DirecxtX 12 for ArmA 3?

[Mattastic 97]

Snippet from Polygon article By Brian Crecente.

"In a meeting with a gathering of press to show off the Xbox App for Windows 10, Mike Ybarra, partner director of program management who leads engineering efforts for console and PC, responded to the following question about DirectX 12 support of graphics cards.

"To get the full support of DX12 will users need to get a new graphics card?"

To get the "full benefits of DX12," Ybarra replied, "the answer is yes."

"There will be DX 11.1 cards that take advantage of a lot of the driver and software tech that we're bringing in Windows 10, but if you want the full benefits of DX12, you're going to need a DX12 card."

The confusion seems to lie in the difference between full support of DX12 features and support of some DX12 features."

[Sandy* 10]

i know nothing of tech, that is true,

but i know politics and finance, why are people HERE on this forum asking for x64 for the past few years ?

they don't know nothing ? maybe then i am just a parrot i guess.

Some have a valid argument by saying they want most of the game loaded into memory instead of relying on content streaming, others are clueless. It's your type of thinking that has lead to many people here screaming about Arma not supporting "GPU PhysX", running AI on the GPU or using all CPU cores to the maximum and whatnot. Trusting unfounded posts by anonymous people is like shaping your worldview according Youtube comments.

you know if you are so familiar with tech, that MS is selling out on the national security state which ends up to be a war on the people.

and if you disagree that is fine, i know what i know from experience i just call it conspiracy theories because you or others don't have to agree because you did not experience or have seen it irl.

I have not bought the DX12 hype, whether it'll bring performance gains or not remains to be seen (and something for Bohemia to experiment). But what Microsoft's relations to NSA and alike has to do with DX12, I really don't understand. (It's not a nice thing but since you're so extreme about it I take it you don't own a smartphone either, or use services like Steam. :p)

[Maio 293]

Well this pretty much confirms Half Life 3... IMHO

[Arma3goodCPUlowFPS 12]

Well this pretty much confirms Half Life 3... IMHO

yeah. DX12, lets take the 12 and split it = 1 & 2. 1+2 = 3 !! OMG HALF-LIFE 3 CONFIRMED!!

[flatbear 19]

I would like DX12 for arma too!

[dayglow 2]

A good example of what is to come with DX12 is the Star Swarm stress test. It shows how AMD's Mantle helps to bypass CPU bottlenecks. DX12 is similar to Mantle in this way. The Arma engine as it is now is banging against the assest ceiling in DX11, which is the cause of a lot of the slowdowns. DX12 will help bypass this freeing up CPU usage and increase FPS.

[old_painless 182]

Read that Dayz is looking into dynamic shadows and that eg

torchlights should not shine through walls etc. Lots of black ops going on at BI also in advanced graphics

[calin_banc 19]

http://www.littletinyfrogs.com/article/460524/DirectX_11_vs_DirectX_12_oversimplified

DX12 vs. DX11, for the not so technical ones. It clearly shows the benefits of a modern API and the scale in which the performance can be boosted.

To to summarize:

DirectX 11: Your CPU communicates to the GPU 1 core to 1 core at a time. It is still a big boost over DirectX 9 where only 1 dedicated thread was allowed to talk to the GPU but it’s still only scratching the surface.

DirectX 12: Every core can talk to the GPU at the same time and, depending on the driver, I could theoretically start taking control and talking to all those cores (Cuda core/SP).

That’s basically the difference. Oversimplified to be sure but it’s why everyone is so excited about this.

The GPU wars will really take off as each vendor will now be able to come up with some amazing tools to offload work onto GPUs.

Not just about games

Cloud computing is, ironically, going to be the biggest beneficiary of DirectX 12. That sounds unintuitive but the fact is, there’s nothing stopping a DirectX 12 enabled machine from fully running VMs on these video cards.

[I give up 152]

Exactly.

That's why I say that DX9 is the best for A3, since the Engine basically operates with a single core, DX11 causes intense bottlenecks, DX9 would solve much of the issues.

About DX12 and Cloud, Windows 10 will partially introduce a Cloud based Operative System.

[calin_banc 19]

DX9 would bottleneck it even more; at least in DX11 there is some part of multithreading.

[brightcandle 114]

DX9 would bottleneck it even more; at least in DX11 there is some part of multithreading.

I think we see that in the profiler output as well, some of the rendering is using up to about 6 cores at least for moments.

[clifdenhill 1]

I'm curious about something and I wonder if anyone can help me out.

as I understand dx12 allows the cpu to communicate to the gpu through each core not just some allowing things to speed up. yes? or what does it do exactly?

with said as I understand Mantle allows to go straight to the gpu without the processor keeping the cpu from doing extra work. also Mantle is available now (or maybe only for some I think was said last year)

so why wait for dx12 if you could possibly use mantle now and maybe get better results? I'm asking because I may be wrong and if someone knows better they can explain. :D

[DancZer 65]

I can give you one. Developers are familiar with the DX because all the iteration of Arma uses it. They know it well. They know whats are the bottlenecks and where can they improve with the new one. And this mean lot!

[calin_banc 19]

I'm curious about something and I wonder if anyone can help me out.

as I understand dx12 allows the cpu to communicate to the gpu through each core not just some allowing things to speed up. yes? or what does it do exactly?

with said as I understand Mantle allows to go straight to the gpu without the processor keeping the cpu from doing extra work. also Mantle is available now (or maybe only for some I think was said last year)

so why wait for dx12 if you could possibly use mantle now and maybe get better results? I'm asking because I may be wrong and if someone knows better they can explain. :D

Mantle and DX12 should be more or less the same, very easy to port from one to another, at least from what the word on the web is. In another thread, a BI employee said they tried to talk with AMD, but at that time, there wasn't a possibility to join the Alpha. If Bohemia made a move after, who knows. AMD said they have like 80+ developers working, some sticking with Mantle, others learning, preparing for DX12. Bohemia may or may not be one of them.

[clifdenhill 1]

I can give you one. Developers are familiar with the DX because all the iteration of Arma uses it. They know it well. They know whats are the bottlenecks and where can they improve with the new one. And this mean lot!

your right that's true. hopefully mantle not that difficult though cause it might help as good as dx12.

Mantle and DX12 should be more or less the same, very easy to port from one to another, at least from what the word on the web is. In another thread, a BI employee said they tried to talk with AMD, but at that time, there wasn't a possibility to join the Alpha. If Bohemia made a move after, who knows. AMD said they have like 80+ developers working, some sticking with Mantle, others learning, preparing for DX12. Bohemia may or may not be one of them.

thanks calin I remember that comment and curious now is AMD still not letting them use it.

[I give up 152]

DX9 would bottleneck it even more; at least in DX11 there is some part of multithreading.

Do not work like that.

Contrary to some beliefs DX11 doesn't give better performance when compared with DX9, in fact is the opposite, DX11 requires much more from CPU and GPU. We can see it clearly with games that have support for both.

But for instance, with DX9 the issue with PIP would be nonexistent, the severe performance drop that we have in towns, destructible objects and particles would be greatly minimized. These are some examples, DX9 could give benefit in many more situations.

Honestly I don't see the need in DX11 for A3, DX9 can provide everything what is needed with a excellent graphical quality.

If it had support for both, would be great.

[calin_banc 19]

Such games are working "better" under DX9 because they have lesser effects to render. DX9 cannot be faster if the same amount of work is being done.

[I give up 152]

Such games are working "better" under DX9 because they have lesser effects to render. DX9 cannot be faster if the same amount of work is being done.

You are correct.

[brightcandle 114]

You are correct.

So what you are really advocating for is a way to turn off performance impacting effects then. You don't want DX9 really you want to be able to turn off effects that cause a massive performance impact. I don't see any issue with that but I don't think this is the common issue most people have. Reducing CPU usage on a single core will help a lot more people at this point by the looks of things.

[ambushlead 10]

If BIS could add DX12 to Arma 3. I think it would solve all the performance issues people have. But then again, most people would have to buy a new GPU.

[TSAndrey 1]

If BIS could add DX12 to Arma 3. I think it would solve all the performance issues people have. But then again, most people would have to buy a new GPU.

Doubt it. Arma 3 has very big netcode/engine issues. DX12 could maybe help a bit if it increases CPU performance, but it won't solve Arma 3's performance issues.

[forteh 11]

If BIS could add DX12 to Arma 3. I think it would solve all the performance issues people have. But then again, most people would have to buy a new GPU.

From what I understand, dx12 is going to be backwards compatible with nvidia gpus as far back as the gtx460, not sure on amd gpus though.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I really hope DX12 can support older GpU's like GT650M, else I'm screwed. I think I heard them mention that it would be ok handling some aspects of DX12, but new GPU's would obviously experience better benefits.

[calin_banc 19]

If BIS could add DX12 to Arma 3. I think it would solve all the performance issues people have. But then again, most people would have to buy a new GPU.

They've said multiple times that only some features will require dedicated dx12 hardware. For jump in performance, at least to some really good degree, GCN and from Fermi onwards are ok.

Doubt it. Arma 3 has very big netcode/engine issues. DX12 could maybe help a bit if it increases CPU performance, but it won't solve Arma 3's performance issues.

DX12 will fix issues regarding the rendering part. Basically will allow you to see further away and have more objects on screen, compared to DX11. Imagine Altis at full 12k, with furniture in houses and lots of stuff around the house that will finally resemble a real place and not just an airsoft battlefield. More so, you could have objects casting shadows from more than 3 or 4 light sources which in itself will bring a tremendous jump in visual fidelity and immersion. Plus, finally that pesky grass could be render as it should, close and far! :)

Of course, AI and physics will have to be themselves multithreaded and moved to the GPU as much as possible. That's the future.

[Brisse 78]

More so, you could have objects casting shadows from more than 3 or 4 light sources which in itself will bring a tremendous jump in visual fidelity and immersion.

Actually.... There's only one light source in Arma3 :)