AMD: There won't be a DirectX 12, BF4 apart of next AMD bundle

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

can somebody tell me why another DX is needed?

DX11 is still barely used compared to DX9.

PublicNuisance

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

A good chunk of the most popular video cards on there are DX11. Progress shouldn't stop for anything, especially people clinging to DX9.

Okay? Most people having DX11 cards means absolutely nothing. Also,  Steam=/=entire PC community

Why continue if we aren't pushing what we have now? It's a waste. DX11 has been for the most part tacked on just to get more sales.

DirectX11 is a baby that is learning how to walk.

Features like tessellation could have been included in DX10 anyway, it's simply that Nvidia bribed MS not to include it because their hardware didn't support it at the time. (unless you count "geo shaders" for a tessellation unit of sorts)

nameless12345

Do you really believe that? Are you that thick?

There is no logic or evidence to support that.

I have the feeling Microsoft is purposely doing this so the nextxbox won't be left behind for a while

links

http://www.geeks3d.com/20130411/amd-there-wont-be-directx-12/

http://www.techpowerup.com/182416/There-Won-t-Be-a-DirectX-12-Battlefield-4-Part-of-Next-Bundle-AMD-Vice-President.html

seems to come into conflict with this:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/amd-roy-taylor-directx12/

http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-cuts-down-another-directx-shutdown-rumor

Advancements in PC graphics technology could be on the verge of a slump, according to GPU major AMD. In an interview with German publication Heise.de, AMD vice president of global channel sales, stated that his company doesn't believe there will be a DirectX 12 API, at least not as far as the company can see. The timing of this statement is particularly important, as both AMD and NVIDIA are expected to unveil next-generation graphics products by the end of the year.

Neither Microsoft's Windows 8 operating system, nor the rumored Windows "Blue" 8.1, could ship with a newer DirectX version. Taylor was responding to a question from Heise about next-generation GPUs and technologies they could be built around, to which he replied that normally, new DirectX versions stimulate introduction of new GPU architectures, but there won't be a DirectX 12, and so the company's next-generation GPUs will integrate other technologies. Answering another question, Taylor hinted that Battlefield 4, EA's upcoming entry to the hit online FPS multiplayer franchise, could be part of the company's next "Never Settle" bundle.

old news

If Microsoft stops advancing PC graphics with DirectX that will just mean AMD, Nvidia and Intel will make more use of alternatives such as OpenGL or make their own tech. This will stop nothing, the master race will live on and our visuals will still reign supreme.

can somebody tell me why another DX is needed?

DX11 is still barely used compared to DX9.

can somebody tell me why another DX is needed?

DX11 is still barely used compared to DX9.

Jebus213

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

A good chunk of the most popular video cards on there are DX11. Progress shouldn't stop for anything, especially people clinging to DX9.

Hard to say, especially since there's so little native DX11 games on the market. DX11 still has plenty to offer, I'd say.

However, if DX eventually ends up standing in the way of graphics progress, something will come and replace it, I guess.

Hard to say, especially since there's so little native DX11 games on the market. DX11 still has plenty to offer, I'd say.

However, if DX eventually ends up standing in the way of graphics progress, something will come and replace it, I guess.

Rocker6

I'm wondering what MS could pull off with a DX12, perhaps making it easier to use? Less overhead? Then again we'll probably have to wait for the new hardware innovations with Maxwell. Volta. and whatever AMD is working on to see what MS has in store for the next DX.

old news

lostrib

there was a thread posted already!?

I can ask my nephew, he can probably make something better than DirectX.

can somebody tell me why another DX is needed?

DX11 is still barely used compared to DX9.

Jebus213

I mean, Witcher 2 was DX9 and that was the most advanced game out there, so there's tons of work to do with DX11, yeah.  DX is just a generalization anyways, it doesn't dictate graphics at all.

But we might see DX12 down the road, just not for a couple years at least.

I wouldn't worry since there are alternatives such as OpenGL that Nvidia and AMD can use.

[QUOTE="PC_Otter"][QUOTE="Mr_BillGates"]

Makes total sense. AMD will be out of business by the time DX12 comes out. 

Mr_BillGates

No worries. Intel will buy ATI division and give them the driver team they desperately need.

My real problem here is stability and a stagnation in innovation for a few years if AMD goes bye bye because there will be no real graphics competitor to Nvidia (Intel would take a while to catch them), and of course, the only "real" competing x86 chip designer to Intel will be gone, leaving Intel to "reign" supreme until everyone revolts to ARM.

Moving to ARM isn't entirely bad, but it could spell the end of custom computer building, which is what keeps so much of us interested in the first place.  It is entirely likely ARM would just take x86's place there too.  There are plenty of custom boards out there for development, and AFAIK, ARM based boards can support established standards like PCI-E, so add in peripheral boards and co-processors can continue to be added and upgraded.

I wouldn't worry since there are alternatives such as OpenGL that Nvidia and AMD can use.

Cyberdot

True, the second they stop advancing and evolving technology which includes API, said componant be it software or hardware will die in a forseeable future, so if we will not see a DX12 for many years, DX will become irellavent for alot of people. OpenGL will likely take that place again.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

can somebody tell me why another DX is needed?

DX11 is still barely used compared to DX9.

Chozofication

I mean, Witcher 2 was DX9 and that was the most advanced game out there, so there's tons of work to do with DX11, yeah.  DX is just a generalization anyways, it doesn't dictate graphics at all.

But we might see DX12 down the road, just not for a couple years at least.

Intel wants to keep X86 as an option not destroy it, and for that they need AMD.

This is why Intel has essentially been pricing itself out of certain markets so that AMD gains stability.

If AMD goes under, regulatory agencies around the world will be all over Intel like mold on a shower curtain.

Why continue if we aren't pushing what we have now? It's a waste. Jebus213

I have the feeling Microsoft is purposely doing this so the nextxbox won't be left behind for a while

links

http://www.geeks3d.com/20130411/amd-there-wont-be-directx-12/

http://www.techpowerup.com/182416/There-Won-t-Be-a-DirectX-12-Battlefield-4-Part-of-Next-Bundle-AMD-Vice-President.html

seems to come into conflict with this:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/amd-roy-taylor-directx12/

http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-cuts-down-another-directx-shutdown-rumor

Advancements in PC graphics technology could be on the verge of a slump, according to GPU major AMD. In an interview with German publication Heise.de, AMD vice president of global channel sales, stated that his company doesn't believe there will be a DirectX 12 API, at least not as far as the company can see. The timing of this statement is particularly important, as both AMD and NVIDIA are expected to unveil next-generation graphics products by the end of the year.

Neither Microsoft's Windows 8 operating system, nor the rumored Windows "Blue" 8.1, could ship with a newer DirectX version. Taylor was responding to a question from Heise about next-generation GPUs and technologies they could be built around, to which he replied that normally, new DirectX versions stimulate introduction of new GPU architectures, but there won't be a DirectX 12, and so the company's next-generation GPUs will integrate other technologies. Answering another question, Taylor hinted that Battlefield 4, EA's upcoming entry to the hit online FPS multiplayer franchise, could be part of the company's next "Never Settle" bundle.

NoodleFighter

There would be "DirectX Blue". http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/30666-next-directx-codenamed-blue

[QUOTE="Chozofication"]

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

can somebody tell me why another DX is needed?

DX11 is still barely used compared to DX9.

osan0

I mean, Witcher 2 was DX9 and that was the most advanced game out there, so there's tons of work to do with DX11, yeah.  DX is just a generalization anyways, it doesn't dictate graphics at all.

But we might see DX12 down the road, just not for a couple years at least.

DX9 may have limited the game to a point, but the majority of the issues you're probably thinking of are just from how much the fairly new team was doing at the time, it was a huge undertaking, from Witcher 2 from 1 and making the engine simultaniously.  The biggest problem with it was glitches, really.

That being said, I only mentioned the game to point out how little usage DX11 is seeing, not that DX9 is good enough, and graphics API's do dictate graphics, but I was saying that DX specifically doesn't lord over progression, with plenty of other options out there.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]Why continue if we aren't pushing what we have now? It's a waste. Zeviander

I never said I didn't upgrade to DX11 yet. :lol: I've had a DX11 GPU since AMD 68xx series. Also, I don't upgrade my GPU for the newest DX version alone. That's stupid if you do.

It's not people refusing to upgrade from DX9. This isn't 2009. They're not using DX11 right now because they don't see a real need to. Especially devs who make multiplatform games.

Meh, there is still no DX11 game

& no Crysis 3 isn't a DX11 game, it's very much a console game

DirectX11 is a baby that is learning how to walk.

Tessellation

Yeah.  Soon as PS4 comes out we will see its potential. 

We've had DX9 since 03, but it didn't get much use till 360 and PS3 came out.

[QUOTE="Tessellation"]

DirectX11 is a baby that is learning how to walk.

Chozofication

Yeah.  Soon as PS4 comes out we will see its potential. 

We've had DX9 since 03, but it didn't get much use till 360 and PS3 came out.

Next-gen consoles to hold back PC confirmed.

But to be honest, I don't think there's a need for a fully new DX that soon.

They can just keep improving DX11 like they were doing with the previous versions. (e.g. DX9.0, 9.0a, 9.0b. 9.0c, ect.)

Features like tessellation could have been included in DX10 anyway, it's simply that Nvidia bribed MS not to include it because their hardware didn't support it at the time. (unless you count "geo shaders" for a tessellation unit of sorts)

The future are hybrid raster polygon + ray-traced voxel engines. (see id Tech 6)

We don't need DX12 right now. Most games still have a DX9 renderer which is really holding them back. DX11 will last a good 4-5 years. Each year more devs drop DX9 support (and with good reason).

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Features like tessellation could have been included in DX10 anyway, it's simply that Nvidia bribed MS not to include it because their hardware didn't support it at the time. (unless you count "geo shaders" for a tessellation unit of sorts)

Wasdie

Do you really believe that? Are you that thick?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TruForm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8enuguM3lA

This is basically tessellation and is running on a 2001 graphics card.

How long did we use Dx9 ?

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Features like tessellation could have been included in DX10 anyway, it's simply that Nvidia bribed MS not to include it because their hardware didn't support it at the time. (unless you count "geo shaders" for a tessellation unit of sorts)

nameless12345

Do you really believe that? Are you that thick?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TruForm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8enuguM3lA

This is basically tessellation and is running on a 2001 graphics card.

"Basically tessellation"

It's a different tech than what is currently implemented. Thus it was more limited. Tessellating an object can be done in many different ways. TruForm was just one way. At the time the advantages weren't that great. It was limited because you had to develop your model with TruForm in mind. Current tessellation methods are much more adaptable than that. 

Current tessellation methods are adapted onto models much more seamlessly without issues. Developers can choose to use it or not without having to change the basic structure of their model if they wish. TruForm didn't gain industry support because it was limiting and took extra effort, not because Nvidia told Microsoft to not utilize it.

DX needs to be more adaptable, it cannot conform to one companies hardware. So obviously they wouldn't support it until they set some industry standards that cannot be monopolized.  

They are doing the same with DirectCompute. Nvidia has had GPU processing for a few years now with PhysX but Microsoft held out on support GPGPU operations until DX11 and DirectCompute which isn't hardware specific. Thus any GPU that has the DX11 hardware can do DirectCompute which makes PhysX obsolete. 

How long did we use Dx9 ?

Bebi_vegeta

Way too long. From 2001 to today.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Features like tessellation could have been included in DX10 anyway, it's simply that Nvidia bribed MS not to include it because their hardware didn't support it at the time. (unless you count "geo shaders" for a tessellation unit of sorts)

nameless12345

Do you really believe that? Are you that thick?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TruForm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8enuguM3lA

This is basically tessellation and is running on a 2001 graphics card.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

How long did we use Dx9 ?

Wasdie

Way too long. From 2001 to today.

So there's no problem staying on Dx11 for a few years.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Do you really believe that? Are you that thick?

Wasdie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TruForm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8enuguM3lA

This is basically tessellation and is running on a 2001 graphics card.

"Basically tessellation"

It's a different tech than what is currently implemented. Thus it was more limited. Tessellating an object can be done in many different ways. TruForm was just one way. At the time the advantages weren't that great. It was limited because you had to develop your model with TruForm in mind. Current tessellation methods are much more adaptable than that. 

Current tessellation methods are adapted onto models much more seamlessly without issues. Developers can choose to use it or not without having to change the basic structure of their model if they wish. TruForm didn't gain industry support because it was limiting and took extra effort, not because Nvidia told Microsoft to not utilize it.

DX needs to be more adaptable, it cannot conform to one companies hardware. So obviously they wouldn't support it until they set some industry standards that cannot be monopolized.  

They are doing the same with DirectCompute. Nvidia has had GPU processing for a few years now with PhysX but Microsoft held out on support GPGPU operations until DX11 and DirectCompute which isn't hardware specific. Thus any GPU that has the DX11 hardware can do DirectCompute which makes PhysX obsolete. 

The basic principle is the same, i.e. polygon subdivides.

Of course the tech has improved and is new fessible due to a high increase in processing power.

But despite this, most modern games still employ parallax (occlusion) mapping for most "bumpy" elements rather than "proper" tessellation.

For example the ground rocks in Arma 3 aren't tessellated and Crysis 2 used it in a "gimmicky" way. (I've even heard there is barely any tessellation in Crysis 3 but that may be just made-up stories, idk)

For a large part, DX11 tessellation is just a hyped marketing thing.

Before we actually see fully tessellated 3D models that give no trace of the typical polygonal "blockyness" it will already pass a lot of time.

And by then we could already be seeing some new graphical techniques. (like ray-traced voxel octrees or similar)

We don't need DX12 right now. Most games still have a DX9 renderer which is really holding them back. DX11 will last a good 4-5 years. Each year more devs drop DX9 support (and with good reason).

Wasdie

Thank you!

 

The basic principle is the same, i.e. polygon subdivides.

Of course the tech has improved and is new fessible due to a high increase in processing power.

But despite this, most modern games still employ parallax (occlusion) mapping for most "bumpy" elements rather than "proper" tessellation.

For example the ground rocks in Arma 3 aren't tessellated and Crysis 2 used it in a "gimmicky" way. (I've even heard there is barely any tessellation in Crysis 3 but that may be just made-up stories, idk)

For a large part, DX11 tessellation is just a hyped marketing thing.

Before we actually see fully tessellated 3D models that give no trace of the typical polygonal "blockyness" it will already pass a lot of time.

And by then we could already be seeing some new graphical techniques. (like ray-traced voxel octrees or similar)

nameless12345

DX11 and tessellations are not a hyped marketing thing. They are a significant advantage over DX9 and even DX10 in many ways. What holds us back is how ever dev has to build their game for aging DX9 machines. High end DX11 machines are still the vast minority of games.

now we use dx11.1 next update maybe dx11.5 ,the whole dx11 cycle not over yet maybe in 2015 we see new dx12

Its people hanging on to XP that need to move on.clyde46

Very little gamers still use windows XP.

Its people hanging on to XP that need to move on.clyde46

Makes total sense. AMD will be out of business by the time DX12 comes out. 

Makes total sense. AMD will be out of business by the time DX12 comes out. 

Mr_BillGates

[QUOTE="Mr_BillGates"]

Makes total sense. AMD will be out of business by the time DX12 comes out. 

PC_Otter

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

can somebody tell me why another DX is needed?

DX11 is still barely used compared to DX9.

PublicNuisance

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

A good chunk of the most popular video cards on there are DX11. Progress shouldn't stop for anything, especially people clinging to DX9.