Oh, I'm expecting it to get far better than just one server in 1U. Not sure how dense it could get, but 2-3 at least.
Nah, its a relatively tiny cooler. And it can easily fit 1U for example.
Weak if you look at ST performance alone. But that is insane on an 8 core CPU.Mainly because of the weak Xbox CPU. Secondary due to laptops/2in1 devices for power consumption.
I think it was you who missed my point! But maybe we're talking about different things. You seem to be talking about backwards compatibility. I on the other hand made a forward looking statement, projecting what the better multi-core handling of DX12 will bring for the future.You miss the point as always. DX11(.3) can use the same features as DX12 except for 2 that is only performance related. And this is the backdoor escape when game developers dont upgrade for new uarchs that gets developed. Else you end up with games that could potentially not run at all on new hardware.
Oh, I'm expecting it to get far better than just one server in 1U. Not sure how dense it could get, but 2-3 at least.
If anyone thinks this leak is about Cannonlake-DE (future Xeon-D parts), think again.
Looks like Intel is about to increase Xeon-D's core count to 16 cores as soon as this quarter:
www.cpu-world.com/news_2015/2015102201_Intel_Xeon_D_chips_may_have_up_to_16_cores.html
In what way is DX12 different do you mean?DX12 isn't a replacement for DX11. Unlike DX11 vs DX10, DX10 vs DX9 and so on.
In what way is DX12 different do you mean?
You got any documentation of this? You are the first person I have heard saying anything llike this. Once DX12 gets implemented, and if it brings benefits as expected, I would think all new architectures would be compatible with it.
Edit: not sure mantle examples are valid either. Mantle only worked with certain versions of GCN. As I understand it, DX12 will work with all architectures, granted with some features still specific to GCN, which is why the AMD fans are so (over) hyped.
Sometimes you should just google
I am also sure at least a dozen techsites covered this extensively.
You thought a low level API came with free lunch? You need to code for every single architecture. Else the fun stops. This is also why Microsoft gave us DX11.3. There isn't any magic solution to a high level API replacement in a dynamic market.
However this issue will first really begin in the future. Post Pascal, post Arctic Island.
Maybe you should just answer the question. just because DX12 doesnt fit with your anti more cores agenda doesnt mean it wont be a success. i would also look at the situation from the opposite direction. if dx12 brings the benefits expected, then i would expect any new architecture to be designed to be easily compatible with DX12. Do you really honestly believe that either gpu maker is going to go back to DX11 while their competitor utilizes the benefits of DX12?
Maybe you should just answer the question. just because DX12 doesnt fit with your anti more cores agenda doesnt mean it wont be a success. i would also look at the situation from the opposite direction. if dx12 brings the benefits expected, then i would expect any new architecture to be designed to be easily compatible with DX12. Do you really honestly believe that either gpu maker is going to go back to DX11 while their competitor utilizes the benefits of DX12?
That's not the point that ShintaiDK is making.
DX12 absolutely brings benefits over DX11, but it's not a free lunch. Developers will have to put in a lot of extra legwork to actually utilize DX12 because this API essentially forces developers to do all of the heavy lifting.
The good news is that for developers with the budgets, time, and skill to actually make use of DX12, this will result in unequivocally better games for us, the consumers.
The bad news is that taking advantage of DX12 will be hard for all but the top developers so you should expect that many games, especially lower budget/indie ones, to use the older APIs that take care of a lot of the low-level stuff that they have in the past.
The bad news is that taking advantage of DX12 will be hard for all but the top developers so you should expect that many games, especially lower budget/indie ones, to use the older APIs that take care of a lot of the low-level stuff that they have in the past.
Citation needed
It's my analysis of the situation, so I can't really provide you with a "citation" as it were. But the fact that DX11.3 will "coexist" with DX12 is a pretty reasonable "tell," IMO.
You got any documentation of this? .
is Shintai alternate reality territory.DX12 is to compliment DX11, not replace it.
It's my analysis of the situation, so I can't really provide you with a "citation" as it were. But the fact that DX11.3 will "coexist" with DX12 is a pretty reasonable "tell," IMO.
Ok, so no citation. Well, do you have any logic for your reasoning then, other than that DX11.3 will coexist (which doesn't really prove anything)?
Ok, so no citation. Well, do you have any logic for your reasoning then, other than that DX11.3 will coexist (which doesn't really prove anything)?
Direct3D 11.3
First and foremost then, Microsoft has announced that there will be a new version of Direct3D 11 coinciding with Direct3D 12. Dubbed Direct3D 11.3, this new version of Direct3D is a continuation of the development and evolution of the Direct3D 11 API and like the previous point updates will be adding API support for features found in upcoming hardware.
At first glance the announcement of Direct3D 11.3 would appear to be at odds with Microsoft’s development work on Direct3D 12, but in reality there is a lot of sense in this announcement. Direct3D 12 is a low level API – powerful, but difficult to master and very dangerous in the hands of inexperienced programmers. The development model envisioned for Direct3D 12 is that a limited number of code gurus will be the ones writing the engines and renderers that target the new API, while everyone else will build on top of these engines. This works well for the many organizations that are licensing engines such as UE4, or for the smaller number of organizations that can justify having such experienced programmers on staff.
However for these reasons a low level API is not suitable for everyone. High level APIs such as Direct3D 11 do exist for a good reason after all; their abstraction not only hides the quirks of the underlying hardware, but it makes development easier and more accessible as well. For these reasons there is a need to offer both high level and low level APIs. Direct3D 12 will be the low level API, and Direct3D 11 will continue to be developed to offer the same features through a high level API.
My logic comes down to this: DX12 requires a non-trivial increase in the amount of work/effort compared to DX11 because it gives developers a lot more control.
This shouldn't be a problem for big, rich studios, so Call of Duty, Battlefield, etc. all of the big names will have no issue transitioning to the new API. But for small indie developers or even mid-sized ones on a relatively tight budget, I can imagine that they may forgo the benefits associated with DX12 for now in order to be able to get their games out to market in a reasonable time-frame and at reasonable development costs.
Longer term, devs may have no choice but to migrate to DX12 though.
So basically we already have the extremes from both camps saying either "DX 12 is going to make AMD cpus and GCN gpus number 1" to the other camp saying, "Eh, dont need more cores. There is always DX 11.whatever. And games run on one thread, no matter what." I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle, but I just cant imagine that DX12 is not going to take the majority of games eventually, and *will* make proper use of more cores. I havent really heard of anyone saying how hard it is to program for the consoles, and they have a low level api.