
Yeah, in arma dx12 may make it possible to run way higher draw distances and object details.
I did testing with a big AI fight some time ago with only 500m drawdistance and lowest object details, fps was still bad.
I don't think dx12 will help the worst case fps much in arma, as the main fps killer is the ai/simulation, but it shouldn't hurt either, since performance regression from 11 to 12 only seems to happen when a game is gpu bound, which is unlikely in arma.
Supposedly they're working on dx12 for that expansion of theirs.
Can you elaborate on this point? I was under the assumption that the driver gave you the option to choose how you wanted tessellation treated.
<snip>
actually even intels igps are more dx12.1 than nvidias gpus D:
And before the AMD crowd jumps on me again, I understand this would be a method to combat NV's over use of Tess. It just taints the performance gains AMD gets specifically in NV sponsored games for me. If they did that in FO4, and gained a huge performance boost (which can't be argued), what else might have been done to combat other Gamework related slights? AMD is seeing in some cases 20+% increase in performance gains against NV in Gamework titles a lot faster than they use to.
You can argue their driver team got insanely good, or they found a shortcut.
Driver optimizations is the norm.
It's up to people and tech journalists to scrutinize image quality, if there's differences or sacrifices to visual for performance gains.
I'll give you an example, sites like pcgameshardware.de who run all their benchmark with forced AF on high quality mode in the drivers actually disadvantage AMD. The reason is obvious for anyone who uses both GPUs side by side. AMD's HQ is superior in image quality and it has a higher performance hit. Leaving it on default mode, they are more equivalent.