Totally. However I'm uncertain if license Intel gave to AMD permits sharing of x86 IP and only covers limitations to manufacturing or if it also includes restrictions of who can design x86 devices.
-
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
Totally. However I'm uncertain if license Intel gave to AMD permits sharing of x86 IP and only covers limitations to manufacturing or if it also includes restrictions of who can design x86 devices.
AMD has been very clear about their Semicustom business: They offer to modify their already working designs, which supports a quicker part design process. The customer pays for the customization work as it progresses and owns the resulting chip design. Since AMD has the right to build both the x86-64 CPU parts and their own GPU designs, AMD can get the parts built for the customer. Both of the game chips were AMD Semicustom designs.
Why do people say that AMD fucked up with their 200 series concerning 12.1? The 290x was launched in Oct/2013, while the 970/980 was launched in Sept/2014. That's almost a year difference between launches. So why put the blame on something that AMD don't control a year down the line? Even Nvidia first gen Maxwell card 750Ti that was launch early in 2014 doesn't even have 12.1.
People aren't. It is mostly a single poster with a certain point of view regarding anything AMD does. It is indescribably pathetic.
GameAddict411
Member
What about the PS4? Didn't it have a more modern architecture? I remember it shared a lot with the x290 features(not performance off course).
Unknown Soldier
Member
Oh no I got the AMD fanboy riled up whatever will I do now
shrug.
It is less what your saying and against whom, but rather the hyperbole. You won't catch me passing such ridiculous rhetoric against say. Nvidia.
More modern depends on what features you define as the individual requirements of GCN1.0 or GCN1.1.
There are features in the ps4 gpu that aren't in the xb1, such as the cache volatile bit (also shared with the 290 series). But on the whole they are fairly similar.
GameAddict411
Member
and? so it has the same limitations?
Yeah, in terms of hardware features required by 12_1.
Of course, the ps4 has its own api, but it just means that most games will target hardware 12_0 features mostly.
12_1 features will have to be added specifically for the PC version.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Well, I wouldn't suggest that nobody else had input, and nor would I suggest the crazy idea that Microsoft somehow bought the rights to GCN, redesigned it and then said to AMD "Build what we just designed for you." It was obviously a collaborative effort in which AMD's pre-existing expertise on the subject of graphics and, make no mistake, Microsoft's own as well, was a significant factor. And that isn't to disregard the contributions from others including Nvidia, but there is no way Microsoft's effort in bringing the whole thing together and making DX12 happen in the way that it has thus far is something Microsoft shouldn't receive full credit for.
I'm not saying you specifically are doing so, but let us not forget that Microsoft has been at this graphics API programming thing for quite some time now.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Brad Grenz
Member
What's this, like the 50th time this gen already?
He hasn't been allowed near shoelaces for years.
I thought Xbox One uses a Customized version of DirectX? So technically its not the PC DX12 or DX12.1 as mentioned in the article right? Phil Said the Xbox supports full DX12 functions or something but not at this time....
https://twitter.com/xboxp3/status/446873135594225664
https://twitter.com/xboxp3/status/446873135594225664
Stop talking crazy talk maybe?
There is collaboration with DirectX, but not historically like people are now imagining it. MS doesn't say "these will be the features, create the hardware", GPU companies create hardware and then DX versions and features are specified to use it.
mgs2master2
Banned
lol thought this as well. Leaving disappointed
Yes everyone else who doesn't agree with your hyperbole is an AMD fanboy /s
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
Here is the thing.
When DX11 was the new shit, we had tessellation and some fancy dynamic lighting and shadows as the main attractions. There were, at the start, cards marketed as compatible, and sure enough they could render that shit in a frame. Cards like the HD5850. However, they ran like donkey balls with those features turned on, so you were going to get shitty/inconsistent performance, or just run in DX9 mode. It has been this way with every single DX release I can remember.
I have full faith in current cards sucking ass at any proper DX12 game until the next set of cards with hardware design built from the ground up to utilize the way DX12 works. And even with proclaimed reduced CPU load, I bet CPU load is still increasing and the reduction is just to mitigate the exponentially growing nature of it. Same with the relationship between system RAM and VRAM.
Because of these things I'm waiting a couple more years to build a whole new nice DX12 system. The AAA games really built around it rather than just slapping it on in gimmicky ways should be finishing by then.
When DX11 was the new shit, we had tessellation and some fancy dynamic lighting and shadows as the main attractions. There were, at the start, cards marketed as compatible, and sure enough they could render that shit in a frame. Cards like the HD5850. However, they ran like donkey balls with those features turned on, so you were going to get shitty/inconsistent performance, or just run in DX9 mode. It has been this way with every single DX release I can remember.
I have full faith in current cards sucking ass at any proper DX12 game until the next set of cards with hardware design built from the ground up to utilize the way DX12 works. And even with proclaimed reduced CPU load, I bet CPU load is still increasing and the reduction is just to mitigate the exponentially growing nature of it. Same with the relationship between system RAM and VRAM.
Because of these things I'm waiting a couple more years to build a whole new nice DX12 system. The AAA games really built around it rather than just slapping it on in gimmicky ways should be finishing by then.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
I know, which is why I said "one day"
. There might be a set of bottlenecks of future rendering must have's which could make this feature essentially free like arithmetic ops in a heavily texture dependent game. We shall see .
SenjutsuSage
Banned
I think a picture of a stacked dual gpu would suffice.
It works both ways. Companies like Nvidia and AMD make hardware and then DX versions and features are created to utilize it, but I'm certain the reverse is also true where there are features MS has in mind that would improve the graphics rendering process, but they know existing hardware isn't quite where they should be tech wise in order to properly get the most from it. Basically it's a two way street. Microsoft offers up ideas and solutions, and their partners like AMD, Nvidia etc do the same on their end, and when it all comes together and some consensus is arrived at, we get new pieces of hardware and eventually new directx releases. As an example, just because new hardware with a certain set of capabilities may release well before there's ever a new version of DirectX to expose it to windows gamers doesn't automatically mean that AMD or Nvidia didn't have discussions with, or at least coordinate those efforts with Microsoft or even other parties outside of Microsoft before they went ahead and made their move. To a large degree I imagine there's an extensive and very streamlined process of back and forth that goes on where Nvidia or AMD would want Microsoft (or also in the reverse) to know exactly where their heads are at with regards to certain features.
I have no idea what I'm reading, but it sounds interesting. What does it mean for DX12 on X1?
lol
dr_rus
Member
That's basically from Wikipedia article on DX12.
Unknown Soldier
Member
What it means is developers are going to have an
The good news is the important part of DX12, which is reduced CPU overhead, is something which requires no hardware support as it's improvement in the API itself.
dr_rus
Member
Not really. I'd wager that most devs will opt for one of feature levels with the most of them choosing 12_0 since that's what is there in both consoles (probably). The resource binding is just one feature in these feature levels and there is no FL which require tier 3 of resource binding. It's probably just won't be used until some DX12.2 or DX13.
This.Wow FUD much? GCN 1.1 came out 2 years ago. Kepler owners are seriously fucked with your attitude and in light of the recent tanking performance. GJ nVidia.
I would bet there's a high possibility there.
Most likely 12_1 will become the DX11.1 aka wont get mainstream because the majority of the GPUs support 12_0, including both consoles. (yes PS4 has its own API but is likely based on the same feature set as the Xbox One GPU - Sea Islands)
Pretty good article from ExtremeTech:
Demystifying DirectX 12 support: What AMD, Intel, and Nvidia do and don’t deliver
Demystifying DirectX 12 support: What AMD, Intel, and Nvidia do and don’t deliver
dr_rus
Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN2ayVd9-3E
A video of NV's Mecha demo showcasing some FL12_1 features.
A video of NV's Mecha demo showcasing some FL12_1 features.
Unknown Soldier
Member
DX12 is a mess:
http://wccftech.com/directx-12-supp...12-1-gcns-resource-binding-tier-3-intels-rov/
Strange to see wccftech doing analysis instead of rumors but there it is. Nobody supports the "full" DX12 right now, devs get to pick and choose what they want to support. If they want to make sure Kepler or Intel IGP works properly with their games, they have to restrict themselves to mostly DX11 feature levels.
http://wccftech.com/directx-12-supp...12-1-gcns-resource-binding-tier-3-intels-rov/
Strange to see wccftech doing analysis instead of rumors but there it is. Nobody supports the "full" DX12 right now, devs get to pick and choose what they want to support. If they want to make sure Kepler or Intel IGP works properly with their games, they have to restrict themselves to mostly DX11 feature levels.
dr_rus
Member
No more a mess than DX11 was. The only truly uniform API was DX10 - and that didn't last long because things got complex again with DX10.1.