DirecxtX 12 for ArmA 3?

[I give up 152]

Heck, my low end machine is getting worse every day.

I have logged to make a post in a ARMA 3 DX12 thread and now I am in a DayZ DX11 forum.

Dam machine.

[djotacon 190]

An interesting benchmark with a integrated gpu that show the benefits to change from dx11 to dx12 (tech demo only)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVdXy7t9oJs

[djotacon 190]

BF4 another engine example of multithread rendering (like DX12,Vulkan does)
 

 

 

AMD ATHLON II X2: 43 fps (2 CORES)

AMD ATHLON II X3: 76 fps (3 CORES)

AMD ATHLON II X4: 88 fps (4 CORES)

[Vasily.B 529]

Excellent presentation to see thing more clear.

 

When all the set of the hardware/software be ready, we have a severe improvements and better graphics quality into the games.

 

To avoid thread spam I add this:

 

 

Isnt directly related but I think the Enfusion guys are doing a great job.

So beautyfull rain..... I wish to see this in A3, maybe they apply it.... Now we have only transforming clouds on camera move (feature or not, but its present since 2 years :D ).

[I give up 152]

BF4 another engine example of multithread rendering (like DX12,Vulkan does)

 

 

 

AMD ATHLON II X2: 43 fps (2 CORES)

AMD ATHLON II X3: 76 fps (3 CORES)

AMD ATHLON II X4: 88 fps (4 CORES)

So, you are comparing a game engine with a 3D rendering API?

Anyway, told you that BF4 barely uses CPU.

Look the performance with a Dual Core and make your conclusions.

Obviously you need to a have a decent CPU, obviously you cannot expect to have any kind of performance with a Celeron or with those AMD, with BF4 or with whatever application.

[nikiforos 450]

So beautyfull rain..... I wish to see this in A3, maybe they apply it.... Now we have only transforming clouds on camera move (feature or not, but its present since 2 years :D ).

Lol graphics are so 2008 there are so many other games looking way better than Dayz!

[djotacon 190]

 

So, you are comparing a game engine with a 3D rendering API?

Anyway, told you that BF4 barely uses CPU.

Look the performance with a Dual Core and make your conclusions.

Obviously you need to a have a decent CPU, obviously you cannot expect to have any kind of performance with a Celeron or with those AMD, with BF4 or with whatever application.

 

 

 I think you need research more about multithread CORES:

 

http://ark.intel.com/es-es/products/65693/Intel-Core-i3-3220-Processor-3M-Cache-3_30-GHz-> 2 cores 4 threads.

 

And speaking about a game that  you dont - i think - play, with the AMD you have and awesome boost using AMD CPUS with more cores (like I show you using your own picture).

 

But this is not a thread about BF4, instead I use this example to show the possible benefits using multithread render engines even in a old - ahem - render API like DX11 and mantle.

 

Edited to avoid bad blood.

[I give up 152]

 I think you need research more about multithread CORES:

 

http://ark.intel.com/es-es/products/65693/Intel-Core-i3-3220-Processor-3M-Cache-3_30-GHz-> 2 cores 4 threads.

 

And speaking about a game that  you dont - i think - play, with the AMD you have and awesome boost using AMD CPUS with more cores (like I show you using your own picture).

 

But this is not a thread about BF4, instead I use this example to show the possible benefits using multithread render engines even in a old - ahem - render API like DX11 and mantle.

 

Edited to avoid bad blood.

Ah, now you are mixing threads with cores.

So, in theory (yours) what's better?

4 cores and 4 threads or 2 cores and 4 threads?

(btw, I dont play games).

[linuxmaster9 101]

Ah, now you are mixing threads with cores.

So, in theory (yours) what's better?

4 cores and 4 threads or 2 cores and 4 threads?

(btw, I dont play games).

4 cores 4 threads. Unless of course the game is IPC reliant. Then, if the 4 core, 4 thread CPU is a CMT style CPU, the 2 core, 4 thread CPU is better. Only because the SMT process has a higher IPC.

[djotacon 190]

Ah, now you are mixing threads with cores.

 

Yeah sure: intel i 3320 2 cores maximum thread managed 4 http://ark.intel.com/es-es/products/65693/Intel-Core-i3-3220-Processor-3M-Cache-3_30-GHz

Not offtopic please.

I dont play games either.

[djotacon 190]

4 cores 4 threads. Unless of course the game is IPC reliant. Then, if the 4 core, 4 thread CPU is a CMT style CPU, the 2 core, 4 thread CPU is better. Only because the SMT process has a higher IPC.

 

4 cores 4 threads is one thread per core the correct phrase will be: 4 cores x 4 threads.

 

Using a low level language "trap" to make a joke.

 

Very "clever" for a fud spreader, bratwurste

[I give up 152]

Mate, rendering threads are not the same of cpu threads.

Since I am a little busy, ill leave here this quote, maybe it can help you to understand (and those who speak about DX12).

 

AMD DX11 drivers for all cards (GCN, Terascale) do not support multi-threaded command lists (an optional feature of DX11). Command lists are accepted and then single-threaded in the driver. This increases CPU overhead, and makes AMD cards highly reliant on fast IPC processors (which AMD processors are not). Nvidia implemented this shortly after the first DX11 game released (after spending two years on it) and saw immense performance gains and decreased CPU overhead.

AMD's performance boost in DX12 is because it now mandates multithreaded command lists and AMD was already working on a similar feature in Mantle. Basically, the boost AMD is seeing in DX12 is similar to the boost Nvidia saw with their Fermi cards in DX11.

Supporting multi-threaded rendering in DX11 gave Nvidia a huge performance advantage, and allowed them to slowly gut parts of their hardware and still keep competitive with AMD's drastically more powerful (hardware) cards. AMD GPUs have always been crippled by the lack of multithreaded command lists, but have been able to specifically optimize some games to lessen the impact (the performance increases seen over time).

Nvidia cards get barely any boost in DX12 because they were already supporting the feature of DX12 that makes it so fast - multithreaded rendering.

DX12 is finally exposing the true power of AMD GPUs, that was locked behind a single-threaded driver for years. If anything, their performance in DX12 is a testament to just how poor the DX11 driver was.

 

 

[djotacon 190]

 

Mate, rendering threads are not the same of cpu threads.

Since I am a little busy, ill leave here this quote, maybe it can help you to understand (and those who speak about DX12).

 

 

 

 

Dj Otacon spells: Ignorate and Confusion. The target suffers double critical "fumble".

 

Too much for you sorry.

[djotacon 190]

Even a broken clock gives the right time twice.

 

http://www.gamepur.com/feature/18311-new-scandal-incoming-brad-wardell-microsoft-amd-nvidia-and-intel-lying.html

 

Excerpt from the article:

 

 

What I hope most users get, I've had a lot of meetings with Microsoft, AMD, and a little bit of Nvidia and Intel – they really need to hit home the fact that DirectX 12, Vulkan, and Mantle, allow all of the cores of your CPU to talk to the video card simultaneously. But everyone's really iffy about that, because that means acknowledging that for the past several years, only one of your cores was talking to the GPU, and no one wants to go 'You know by the way, you know that multi-core CPU? It was useless for your games.' Alright? No one wants to be that guy. People wonder, saying 'Gosh, doesn't it seem like PC games have stalled? I wonder why that is?'

Well, the speed of a single core on a computer has not changed in years. It's been at 3GHz, or 2-something GHz for years, I mean that's not the only thing that affects the speed, but you get the idea. Now, with DirectX 12, Vulkan, and Mantle, it's how many cores you've got. We've got lots of those. Suddenly, you go by 4x, 5x, the performance. That's another thing, quit with this 20% boost crap. They all know it, and off the record I've had people tell me if they say the real numbers, there will be people who just believe it's marketing fluff. Well, bring them over to your booth, show them, and go 'Look, here's DirectX 11, here's DirectX 12. This is running at 8 frames a second, this is running at 60 frames a second.' It's straightforward, but no one wants to admit it. Anandtech did, they showed it, they did their benchmarks.

 

[I give up 152]

Dj Otacon spells: Ignorate and Confusion. The target suffers double critical "fumble".

 

Too much for you sorry.

Mate, relax.

[djotacon 190]

Nvidia is doing his homework:

 

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-async-compute-directx-12-oxide-games/

 

But AMD doing before:

 

http://wccftech.com/async-shaders-give-amd-big-advantage-dx12-performance-oxide-games/

 

This will be used in a future dx12 Arma 3 patch?

 

Hitman does:

 

http://wccftech.com/hitman-feature-implementation-dx12-async-compute-amd/

[dwaight 17]

https://twitter.com/renderpipeline/status/699501481632886786

[setlec 2]

lunarG, the company that works with Valve on vulkan has released its VulkanSDK so now is the time to see what will happen. Arma3 could use some GPU love as well as being multithreaded and also makes the engine more portable since you don't need to rewrite the rendering engine.

[I give up 152]

I am guessing that with Arma 3, DirectX 12 or Vulkan are not going to happen anytime soon.

The reason for my guess? I am going to say trying not to hurt feelings.

 

When we launch ARMA 3 do we see a Nvidia or AMD Logo?

We see a shiny Nvidia Logo, means that there is some kind of partnership or at least some cooperation in development and obviously the ultimate interest of the Nvidia Logo is a commercial one.

The implementation of DX12 would make AMD GPUs (it's a fact that Nvidia is not having any boost with it) more tasty for ARMA 3, probably the shiny Nvidia Logo would not be happy.

The same for Vulkan, in first place it has AMD Logo behind, in second place AMD GPUs would be the ones having benefits and in third place, the shiny Nvidia Logo would not be happy, again.

Maybe some day DX12 can give a boost for Nvidia GPUs, also. Then we may see it on ARMA 3.

Vulkan, I am sure that will never happen.

[en3x 209]

I would believe that for companies with greedy publishers behind like ubisoft or ea, but I haven't found such practices

in Arma series yet.

[djotacon 190]

See directx12 in Arma 3 isnt relevant to me.

 

See fps improvements using every resource avaiable is really important to me.

 

Directx12 may not be the "salvation" of the fps "hell" that the game suffers rigth now but helps a lot to achive more and more fps reducing the overload with dx11 right now in this game.

 

We will see directx12 in a near future?, maybe.

 

We have a first milestone with Tanoa DLC but the work to change internally the main render engine is huge if they try do this, or maybe the Enfusion guys have his work done - and integrated -  before this DLC.

 

But listening "lunatic" conspiracies about NVIDIA and AMD or Dx11 isnt to me valid to fill a thread with good intel.

 

Vulkan is a great contender for the title of best api to improve the render power in a game but to me Directx12 has behind the main creator of the S.O under the game.

 

In an ideal scenario maybe will see a DirectX12 for Win10 and a Vulkan for linux, but I dont have right a cristall ball to see the future - unless I dont have the silver foil hat :) -

[dwaight 17]

Most importantly... if engines start using vulkan, which they will.. we are no longer tied to windows aswell.

So im really looking forward to that, and see how that works out.

 

DX12 is tied to windows only anyways, most people talk about the performance gap, but im also looking forward to get rid of windows 10 and use linux or whatever.

[PuFu 4600]

 

I am guessing that with Arma 3, DirectX 12 or Vulkan are not going to happen anytime soon.

The reason for my guess? I am going to say trying not to hurt feelings.

 

When we launch ARMA 3 do we see a Nvidia or AMD Logo?

We see a shiny Nvidia Logo, means that there is some kind of partnership or at least some cooperation in development and obviously the ultimate interest of the Nvidia Logo is a commercial one.

The implementation of DX12 would make AMD GPUs (it's a fact that Nvidia is not having any boost with it) more tasty for ARMA 3, probably the shiny Nvidia Logo would not be happy.

The same for Vulkan, in first place it has AMD Logo behind, in second place AMD GPUs would be the ones having benefits and in third place, the shiny Nvidia Logo would not be happy, again.

Maybe some day DX12 can give a boost for Nvidia GPUs, also. Then we may see it on ARMA 3.

Vulkan, I am sure that will never happen.

what a fucking long shot. They need to use the nvidia logo since they are using nvidia technology (physx). 

[batto 17]

It has happened:

https://www.khronos.org/vulkan/

https://developer.nvidia.com/Vulkan

[Horus 83]

It has happened:

https://www.khronos.org/vulkan/

https://developer.nvidia.com/Vulkan

..and more on nV blog

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/02/16/vulkan-graphics-api/

 

Vulkan driver is out AMD http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/radeon-vulkan-beta.aspx and nV  https://developer.nvidia.com/vulkan-driver