It is....12.0 that is
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AMD confirms GCN, incl. XBO, doesnt support DX12 12_1 (but does 12_0 stop panicking)
- Thread starter chadskin
- Start date
It is....12.0 that is
fizzelopeguss
Banned
DX releases are often a feature year for GPU manufacturers (ie, expensive rebadges for little effort), i'm not expecting any cards released in 2015 to be fully DX12 compatible.
Irobot82
Member
They are, they just aren't 12.1 feature level? I think
Maxwell GPUs are.
No, 750Ti does not. All other Maxwell cards, 960 and up, do, though.
It's probably not any major deal, though. I certainly wouldn't go judging which GPU I got over this, unless all else was equal.
mugurumakensei
Member
All of the features specified in 12_1 are in the docs detailing the second gen Maxwell architecture so GM200(Titan X, 980Ti), GM204(970, 980), and GM206(960) are 12_1 feature set level.
You should just assume they haven't updated their store page.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
If I'm doing a build though, I guess it's worth going for the GTX960 over the 750ti?
DX12 =/= DX12.1
I think DX12 is primarily CPU optimizations and all DX11.1 compatible cards support it. DX12.1 has new features.
Edit: They can't mean GCN 1.0 won't get any DX12, can they?
dr_rus
Member
It seems than GCN 1.0 won't be able to support feature level 12_0. Thus it's maximum supported feature level under DX12 will be 11_1. This means that Pitcairn and Tahiti owners will only receive "legacy" DX12 support ("thin" API itself with the performance improvements but no new rendering features), like all owners of non-Maxwell 2 DX11 GPUs from NV.
This remains to be seen though, they didn't say anything officially about GCN 1.0 yet.
If you're asking specifically, I wouldn't recommend the GTX960. If you're just asking generally, then it would depend on your budget and desires/expectations.
lol it was the most stupid acronym ever too. Mosty reasonable people called it GC or NGC.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Well, specifically. I'm trying to stay under $200.
Fair enough that's great I was worrried it won't support it. Thanks.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
PS4? It probably does not have full feature level 12_1, but it would be interesting how they would place it.
PS4 doesn't use DirectX.
My guess is it's just a matter of Sony's APIs using whatever is in GCN.
balladofwindfishes
Member
The only measure of graphics performance for console games is by how many Gamecubes taped together a system has.
That's the basis of all graphics measurements.
It won't have the hardware changes to theoretically support 12_1.
From the sounds of that, it creates the impression that at a hardware level it would be able to support 11_1 theoretically which is what all the GCN cards will support.
My question is, whats the difference between 12_0 and 11_1?
I'm pretty sure it was CPU optimization for draw calls. DX11 couldn't use more than one core very efficiently making it scale poorly on more than four threads.
Regarding GCN 1.0 not getting DX12:
Ah, so it's literally just the CPU optimisations?I'm pretty sure it was CPU optimization for draw calls. DX11 couldn't use more than one core very efficiently making it scale poorly on more than four threads.
Regarding GCN 1.0 not getting DX12:
So all the stuff around command list/bundles and the descriptor heaps and tables are just 12_0 and 12_1?
I have no idea why 12.0 and 12 would be different, but to my understanding 12 doesn't have any new features. The CPU optimization is pretty big though as that has held back a lot of bigger games and means you can save something on the CPU by not needing a K series i5.
From my understanding, 12_0 had the optimisations above, but 12_1 had hardware changes which added more hardware based optimisations for voxels, and enabling real-time GI?
Wait and see what AMD do. If they do a rebadged 290 as a 380 and price it around $200, that is going to be much preferable to a GTX960. It'll probably be more like $250, but you never know.
If not, then I'd still say a 280X is a better bet. More powerful and more vRAM.
Like I said, I wouldn't base your choice on whether it has 12.1 functionality. At that price level, I'd recommend looking for best bang-for-buck. And AMD seems to do better at this level.
I'm glad I wasn't the only one.
Locuza
Member
There is no DX12.1, there is only DX12 and its Feature-Levels 11_0, 11_1, 12_0 and 12_1.
The consoles are using GCN Gen 2 / GCN 1.1 / IP v7 / Sea Islands, you name it.
FL12_0 support is the highest (from DX12 perspective) .
For FL12_1 one need serious hardware modifications, for what the console technology is too old.
The consoles are using GCN Gen 2 / GCN 1.1 / IP v7 / Sea Islands, you name it.
FL12_0 support is the highest (from DX12 perspective) .
For FL12_1 one need serious hardware modifications, for what the console technology is too old.
But they did customize it while knowing that DX12 was in the pipe line and what would be required surely?
But when developers start to adopt DX12, will they even care about 12_1 since they can target way, way more GPUs by sticking to 12_0?
Didn't we already go through this with DX 10.1 and 11.1? How many games even required you to have a GPU with those feature sets, I can't recall many. Why should we believe this is going to be a different scenario, despite that DX 12_0 and 12_1 are becoming available at the same time and not spaced apart like the previous feature levels.
If the XB1 is also 12_0 only then it gives devs even less incentive to target 12_1 even for ports.
I'm making certain that my next GPU supports 12_1 but I'm wondering if it will even matter.
Didn't we already go through this with DX 10.1 and 11.1? How many games even required you to have a GPU with those feature sets, I can't recall many. Why should we believe this is going to be a different scenario, despite that DX 12_0 and 12_1 are becoming available at the same time and not spaced apart like the previous feature levels.
If the XB1 is also 12_0 only then it gives devs even less incentive to target 12_1 even for ports.
I'm making certain that my next GPU supports 12_1 but I'm wondering if it will even matter.
Beerman462
Member
This should be in OP.
And they did, but that doesn't mean they'd stop development at what the Xbox One is capable of.
Except they designed the features. AMD just provided the base hardware and manufacturing. It is like how Apple designs their CPU's but Samsung manufactures them.
There's no way in hell Microsoft did not anticipate and design the Xbox One accordingly.
Locuza
Member
It's of course very unlikely that FL12_1 will be a prominent requirement.
I only see very few Software-Vendors/Games using it for PC exklusive features.
I assume this will be more a job tackled by the various Hardware Vendors with small middleware like VXGI from Nvidia which uses Tiled Resources Tier 3 and Conservative Rasterization for a Global Illumination solution.
Is that it? Meh.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
I am more interested in having fast, one day free again, Order Independent Transparency... The DreamCast's GPU was doing it (HW translucency sorting, basically the same end result) in HW years ago
...So MS ended up designing a GPU that's JUST like the GPU Sony had designed for them by AMD and it performs better.
Weird. It's like AMD sold Sony MS's GPU design, they should totally sue or something!
StalkerUKCG
Banned
So my 780ti won't right. Guess I'll be upgrading on July. Maybe I'll wait it out till the next range of nvidia cards
Locuza
Member
For free you won't get it, but vastly cheaper than before with ROVs.I am more interested in having fast, one day free again, Order Independent Transparency... The DreamCast's GPU was doing it (HW translucency sorting, basically the same end result) in HW years ago
Supported by Maxwell Gen 2 and Intels Haswell.
Sadly, AMD doesn't seem to support this Feature till 2016.
dr_rus
Member
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct3D#Direct3D_12_levels
I'm pretty sure it was CPU optimization for draw calls. DX11 couldn't use more than one core very efficiently making it scale poorly on more than four threads.
Regarding GCN 1.0 not getting DX12:
CPU optimization for draw calls is a feature of DX12 API which has four feature levels for hardware - see wiki above. This optimization will be available on all GPUs which will have DX12 driver and it's not tied to feature levels in any way.
Microsoft did not build the GPU's, though. If AMD simply didn't have the capability for it, then there's nothing else to do. Microsoft aren't going to limit the development of DX12 just because there's a few things the Xbox couldn't do. Like I said, the company doesn't revolve around the Xbox.
Let me clarify. AMD provided the base hardware, let's assume an HD 7970 GPU. Microsoft took that core product, and added some features, removed some features, and redesigned some features. It is now a heavily modified HD7970 that is in most ways better than the original 7970, but it may also miss features, that Microsoft thought the Xbox One didn't need, and making it worse than 7970 in those aspects.
Sony did the same thing with the PS4. They took that base GPU and heavily modified it. Just because the core is the same as the Xbox One GPU does not mean they are both the same in every single way. Some features PS4 clearly has advantage, like the extra ROP's and all that other stuff. Xbox One version on the other hand has a higher clock, because maybe Microsoft modified in some way, ie. the cooling process, to make it run cooler at the same temperature. AMD then just manufactures the GPU given the specifications by Microsoft/Sony.
The same process then repeats with the CPU. Microsoft and Sony took that base Jaguar CPU and they each modified it to their liking. Of course with a CPU there is less headroom for customization, but some things can be modified. As an example, the Xbox One Jaguar runs at a higher clock speed, and again this is probably tied to the cooling design Microsoft has for the rest of the system.
Some of the hardware, such as the RAM, is just base hardware, and not modified. The same can be said for HDD, but these are probably tested more thoroughly to ensure it lasts an entire generation.
Is this clearer?
The Xbone is based on a DDR3 variant of the Bonaire GPU. It is the PS4's GPU that is based on Pitcairn.
no not really. it's more likely ms and sony provided specifications of what they wanted thier SoC to be capeable of and then AMD designed them.
So Microsoft would do the R&D for most of the console but omit the GPU R&D? Makes sense...
not really.
This is exactly like the case with Apple and Samsung. Apple designs the CPU, but lacks the manufacturing abilities, so they pay Samsung to manufacture it. Also, they would have to pay a lot more to AMD/Samsung for them to design it as well, and not just manufacture it. Microsoft/Apple also has way more control on the design process if they do it themselves.