Back in 2016, we published an article about the state of DirectX 12 in PC gaming. As we wrote back then, DX12 failed to impress as a new API. Most of the DX12 versions of 2016’s PC games were running slower than their DX11 counterparts, something that really surprised us. However, back then we only tested NVIDIA’s GPUs. So, time now to take a look at all the DX12 games that were released in 2017 on both AMD’s and NVIDIA’s hardware.
Let’s start with the obvious: In 2017 we only got 5 DX12 games and 1 Vulkan game. These games are: Forza Motorsport 7, Star Wars Battlefront 2, Sniper Elite 4, Halo Wars 2, Total War: WARHAMMER 2 and Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus. For comparison purposes, in 2016 we got 11 DX12 games and 2 Vulkan games. So yeah, it’s a bit surprising that instead of increasing, the number of DX12 was actually reduced by 50%.
What’s also interesting here is that some developers have simply ignored the DX12 API, even though they’ve been experimenting with it. One of them is Codemasters who claimed in 2016 that its EGO Engine supports the DX12 API. However, F1 2017 – which came out this year – is only using the DX11 API. Another such developer is Ubisoft. Although both Watch_Dogs 2 and Assassin’s Creed Origins only use DX11, the French company has been experimenting with DX12 since 2016.
But anyway, out of all the DX12 games, only Sniper Elite 4 performed better than its DX11 version on AMD’s hardware. Do note that Halo Wars 2 and Forza Motorsport 7 are DX12-only games so we couldn’t really examine their behaviour in DX11. Total War: WARHAMMER 2 and Battlefront 2, on the other hand, ran faster in DX11 than in DX12. This should not surprise us of course as last year’s Total War: WARHAMMER and Battlefield 1 showed the exact same behaviour.
Furthermore, and while Halo Wars 2 and Forza Motorsport 7 run incredibly well on the PC platform, they are not taking full advantage of multi-core CPUs. Even though this is an area that DX12 should – theoretically – excel at, we can clearly see that both of these games are mainly using two CPU threads. Yes, both of them are running with more than 100fps but it’s crystal clear that we’re CPU bottlenecked, even though most of our CPU cores/threads are not stressed out.
But what about the future of DX12? With Xbox One X and PS4 Pro now out, it seems that even fewer developers will invest their resources in Microsoft’s new API. Yes, DX12 can improve performance when used right. This API gives more freedom to developers than before but we do have to ask whether this is something that most developers simply do not want at this point. This freedom obviously means that developers must use extra resources in order to rebuild and optimize their engines for this API. Take for example DX12’s explicit mult-GPU support. On paper, this feature sounds awesome as PC gamers can use GPUs from different manufacturers. However, and contrary to DX11 where NVIDIA or AMD had to step in and enable SLI or Crossfire, this time developers must do all the extra work themselves in order to support it. And from what we’re seeing so far, most of them are not willing to go that extra mile.
This is something that also falls in line with what Jurjen Katsman, CEO of NIXXES Software, said back in February. Katsman claimed that the CPU performance gains that come with DX12 are negligible for enthusiast gamers, for those owning a high-end CPU, for those that game at 1440p or 4K resolutions, and for those using High Quality settings. Moreover, Kartman stated while DX12 can help CPU-heavy scenes that are bottlenecked, and that an overall 10% GPU performance increase can actually happen, DX12 is hard to code and its performance gains may not be worth the extra work it requires.
As we’ve already stated, DX12 is more than Async Compute; a feature that most developers are currently using in their DX12 games. DX12 offers better multi-tasking CPU capabilities, reduces CPU overhead and can handle more draw calls than before. The last feature is crucial for open-world games or those that for some unknown reason under-perform on the PC. DX12 also offers low-level access to the graphics cards, something that – theoretically – should make things easier for experienced developers (but may also scare others).
In conclusion, things are not looking good for DX12 as most triple-A developers are not currently supporting it. As Tiago Rodrigues, 3D programmer at Ubisoft Montreal, claimed, most developers will most probably won’t be particularly satisfied with DX12 if they only care about raw performance. Rodrigues also claimed that it takes a lot of effort to get a DX12 game up and running as fast as its DX11 counterpart. And while DX12 was hyped as the next big API, it may end up as one of the biggest API failures!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
>Most of the DX12 versions of PC games were running slower than their DX11 versions, something that really surprised us.
Shouldn’t have surprised anyone who was around for DX10. DX12 only exists to herd gamers onto Windows 10. It was never intended to improve anything for anyone, it’s just a marketing gimmick like DX10 was.
But really MS was nice during those days compared to today. They used DX10 as a bait to lure gamers into buying Vista but look at the sh*t they have pulled to get people on Win 10. MS is disconnected with PC gamers as usual.
They have used every Windows with a new DX version to do that, it’s part of the OS and intergrated deep into the driver stack.Vulkan is going to have the same issues as OpenGL, only Linux is free of OS upgrades for graphics API.
Well, leopard never changes it’s spots, this is what you get with MS, found guilty of abusing their position as a monopoly, no real competition in the desktop space. Got to say though, developers are somewhat to blame, they didn’t give a f*ck that DirectX was so intergrated into Windows and bad for the consumer so those who are cheering Vulkan and openGL or moan about DX now are hypocrites.
As far as I rememeber, John Carmack is the only one who has been consistent on this, even NVIDIA used OpenGL for their tech demos and have performed well in OpenGL, while others dropped it into the pit of oblivion.
That depends on CPU with weak CPU DX12 actually runs significantly faster in most if not all titles.
No, only when paired with a very fast GPU. Which is a very rare combination.
not at all, actually there are significant differences on a mobile platforms when low level API are used and you can hardly called those very fast. Same the results with mid range GPU on a PC with some AMD FX for instance. Gaming experience in case of low level APIs is significatnly better when mid range or even low end HW is used, because those APIs can use that HW much more efficiently.
For fun i ran wireshark on my PC on idle several servers from Microsoft kept connecting to my PC one for bing one for azure and one was for some other microsoft server so i decided to run Comodo firewall went to click on an image of mine and Comodo said the photo’s app wanted to connect online and the photo’s app wouldn’t even open until i allowed it to in the firewall haha that is how connected 10 is a bunch of BS features no one asked for all we want is a fast light secure OS that is compatable with our software and games not a single thing more.
Yea none of that is true. Photos app doesn’t require any connection to a server. Just stop.
So you checked it yourself or you’re talking about your behind? Download comodo firewall and get back with me
Lol me to my friends did not believe me when i said to them i have a pirated copy of win7 replaced it with original win10 for free XD
It’s not exactly free. You’re actually trading your right to privacy when you install Win10.
And you think this is a new thing with Windows?
No. But it could be disabled in previous versions. Also, previous versions did not activate all the snooping again when they updated.
Please. It’s no less private than 7 or 8.
Yeah and Microsoft are not a charity.
Because giving Windows 10 for free is a free pass to invade your privacy even more, do you think it was only Windows 10 that did it? Windows 10 collects more data about you then ever, it’s not the first Windows to do it. As for rights, people accept the EULA when they install Windows 10, your rights as a consumer are still valid like any product and if you accept the EULA which tells you about the data collect then it’s your problem.
now go use your android phone or chrome…. you clueless parrot.
Except for DX12 though, there was no reason to switch from W7 to W10.
Except for all the great features it came with and maintaining compatibility and the fact that they stopped supporting W7. And the fact that it’s faster. And 1000x better.
you are a coder or a 12 year old clueless kid?
why not both?
Joke’s still on you, a pirated copy of Windows 7 is better than a legal copy of Windows 10.
Lol, no. Windows 10 is better than 7 in every way.
If you’ve had ANY problems or annoyances with Win10 ever at any point I’m already ahead of you by using Win7 with no updates in years. I have had zero OS problems in years. Everything just works. There is no conceivable reason for me to downgrade until MS finds a way to force me.
DX10 was not a gimmick. Most devs just didn’t bother. They’re still not leveraging DirectX properly actually. DX10 enabled GPUs to use system RAM as VRAM. Current games STILL don’t exploit this feature that came 11 years ago.
Having the GPU communicate with system RAM is simply too slow. Nobody uses it because it’s pointless.
Too slow? Textures are cached. They don’t need to be really fast.
if GPU has no dedicated memory then it is certainly a problem.
Cause and effect:
– Windows 10 launches, it’s controversial, it fails to take off properly, so
– Microsoft loses interest in finishing their work on DirectX 12, so
– Microsoft stops bribing/forcing developers into DirectX 12, so
– DirectX 12 becomes irrelevant.
That’s the thing that some people missed. DX12 was to push Windows 10 on PC gamers. MS was hell-bent on coercing everyone onto Windows 10 at the time.
only to maintain appearances that they still believe in it
That’s better than they’ve done for Windows Phone, Band, Groove (subscription), OneDrive (reduced storage), etc.
Well, not like they didn’t also try to push the Zune for years, even after everyone knew it was a dud, instead of the fabled “iPod Killer” everyone predicted it to be.
But yeah, I guess they’re applying some Xbox tactics in this case; keep pushing and pray that it works out in the end, because…. why wouldn’t it? >.>
Mantle only have to work with GCN. but even with slight hardware change already enough to throw initial optimization out of the window. i still remember mantle in BF4 work wonderfully on 290X. then came 285 (dub as GCN 1.2 at the time). using mantle causing much worse performance vs DX11.
Now imagine DX12 have to work with various architecture that have even larger difference than GCN 1.1 and 1.2. low level API that should work on various different hardware was very bad idea to begin with.
Vulkan have feature makes it more suitable to low level API but it might also the reason why majority of game developer chose not to use OpenGL over directx before.
DX12 is finished. Implementations may not be, but the API is done. What makes you think it isn’t?
I agree with your other points though.
It’s “finished” now, yeah, now that they’ve finally added Shader Model 6.0, months behind schedule, but yeah, you’re correct in that it’s really just about engine implementations, now.
Well, they did screw up the launch of the Xbox One X (ridiculously pathetic absence of any sort of notable launch title lineup, and most importantly, not even a single Halo title to accompany the launch, as they allowed 343 to skip Halo 3 Anniversary), so maybe they’re just becoming stupid(er), rather than complacent and languorous, or anything else, even.
Yeah, but I think the UHD thing was more Sony dropping the ball than anything, as Microsoft got really slammed after a few years for having nothing but a DVD player in their Sh*tbox360.
But yeah, when they actually want something to sell, they put in effort. When they don’t, they just abandon it entirely ^^
DX 12/Vulkan increases performance if used properly. Emulator devs already proved this. The thing is, devs just don’t give a flying fu** about PC because they’re lazy and PC gamers can brute force performance by buying newer sh** on the market (and Nvidia/AMD love this so they won’t make an action about the problems on PC performance). DX12/Vulkan won’t be used more unless someone sponsors it like AMD’s Mantle. I bet the multi-GPU support will be used once or twice at most in DX12’s entire existence
Ten companies? what 0_0?
Difficult to work with? or devs are just too used to making games at DX 11 and leaving the fixing to Nvidia/AMD drivers that they’re not willing to learn how to use a new API or making the effort themselves? If it’s so difficult to use then why would the emulator devs use DX12/Vulkan and even focus on it rather than DX11?
Who’s talking about Mantle’s performance? and even high end PCs benefit on Doom’s Vulkan patch 0_0?
It’s more to do with having mature DX11 code in their engine, which has taken along time, they don’t want to throw that out, Quantum Break Devs even said it for their DX11 version, also Ubisoft are not even using DX12 yet. DX12 wouold be great for AC Origins because of the sheer amount of draw calls, would have been great for AC Unity as well.
Yeah, devs just don’t want to make an effort to change what they used to do because “Who cares. It’s just PC.” Ubicrap even admitted that PC gamers can just bruteforce performance by buying new hardware
Yes PC does have the brute force but devs just don’t want to give up all the work they put into their mature DX11 engine, notice how it don’t get that core0 maxed out much now days, and DX11 games scale alot better now with cores. The down side is that we’re hitting 100% on all cores more regular now, creating a CPU bottleneck espeically at 1080p, shouldn’t have that issue with DX12.
Nearly all engines support DX12 now. Which ones don’t?
Yes but the games don’t use DX12 only. Basically, there are no DX12 only games outside XB1 ports, and as I rememeber Crysis 3 was the first game to go pure DX11 only, no dev has done that yet with DX12.
Ubisoft have DX12 in The Division.
One game and none of their new games use DX12.
No, I did not so please show the 10 companies you’re talking about or are you mistaking these partners that “will use” the API rather than “sponsoring” which means fund it?
Can’t explain but know first hand? yyyeahhh …………
Doom was just an example but there are games that are made in DX12/Vulkan that benefits high end PCs. Just scour the internet and you’ll find them. You were talking about Mantle’s performance because “Mantle worked on a handfull of games. And only really improved
performance for people with lower end or older hardware. Like the FX
series CPU’s” and not because it was what’s Vulkan is based off of which is an information I already know. Are you trying to segue you’re argument to confuse me or something ? So again scour the internet and you’ll find out that even high end PCs benefit from Vulkan/DX12.
“But even developers like Quantum Break state it isn’t worth it, because of how invested the industry is in DX11 and how difficult it is to use DX12” uhh … you’re just proving my point. These devs say “It’s difficult to use” or “It’s not worth it” but the real reason is they are just too used to DX11 and too lazy to make an effort on switching to DX12/Vulkan or they just don’t give a f**k even though it solves many performance problems on PC. As I said, look at emu devs focusing on DX12/Vulkan instead because it improves performance rather than making an excuse that “It’s too difficult to use” or “It’s not worth it.”
As a developer, its not that difficult to use unless you’re creating your own game engine.
I actually find using vulkan for my own projects to be somewhat beneficial, especially when dealing with advanced AI or special movement processing. Otherwise, it is honestly easier to just use DX11, which I am very familiar with.
Emulator is not the same as game engine. with Emulator the CPU have always being the problem due to it’s nature. so using DX12 or vulkan will help emulator a lot in that regard.
Yeah, because CPU utilization isn’t a problem in PC games nowadays, right?
I’m not saying that. But it is not fair to compare emulator and game engine. Just look at most emulator. Even if the cpu inside pc is many times faster than the one used in console that being emulated we still see large bottleneck. Low cpu overhead with DX12 or vulkan will going to see it’s most effect here.
Yeah, “most effect” in emu but it doesn’t mean it won’t affect PC performance. Also, why are you focusing so much on CPU overhead when it’s not the only benefit a game will get on a low level API?
I forgot all the written benefits that a game can get when a low level API is used properly on an article I read about but I’m going to list a few.
-Better multi-core CPU utilization so yeah, less CPU overhead
-Better GPU utilization so obviously better FPS
-Better frametimes so less stuttering
-Lesser dependence on GPU driver because the work is going to fall to the devs themselves (I forgot the reason why but I think it’s because a low level API won’t need further tweaking game by game unlike what is AMD/Nvidia is doing now)
lmao windows 10 is such a piece of crapgarbage i’m glad dx12 failed. Worst OS ever
No way, Vista and Windows ME are more stronger contenders for that crown.
Haven’t tried these ones, but i uninstalled Win 10 because of the super slow internet speed, even after trying every hint on the internet for a fix. Win 7 for life(win 8.1 wasn’t bad either compared to win 10)…
If you want Mental Illness, then try ME, Windows 8’s UI gave alot of people cancer.
Windows ME was the worst piece of sh*t that MS ever spewed out imo. But that OS is probably never even been heard of by most PC gamers today.
Vista was a mess on release. It was a resource hog compared to XP but in all fairness some of the blame was due to PC manufacturers putting “Vista Ready” stickers on their retail PCs with 512 MB RAM which was plenty of RAM for XP but not for Vista and some hardware manufacturers that didn’t provide drivers that were Vista compatible in time for the release. The UAC was an irritation too but for the informed it could be turned off.
Vista got better after patching and hardware manufacturers providing better support but really it was just a stepping-stone to Windows 7 which was a great OS.
Same could be said about XP, what an absolute POS on launch and a security disaster, no firewall on by default, that network virus shutting down the OS for loads of users.
Vista is good. C mon.
No, No it’s not.
It is so because i said so
7 is my favorite Windows but 10 isn’t that different.
My internet speed was too slow, i woudn’t even mind microsoft spyware crap if it wasn’t for this crap
Visually it’s a massive downgrade. Not to mention that overbloated Start Menu, weird changes to the UI in general, etc.
It may not be “that different” overall, but it is a massive downgrade, regardless.
nonsense… you are talking bullshite like most noobs.
Wtf? WIndows 10 out of the box gives around 10% perf boost compared to 8 and 15-20 % compared to Windows 7. It has it’s downsides, but for gamers, the best performance is from Win 10.
I didn’t even tried to play games on the win 10, i gave up trying to fix the slug and slow internet and then i “downgraded” to a win7.
I stuck with Windows 7 on my gaming rig until this year when I did a new build. I don’t really have any issues with Win 10 so far but it took a bit of Googling to find out how to do a few things. When I installed it I chose not to have MS running any of their spyware but I don’t know for certain if that made any difference. I’m in the camp that believes that nothing is private where you go online anyway. If MS is farming that info on me then they are just another one doing it. No, I don’t condone it or like it but it’s reality. Even a cell phone conversation isn’t private. The NSA routinely monitors cell phone calls and uses voice recognition software to listen for certain words and phrases for possible terrorist activity. If one of your conversations triggers an alert then they may have an agent monitor your cell phone conversations.
I did notice on my work computer when we upgraded from Windows 7 to Windows 10 that my PC booted a little quicker.
I could stand the spyware crap IF the internet worked properly for me 😀
yeah well but you are a moron….
“With Xbox One X and PS4 Pro now out, it seems that even fewer developers will invest their resources in Microsoft’s new API.”
Xbox does not make use of DX12 already?
It does but console low level API already could do alot of the things DX12 can do anyway, like Async Compute and multithreading but it takes alot longer to get up and running and optimise for, low level graphics API’s are no easy task. XB1X can port quicker and get the game ports up and running quicker yes.
If you need any proof that the PC are much easier to get games up and running, ask yourself why the devs admit that in game demos of their games or virtical slices, it’s usually on a beefy PC running it.
Yes, sure, but it’s contradicting with what he said in the article, the XBX investment will be higher and much of the code will be ported to one or the other.
DX12 will continue as long as MS wants, and while the xbx family exists.
Well of course because Microsoft owns and controls the OS, graphics API on both platforms, they’ve been dictating that since the 90s anyway on the PC
I don’t recall seeing anywhere state the Xbox One can do Async and better multi-threading. I did however read that it supports the Draw Call Bundling feature which is one of the big performance enhancing features of DirectX 12.
Why do you think AMD made Async back in 2012, no PC graphics API supported it, it was ready for consoles, their API can do it and because it’s direct to the metal API, it makes use of the hadrware much better, but devs take a long time getting up and running with the game, plus optimisation.
Top Optimized Games 2017 Please
Wolfenstein II, the only one PERIOD
Remember of Direct x 10? Yea, same sheit happen here.
LOL THIS GUY IS TALKING COMPLETE B#@SH@T LOL DX12+UWP+DENUVO+VMPROTECT+UPLAY+ORIGIN+STEAM+ALWAYSONLINE+MICROTRANSACTION+LOOTBOX+SEASONPASS IS THE FUTURE YOU CAN’T STOP THAT
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a1bb21fb762606b5987709c8f799b1d6e3c2d8d8c3dca1837ec6588f6d58a140.jpg
I’m kinda curious, how many DirectX 12 capable games used Denuvo and/or VMProtect Vs. DirectX 11 games? Do the higher performing DirectX 12 games lack nasty forms of DRM?
Not meaning to put you off but I don’t really keep up with what games use Denuvo for the most part. There are people here that can better answer your question than me.
There may be a big difference between a game made from scratch only for DX12 or Vulkan and a game straddling APIs. If you look at a lot of early DX11 titles, they still supported DX9 and were basically just DX9 games with some DX11 effects duct-taped on. That’s not going to give optimal performance.
The thing is,though… are we really hurting for CPU horsepower on PC? DSOG is always crybabying about games not supporting enough cores, but if the game runs fine who cares? Destiny 2 will reach 60fps on a $65 dual-core! The current console CPUs are trash so multi-platform games are going to have low CPU requirements to begin with. A couple i5 cores probably run circles around six Jaguar cores.
And aside from performance, what do DX12 and Vulkan actually add? DX9, 10, and 11 all added various special effects. I don’t recall hearing that the new APIs add anything other than (theoretically) better performance.
I mean, if I was a dev sitting on a nicely optimized DX11 engine I wouldn’t bother with 12 or Vulkan either, probably. It’s more work, it gives you 0 extra visual FX, and it doesn’t help performance that much. Frankly, I’d rather they put that work into making more content and making the game bug-free and stable.
More performance means you can increase AI, have more complex environments and so on so in a way 12 and vulkan can increase the experience
Not really, games are designed for the lowest spec and scaled up accordingly. All models of xbone/ps4 have a very bad CPU and are therefore the limiting factor for any sort of progress on an AI front. not sure what you mean about a “more complex environment” since you’re going to need more GPU resources to render all the extra stuff like small objects and detail scattered around a world
More complex environments such as bigger game environments, physics that doesn’t look like its coming from 2005.
I do agree that consoles have terrible CPUs and that will continue to hold PC games back however, and yes games are made from a low stand point and scaled up. In reality I would be happy to see all game developers either create an engine that is as good as Unity/Unreal 4 engine or stop using their old crappy 2010 game engines and switch over to a modern engine and just let the guys at Unity and Unreal handle the coding for the engine. Then simply learn and switch over to using Vulkan or Directx 12 I mean we have Bethesda doing it now didn’t we all claim they were the laziest or something haha and now they even use Vulkan. I can see Microsoft finally losing in the API wars this time around as 12 only works on 2 devices where Vulkan works on well everything modern really and that can make ports that much easier for developers.
At this point it almost makes no sense financially to support DirectX11 in any new projects as hardware dating back to 2012 support Vulkan.
The issue isnt support for the API the issue is the work it takes to switch over to those API’s. Yes, vulkan is the more supported API because it works on more platforms/OS’s but DX12 has Microsoft (and with it xbox) behind it.
I quite clearly remember the big draw for me getting a new PC that supported DX11 was tessellation, the big talking point with mantle/DX12/vulkan was “draw calls” and those benchmarks of how many DX11 could take without performance tanking, but we’re still nowhere even close to those limits so there’s not even any benefit from that perspective.
The Dev’s are lazy. DX12 is great but lazy Dev’s don’t wanna do any extra work -_-
DX 12/Vulkan increases performance if used properly. Emulator devs already proved this. The thing is, devs just don’t give a flying fu** about PC because they’re lazy and PC gamers can brute force performance by buying newer sh** on the market (and Nvidia/AMD love this so they won’t make an action about the problems on PC performance). DX12/Vulkan won’t be used more unless someone sponsors it like AMD’s Mantle. I bet the multi-GPU support will be used once or twice at most in DX12’s entire existence
DX12, as it stands, doesn’t and hasn’t really offered much to really turn things around. DX 11 is still on top, with DX 12 behind it and Vulkan in third.
We have less games sporting Vulkan, some games sporting DX 12 and not doing much, but a majority that run on DX 11.
MS and devs are really going to have to give it their all within the next 5 years, if they want to see the API doing anything meaningful and head turning.
Which then makes it a situation, where we should have just waited longer for a new API to come about, rather than feeling that we really needed to use DX 12, when a new APi is going to end up besting it.
Sometimes an API gets kinda skipped. Barely anything used 10. much less required it. And 11 took several years to become the standard over 9.
Directx 12 simply doesn’t look like the savior we all hoped it would be vulkan on the other hand has for once i think Microsoft might have lost this battle.
That’s so sad that that PC devs isn’t taking any risk on improving tecnologies. They’re stuck in their preexistent engines. It’s a shame that the implementation of technology improvements come from outdated consoles, like Horizon for PS4, presumably, The Last of Us II. Recent games like Ghost Recon Wildlands, Wolfenstein, Prey, Total War Warhammer… feels so much old. The ball is in their court.
Yes, there are exceptions, like Unreal, Frostbite, REDEngine… despite that, few developers know how to implement them.
oyé homosexual gordo todavia se la mamas a los gordos piperos de youtube
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/695ef0c65c98ee9cc69cf2e922618fb88b5f2a2e424dc259bd26134668274f79.jpg
Emulators are seeing a performance increase with DirectX 12/Vulkan because of
very specific new functionality in the API that the older API lacks, allowing them to efficiently do specific tasks that the emulated system did. That doesn’t mean a majority of games are doing stuff in a way where those same features can provide a similar lift in performance.
The overall feature set of the new DirectX 12/Vulkan API is underutilized by emulators because most of what is required was already supported by DirectX 11/OpenGL.
It wasn’t until after the Fall Creator Update for Windows 10 was released that Shader Model 6.0 (a major DirectX 12 component) was finalized/released. It also wasn’t until late this year that they finished up their debugging/performance analysis component for DirectX 12 (PIX).
It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to realize why there is a dearth of DX 12 games in 2016 and 2017 and why they often performed worse than DirectX 11. DirectX 12 has basically been in public beta on PC.
This is also a big reason behind why there are more Vulkan games than DirectX 12. Vulkan has been feature complete for a very long time compared to DX 12.
DirectX 12 aims to improve performance, which in turn means that the visuals can be pushed higher while achieving the same FPS as they would under DirectX 11 with worse visuals.
So far it seems game devs are trying to improve performance for the sake of improving performance in their DirectX 12 implementations, which is fine, those with high refresh rate displays appreciate this development.
Remember how it was all “blame NVidia” at first – as usual? Ironic, especially now that AMD’s best GPUs can barely compete with a nearly 2 years old GeForce 1070 in either API – and AMD was hyping DX12 together with MS like there’s no tomorrow
It was in AMD’s best interest to hype DX12 because their architecture handled it better than Nvidia’s but what do we see now that DX12 has been out for 2 1/2 years now. One Developer whining about it’s too difficult to learn and use. Reviewers saying that a game that can use either DX12 or DX11 saying that with DX12 the performance takes a hit without any noticeable improvement graphically. I have also seen it reported that DX12 isn’t being fully implemented even when it is being used in a lot of games.
The one on the right is DX12
you guys should thank novidio and its gamenotworks mallware blackbox cr@p for that! since they added dx12 support in late 2017 for it and vulkan support its still missing. i know! its really hard for an nvfangirl to accept the truth. you guys deserve to enjoy your api bottlenecked singlethreaded dx11 consololow ports!
yeah well as carmack said.. most game coders are lazy or not very good at their job.
you may have a few good people working on a game. but that does not help when most of them rely on premade engines that are in development since 2010 when there was no DX12 API.
if you want to blame someone blame publisher. most often developer have not much choice rather than following the orders that pays their salary. games getting bigger and bigger and yet development time has not increased. in fact publisher want to shorten the development time even more so they can cash in their investment ASAP. low level API will going to need more fine tune due to more burden are shifted towards game developer. most often rather than optimizing the performance game developer are much more busy to fix the issues with their own game due to being rush to the market. yes carmack is very knowledgeable when it comes to programming games. but how many games did he pump out in a decade?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a39e6ef0bcc6e0419c1497d5b3a4314cb204184084a24a06e0d470f5a0102768.jpg
there is one “nice” hardware manufacturer which we should thank for that xD
In November 71% of steam players were using windows 7, of course that number fluctuates but still fairly telling of how many still cant use dx12.
I don’t remember what company it was (was a year ago) but I read a article that not enough people used dx12 capable os’s or gpu’s yet to make the jump worth while when dx 11 still does a great job and way more people can take advantage of it over dx12.
If its not worth the time/money investment companies aren’t gonna waste money supporting it no matter the potential for performance. Maybe in a few years.
didn’t surprise me. I called derelictx 12 a flop from the announcement
DSOG and many people missed one important factor of DX12 adaptation : China don’t use windows 10! With the coming of age chinese market like with pubg, developers are forced to make games compatible with dx 11 or risk alienating themselves from a big market on the rise.
And quite many old timers still on win 7 too, myself included, lol.
doesn’t matter if all PC in china using Windows 10. with low level API more work are being shifted towards game developer. ultimately using low level API GPU maker would not need to do game specific optimization anymore (that’s what AMD hope). but that simply not realistic looking at how the games are built right now.
fifa 18 support dx12 isn’t
So where are the 10 companies “sponsoring” the api? And as I said, I already know that AMD contributed to Vulkan’s development with Mantle. I’ve read that a long time ago.
You’re the ignorant one. Have you ever used an emulator before? Emulators use DX/openGL renderer you fu**ing idiot. Just look at the graphics settings of the emulator and you’ll see different renderers. Emulators will take a big performance hit if they emulate the console’s api but it will be more accurate. It’s called “software” renderer in the graphics settings if I’m not mistaken. Also, I said “scour the internet and you’ll find out that even high end PCs benefit from Vulkan/DX12.”
https://forums .anandtech .com/threads/ashes-of-the-singularity-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-hitman-cpu-tests-%C2%96-dx11-vs-dx12.2465194/
http://i.imgur .com/57SI1US.png
https://forums .anandtech .com/threads/gamegpu-sniper-elite-4-dx11-dx12-performance.2499237/
There, I did it for you because you seem reluctant to search for a proof to prove you’re wrong. You clearly don’t want to understand more because you’ll be proven wrong —__—
Was surprised to see X Rebirth VR is using Vulkan 🙂
at least vulkan games perform better then opengl versions and have solved the cpu bottleneck which seems to be backed by wintel !
Serious Sam Fusion 2017, which you get free if you bought SS: TFE HD or SS:TSE HD or SS3, supports vulkan in beta, you forgot a game.
I wish more devs would support vulkan. Doom 2016 and Wolfenstein 2 run really well using it.
It’s the standard way of doing things for Microsoft. Just like with Windows, it’s always a good one followed by a bad one. DX7 was great, DX8 was meh, DX9 was great (still used today), DX10 was meh, DX11 is great, DX12 is meh. Waiting for DX13.
DX12 never had any steam. DX never does. Gaming is driven by the console sector, for some reason despite the proven fact PC is more profitable. The consoles do not utilize new technologies. You can look back the fact that DX9 was huge for several years. And it has nothing to do with AMD.
Also no, DX12 versions do not run worse than DX11 unless your PC is trash.
“Although both Watch_Dogs 2 and Assassin’s Creed Origins only use DX11, the French company has been experimenting with DX12 since 2016.”
Actually, Ubisoft had Unity running on DX12, so I’d say experimenting since 2014/2015.
Vulkan oughta be the standard
>It’s piss easy to reinstall
I haven’t had to reinstall Windows 7 ever. I installed Windows 7 on my current PC in 2011 and on my laptop, I guess, 2 years ago. No reinstalls necessary.
>Both from Microsoft actually providing Windows security updates and me not being a re**rd, but someone who actually knows how to use a computer properly
Accepting every update and reinstalling your OS frequently is the proper way. Don’t mind me, just running a completely stable, clean OS for 7+ years here. I don’t know what I’m doing.
>the extra crap people complain about (That you can still turn off with third party applications)
This directly negates your point about being easy to reinstall.
>getting games I wouldn’t otherwise get to play if I didn’t get Windows 10.
Console ports of trash like Gears, no thanks. Also “Microsoft is holding games hostage on this OS” is not an argument in favor, it’s a sign that it must be trash. They did the same thing with Vista a decade ago and I didn’t fall for that either.
It’s because of Nvidia holding developers back so their old outdated hardware can still be sold. Even pascal is severely outdated compared to AMD, however since they have almost total control of the pc market, Nvidia can do whatever the hell they want and still get away with it. Makes me sick.