Is it really based on Mantle? Wasn't Dice a major contributor and early adopter of Mantle?
-
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.
DICE's Johan Andersson wants Win10+DX12 as minspec for holiday 2016 Frosbite titles
- Thread starter -SD-
- Start date
Is it really based on Mantle? Wasn't Dice a major contributor and early adopter of Mantle?
ashecitism
Member
It is. Read the GDC slides. Frostbite will transition their Mantle renderer to Vulkan.
Edit: B10. The curse of mobile lol
ScepticMatt
Member
Resource management (e.g. Memory allocation, garbage collection) and scheduling is the full responsibility of the application developers now. But the driver still has to translate API commands and calls to the specifics of it's hardware.
See: https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2014/07/23/direct3d-12-overview-part-2-pipeline-state-object
VibratingDonkey
Member
So they target X1/Intel with DX12, AMD Windows with Vulkan, and PS4 with Sony's proprietary graphics API?
I think that it's important to us to have Vulkan-exclusive games. There will definitely be DX12 exclusives, even the ones not developed by Microsoft, and it would be bad to leave Vulkan with the same market share as OpenGL at the moment. If the two of them can compete with close market shares, then it would push for improvements. Of course, games that support both would be nice too.
As for the initial debate, I'm all up for it. Windows 10 has improvements over 7 and 8.x as a system too, so there would be performance gains everywhere.
As for the initial debate, I'm all up for it. Windows 10 has improvements over 7 and 8.x as a system too, so there would be performance gains everywhere.
ScepticMatt
Member
Why Intel and DX12? Valve/LunarG already wrote prototype Vulkan drivers.
As long as they drop support for DX11 anything is great.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the importance of using DX12 with Win10. When at the same time they are pushing for Vulkan on that platform.
Which was budges. Perhaps it's just AMD systems that will leverage Vulkan for now.
WDDM 2.0 is the reason to aim for Win10. (Even with Vulkan.)
GifGafIsTheBestGaf
Member
it is nice to dream but i really doubt theyll let them drop those many potential buyers, hell i bet we still be getting crossgen games from them by 2016
alexandros
Banned
As long as they drop support for DX11 anything is great.
In terms of performance, definitely. However, support for Vulkan is of the utmost importance for PC gaming's escape from Windows. Microsoft has held the keys to the PC kingdom long enough, it's way past time something changed.
Nikodemos
Member
I don't think that would happen. What I suspect as an end result is a situation similar to the one occurring during the Second PC Age, namely when you could/would choose between several APIs (Glide, Direct3D and OpenGL at the time) depending on your hardware.
What about backward compatibility though?
They haven't done anything bad with the keys as PC gaming has thrived and things are better right now than they were during the time when game devs had to target multiple APIs. That's extra cost and reduced stability right there.
dr_rus
Member
The limitation for multiplatform games is the consoles which didn't have the draw calls problem since like ever. This limitation won't go anywhere after DX12 will allow for much higher draw calls numbers on PC. What I'm saying is that unless a game will be made with DX12 capabilities in mind - like that Oxide RTS - it is unlikely to show any performance benefits on PC under DX12 because console hardware will become even more of a limiting factor.
It's also worth noticing that having a higher draw call limit is nice but if your game is shading limited it is likely to stay shading limited in DX12 as well - thus what you can expect is some increase in LODs and general geometric detalisation while maintaining the same performance.
So the thing is - PCs are not CPU limited under DX11. Most games in 1080p and above are shading limited on anything starting with i3 and higher. This efficiency will only play its role on quite low end CPUs - AMD APUs and Intel Celerons/Atom cores. This was already demonstrated by Mantle.
For a regular PC gamer this isn't that interesting as he tend to have an i5-level CPU anyway. It is nice that these lower end machines will be able to handle some console ports while costing less than consoles for sure. Still - not a big deal for PC gaming crowd.
It really depends on where you're looking. In my typical 2560x1600 + AA gaming scenario the boosts are close to non existent. For someone gaming in 1600x900 without AA the boosts can be rather considerable.
Not happening. Most corporate businesses are still on Windows 7. They aren't dropping support for that any time soon.
Have they ever ignored a major development on the PC market? They were some of the first (I think the first) to use DX10.1, they've been using DX11 for a long time and while their ports are problematic, most of them include pretty cutting edge techniques as well as nVidia specific effects. If EA moves, Ubisoft will have to follow, even if they're not necessarily competing for PC players.
It's a sliding scale. Reducing fragmentation reduces support costs even if they can't get to the ideal of everyone running the latest verson of Windows.
Johan Andersson actually was the one who went around to the various hardware vendors 5-6 years ago and started pushing for something like this.
AMD was the one who jumped on board in support of the idea so inherently DICE got entirely on board with supporting it.
dragonelite
Member
Tools is also a big reason, but with Valve and other big engine shop support im sure Vulkan has or will have great tools.
Haven't researched vulkan yet.
My take on the whole Vulkan API is that it is ultimately for the developers. To finally have an open source graphics api out from under Microsoft's shadow. An api that is modern, that is a fresh start without years of baggage, mistakes, version discrepancies, etc.
I don't see how switching to Win10 is unreasonable, I'm just hoping Vulkan isn't just as unused as OpenGL.
Corporate business? You mean a corporation?
Corporate business? You mean a corporation?
alexandros
Banned
What about it? Vulkan is cross-platform, it will work everywhere. As for older DX games, either devs will port them or something like Wine will take care of the rest.
I strongly disagree, Microsoft's stance towards PC gaming has been nothing short of shameful. Hopefully in the future there won't be multiple apis to support, it will be Vulkan all the way.
Yeah, this not going to happen. Additionally many titles will be DX12 based.
My first question when reading the title was "why not Vulkan". All the benefits, none of the OS limitations.
Have we seen "serious boosts"? On fast CPUs, and compared to NV's DX11 implementation and not AMD's anemic one?
they're possibly doing both.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/repi/status/585558771604316161[/tweet]
RubberJohnny
Banned
I can't see Vulkan getting anywhere near the performance - so far it's been typical AMD "promise the moon, back down when it comes to implementation".
DX12 will be in all Windows as standard and that's huge.
If a Vulkan implementation doesn't offer completely comparable performance to a DirectX12 implementation for the same thing, it's a given vendor's (why focus on AMD?) fault and they should be questioned (or better, pressured) about it.
What makes you think Vulkan will not offer same performance as DX12?
JumPeRJumPzZ
Banned
I hope they did some optimization and improvements to Frostbite for SW Battlefront on XboxOne and PS4.
Hardline was a disappointment in that regard.
Hardline was a disappointment in that regard.
cleveridea
Member
as long as the Microsoft free upgrade to 10 remains true in practice, very reasonable
BriareosGAF
Member
FWIW this is not how MANTLE came about, but unfortunately I can't really go into detail due to NDAs, etc. The whole history is messy and complicated, like most things in life. That's not to say Johan wasn't a big part of pushing this stuff--I know him and he's a smart, good guy.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Let's wait to see what we don't know about windows 10 yet before we start locking down games to it...
I don't trust MS at all
I don't trust MS at all
Huh, if PC gaming on Windows has had a renaissance and a golden age while MS has had a 'shameful' stance towards it under Ballmer then what might happen if under Nadella Microsoft's stance actually improves? It might be a diamond age!
Seriously at worst Microsoft's stance towards PC gaming for the past decade or so has been benign neglect broken up by clumsy and irrelevant attempts at legitimacy (read: GFWL). The only truly bad thing has been MS franchises not appearing or continuing on the PC and that's a software issue not a platform one.
Even there you have bright spots like the Shadowrun games from Harebrained.
CyclopsRock
Member
I basically agree, but you could argue that tying certain DX versions to certain OS's is, at least, slightly cynical as I believe there's very little reason to do it from a technical level. Maybe I'm wrong about that, though?
It's kind of damning with faint praise if the "bright spot" of a companies' support for a platform is not preventing another company from making a game for it
Sure. MS hasn't been great by any stretch. I'm just saying 'shameful' is hyperbole.
Fact: PC gaming is currently great and has been great for a lot of years now
Fact: Most of it (as in vast majority) of it has happened on Windows
Conclusion: Windows ain't all that bad.
Edit: Plus I don't think the HBS deal with MS should be downplayed. It's pretty progressive from a big company standpoint to be so lenient with IP. It worked out really well for all concerned.
Fact: PC gaming is currently great and has been great for a lot of years now
Fact: Most of it (as in vast majority) of it has happened on Windows
Conclusion: Windows ain't all that bad.
Edit: Plus I don't think the HBS deal with MS should be downplayed. It's pretty progressive from a big company standpoint to be so lenient with IP. It worked out really well for all concerned.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
How on earth is it silly? Why would anyone pay $$$ for Windows 8 now when you can buy the rock-solid W7 and upgrade for free from that in a few months time?
He means not upgrading to W10 when it comes out.
Cave Johnson
Member
I'm usually in the conservative position when it comes to outrageous spec requirements but as long as it benefits the game design as a whole I'm fine with it. Using it for specs for the sake of and "melt-PC" braggadocio PR statements like Crytek only makes me cynical for that requirement demand.
If I wanted something to test and push my system to see what it's capable of then I'll use benchmark tests like 3D mark or any other Nvidia real-time demos. When a game does this only to be backed by overly simplified gameplay systems as an "interactive" stand in is where I draw the line.
As someone who is already on the process of saving up to what would be my biggest PC investment upgrade for the Oculus Rift, I would love nothing more to see more studios actually taking the stand of utilizing the cream-of-the-crop resources available - just as long as they don't advertise them as gimmicks.
If I wanted something to test and push my system to see what it's capable of then I'll use benchmark tests like 3D mark or any other Nvidia real-time demos. When a game does this only to be backed by overly simplified gameplay systems as an "interactive" stand in is where I draw the line.
As someone who is already on the process of saving up to what would be my biggest PC investment upgrade for the Oculus Rift, I would love nothing more to see more studios actually taking the stand of utilizing the cream-of-the-crop resources available - just as long as they don't advertise them as gimmicks.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Oh ok. In that case I would agree for new PCs.
I'd just like to remind that it's not DICE's stand, but one of their tech leads. He's also the guy who has worked on Mantle and Vulkan so it's no surprise that he's the first line supporting new APIs. As he admits, it's quite aggressive even with W10 being free to upgrade so I personally don't see them going for the DX12 minimum requirement next year.