• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

DX12 games and GPU's...I think its a trap!

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
TheELF said:
Why?What did I say? That it doesn't happen at the same time?
But think about it,why would someone even want to run compute+graphics at the same time?
The only time it makes sense is if you can't fully utilise your GPU with only one of the two so you run both at the same time to fill up your GPU (shaders) with work.
Click to expand...

GPU is more than just a shaders. Read up on dx12 multi engine
 
yer1Vin.jpg



You can have a nice boost on nVIDIA as well while using less powerful CPUs. You don't like it? Feel free to use dx11. 🙂

Add more complexity to the games, get rid of dx11 altogether and ever more powerful CPUs will benefit from these APIs.

The problem right now is that most test on high end CPUs (like they did with Mantle), while a gamer is typically interested in getting the most out of his money. That means keeping you CPU for longer or getting a cheaper, slower one and a better GPU, for virtually the same overall performance.

It's just the beginning, the devs will make good use of it.
 
Piroko said:
Yes, Doom has certainly upped the Ante of what is possible in a modern 3D engine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss8SyOhqk1I
Click to expand...

Indeed. Or maybe rather calling the rest of the industry hacks out. Doom is certainly miles upon miles better than the regular ports we get.
Miles better graphics.
Miles better performance.
Miles better campaign (and longer, 2x what you'd get in COD/BF).
And it runs on older hardware as well.

I was afraid for ID after Carmack left. Not anymore. IDTech-6 for the win.
 
cytg111 said:
Indeed. Or maybe rather calling the rest of the industry hacks out. Doom is certainly miles upon miles better than the regular ports we get.
Miles better graphics.
Miles better performance.
Miles better campaign (and longer, 2x what you'd get in COD/BF).
And it runs on older hardware as well.

I was afraid for ID after Carmack left. Not anymore. IDTech-6 for the win.
Click to expand...

I like how you replied to the URL without watching the video. The video is someone trying to make a map for DOOM. They initially wanted to make a map with 100k revenants but due to restrictions of either SNAPMAP or DOOM engine they can only make a few rooms and only 64 revenants. Additionally only 12 of the Revenants can be alive at any given time.

You quoted a sarcastic comment.
 
torlen11cc said:
I'm wondering if there is any DX11-12 advantage for AMD/nVidia cards to running in Windows 10 over windows 7
Click to expand...

There's plenty of testing out there if you search for it. Many people compared W10 to W7 gaming, especially right after release. Additionally all the DX12 tests are going to be on W10 as it is not available on W7.
 
cytg111 said:
- Well that flew over my head for sure. I thought my fast reflexes would have caught that(gotg).
I've played the game, participated in http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2463156&page=22 and you'll be hard pressed to find a negative review anywhere.
If it gimped on a map construction tool.. well..blrrrr.
Click to expand...
My comment was supposed to cover a bit more than that. It's a game engine that has proven to do one job really well - and that is high performance, low latency gameplay in small maps with limited amount of scripts, interactions and assets.
However, the OP wants to compare this to game engines that do almost the exact opposite - gameplay with lots of scripts, more interactions and a (very) high amount of (unique) Assets/objects on screen. And they don't run like garbage for what they show, not at all.
 
Krteq said:
Yes, It is the same thing! Re-read the MSDN article.
Click to expand...

Yes,what exactly should I be reading here?
The 3d engine handles triangulation,tessellation,geometry and the likes,
copy engine handles texture streaming and I/O in general,
graphics are being done by the shaders=compute core.
 
cytg111 said:
- Well that flew over my head for sure. I thought my fast reflexes would have caught that(gotg).
I've played the game, participated in http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2463156&page=22 and you'll be hard pressed to find a negative review anywhere.
If it gimped on a map construction tool.. well..blrrrr.
Click to expand...
the engine tools are directly gimped to the engine if the engine cant handle it its not the tools problem lol
 
TheELF said:
Yes,what exactly should I be reading here?
The 3d engine handles triangulation,tessellation,geometry and the likes,
copy engine handles texture streaming and I/O in general,
graphics are being done by the shaders=compute core.
Click to expand...
What the hell? Do you have any clue about computer graphics and coding?

We have a pixel shader, vertex shader, geometry shader, hull&domain shaders... these are all processed via ALU core.

shader_full.jpg


With Multi-Engine aka Async-Shaders, you can run 3D queue (graphics command list) concurrently with Compute queue (Compute shaders command list). This is done via front-end scheduler (Command processor and ACE units) which is able to assign tasks of both types to Unified shader core.

It's not a rocket science.
 
Piroko said:
My comment was supposed to cover a bit more than that. It's a game engine that has proven to do one job really well - and that is high performance, low latency gameplay in small maps with limited amount of scripts, interactions and assets.
However, the OP wants to compare this to game engines that do almost the exact opposite - gameplay with lots of scripts, more interactions and a (very) high amount of (unique) Assets/objects on screen. And they don't run like garbage for what they show, not at all.
Click to expand...

Good point.
The way I see it is this; for this particular job, for jobs within this frame of reference, it has done especially well.
How will it perform in COD/BF style scenarios? Dont know. What we do know it that Doom is the best looking and well performing of its kind in a long long time. So if it can pull that off (not only the engine, ID), what else can they do?
(And you do have some pretty BIG maps with big wast horizonts in the game(Hell))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top