GCN can't support Conservative Rasterization or Rasterizer Ordered Views

[Spanners]

Maxwell is feature 12_1.
GCN 11.1 and 1.2 is feature 12_0.

The information is very clear, let it go.

Who are you responding to? Let what go? If it's the poster above you then nothing you've said refutes (or even addresses) anything he said in his post.

 

[Mindtaker]

Only Maxwell 2 is feature 12_1

Maxwell 1 is feature 11_0

You're right.

Who are you responding to? Let what go? If it's the poster above you then nothing you've said refutes (or even addresses) anything he said in his post.

To an old friend. I base myself on the present and real information.

 

[Headfoot]

So looks like we have another DX 10.1 situation on our hands. I wonder what is the common denominator minimum feature level that will become the first DX12 target will be... maybe back to Kepler? I wonder what Fermi supports...

 

[ShintaiDK]

So looks like we have another DX 10.1 situation on our hands. I wonder what is the common denominator minimum feature level that will become the first DX12 target will be... maybe back to Kepler? I wonder what Fermi supports...

Kepler and Fermi is the same. I think its fair to say that DX11.0 featurelevel will be the target for almost all DX12 games. If you are really lucky you may get some DX11.1 features due to consoles.

There may be some features above DX11.1 here and there. But the games will be designed from ground with DX11.0 or DX11.1 featurelevel in mind.

 

[ThatBuzzkiller]

Kepler and Fermi is the same. I think its fair to say that DX11.0 featurelevel will be the target for almost all DX12 games. If you are really lucky you may get some DX11.1 features due to consoles.

There may be some features above DX11.1 here and there. But the games will be designed from ground with DX11.0 or DX11.1 featurelevel in mind.

That's OK ...

Games can be built around multiple feature levels when developers were making a transition from DX9 to DX11 so having some games natively supporting feature level 12_0 in conjunction with feature level 11_0 isn't out of the question ...

 

[Headfoot]

That's OK ...

Games can be built around multiple feature levels when developers were making a transition from DX9 to DX11 so having some games natively supporting feature level 12_0 in conjunction with feature level 11_0 isn't out of the question ...

Do you anticipate mixed feature levels being a user toggleable setting? (E.g. "high" setting ends up being level 11_0, "ultra" ends up being 12_0?) Or just mixed on an effect-to-effect basis?

 

[ThatBuzzkiller]

Do you anticipate mixed feature levels being a user toggleable setting? (E.g. "high" setting ends up being level 11_0, "ultra" ends up being 12_0?) Or just mixed on an effect-to-effect basis?

Could be but I'm expecting the drivers and games to automatically handle feature level settings.

I don't totally understand your second question but if you mean enabling features separately from the feature levels then yes it is a possibility.

 

[DiogoDX]

So looks like we have another DX 10.1 situation on our hands. I wonder what is the common denominator minimum feature level that will become the first DX12 target will be... maybe back to Kepler? I wonder what Fermi supports...

Nvidia blocked 10.1 last time (Assassins Creed). Now that they are ahead I bet they will promote 12.1 features.

 

[Silverforce11]

Kepler and Fermi is the same. I think its fair to say that DX11.0 featurelevel will be the target for almost all DX12 games. If you are really lucky you may get some DX11.1 features due to consoles.

There may be some features above DX11.1 here and there. But the games will be designed from ground with DX11.0 or DX11.1 featurelevel in mind.

Rather, consoles are fully FL12 capable due to GCN. So cross-platform development will focus on THAT as the foundation. Anything ported to the PC will be re-evaluated, with options for DX11 features & the usual HD texture packs.

You have to be living in a rock if you think cross-platform games are designed with PC in mind first (maybe except from DICE or Crytek).

 

[Silverforce11]

Nvidia blocked 10.1 last time (Assassins Creed). Now that they are ahead I bet they will promote 12.1 features.

It won't shock me if GameWorks titles use 12.1 as much as possible so it will run like crap on GCN via emulation.

 

[DiogoDX]

It won't shock me if GameWorks titles use 12.1 as much as possible so it will run like crap on GCN via emulation.

Problem is that will run much more worse on kepler if that intel article about CR is some to take by standard. According to they projection kepler with hard CR would be only 20% faster that GCN with software CR in a complex scene.

 

[Silverforce11]

Problem is that will run much more worse on kepler if that intel article about CR is some to take by standard. According to they projection kepler with hard CR would be only 20% faster that GCN with software CR in a complex scene.

You think NV cares about Kepler optimizations given its drop-off compared to Maxwell?

They are gonna hammer away at their 1 advantage, FL12.1, because they lack quite a few FL12.

 

[kagui]

You think NV cares about Kepler optimizations given its drop-off compared to Maxwell?

They are gonna hammer away at their 1 advantage, FL12.1, because they lack quite a few FL12.

exellent way to market maxwell,

look how good maxwell are 1000% better, than kepler, o yea we forgot to optimize drivers for kepler

 

[Abwx]

You think NV cares about Kepler optimizations given its drop-off compared to Maxwell?

They are gonna hammer away at their 1 advantage, FL12.1, because they lack quite a few FL12.

I wonder how MS accepted what seems an Nvidia trolling initiative, that is, to brand their GPU specific, because limited, management as the one with the higher level feature...

That said all has not been said about thoses CR s and ROVs...

Look like people didnt notice the last lines of HFR article :

A noter que pour les fonctionnalités spécifiques au niveau 12_1, les Raster Ordered Views et la Conservative Rasterization, il existe également des Tiers 1 et 2 dont les spécificités nous sont pour l'heure inconnues. L'implémentation de Nvidia se limiterait au Tier 1 et il pourrait être possible là aussi pour AMD d'essayer de se démarquer.

Translation :

Notably for 12_1 level functionalities, Raster Ordered Views and Conservative Rasterization, there exist also Tiers 1 and 2 wich specificities are actualy unknown from us.

Nvidia s implementation should be limited to Tiers 1, and it s quite possible that in this respect AMD could try to differentiate itself.

http://www.hardware.fr/html/news/cat4/page4.html#actu_14135

You have surely noticed that Nvidia define being 12_1 as supporting at least Tiers 1, the only one they seems to support actualy, talk of using a sliding rule....

 

[Gloomy]

All has been said about CR: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dn903791(v=vs.85).aspx

 

[ShintaiDK]

Rather, consoles are fully FL12 capable due to GCN. So cross-platform development will focus on THAT as the foundation. Anything ported to the PC will be re-evaluated, with options for DX11 features & the usual HD texture packs.

You have to be living in a rock if you think cross-platform games are designed with PC in mind first (maybe except from DICE or Crytek).

The consoles are GCN 1.0, meaning featurelevel 11.1.

 

[Silverforce11]

The consoles are GCN 1.0, meaning featurelevel 11.1.

Apparently Microsoft disagrees with you.

Also, several of the features not available currently in the beta viewer with beta drivers, is actually available for OpenGL on GCN. All AMD needs, a driver update. So don't be so sure!

 

[ShintaiDK]

Apparently Microsoft disagrees with you.

Also, several of the features not available currently in the beta viewer with beta drivers, is actually available for OpenGL on GCN. All AMD needs, a driver update. So don't be so sure!

MS certainly agrees with me, from their own DirectX tools.

 

[.vodka]

Aren't the XB1 and PS4 based on Hawaii GCN?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Aren't the XB1 and PS4 based on Hawaii GCN?

Pitcairn

 

[StereoPixel]

Aren't the XB1 and PS4 based on Hawaii GCN?

XB1 and PS4 based on GCN 1.1 with TrueAudio support

 

[.vodka]

Exactly, then both consoles are FL12. MS knows this better than anyone else.


Why do you say they're GCN 1.0 then, shintai? Maybe those tools you're using are outdated.

 

[ShintaiDK]

XB1 and PS4 based on GCN 1.1 with TrueAudio support

if that was so, you would assume caches etc was the same.
Not to mention all the PC ports lack any kind of trueaudio support.

Xbox looks like this

 

[Silverforce11]

Exactly, then both consoles are FL12. MS knows this better than anyone else.

MS would not sabotage their Xbox1 by making DX12/FL12 not compatible with it.. seriously must be thinking MS are run by imbeciles to believe otherwise.

 

[StereoPixel]

The consoles are GCN 1.0, meaning featurelevel 11.1.

GCN 1.0 is full DX12
AMD Catalyst Slide shows Tiled Resources Tier2 support for HD7000 Series, but the Catalyst driver has some problems with detection in the DXCapsViewer, and also some problems with detection of OpenCL support in the GPU-Z, although the OpenCL worked in other applications without any problems.