Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Technology

DirectX 12 Ultimate is an Attempt To 'Future-Proof' Graphics Hardware (pcgamer.com) 56

Posted by msmash from the shape-of-things-to-come dept.
A new DirectX badge is going to start showing up on graphics hardware: It's called DirectX 12 Ultimate, and it denotes support for "ALL next generation graphics hardware features," Microsoft announced today. From a report: DirectX is a collection of application programming languages (APIs) that developers use to communicate with your hardware. You can think of it like a conduit between software (especially games) and hardware. Up until now, DX12 was the latest version, supported in Windows 10 (and also in Windows 7 for some games). Now that distinction belongs to DX12 Ultimate. It's not an overhaul of the API, but a culmination of the latest technologies bundled into one. This notably includes DirectX Raytracing (DXR), variable rate shading (VRS), mesh shaders, and sampler feedback.

One of the reasons Microsoft is doing this is to unify experiences across the PC and its upcoming Xbox Series X, which will launch November 26, 2020 (Thanksgiving Day). "These features represent many years of innovation from Microsoft and our partners in the hardware industry. DX12 Ultimate brings them all together in one common bundle, providing developers with a single key to unlock next generation graphics on PC and Xbox Series X," Microsoft explains. The main benefit for gamers is knowing, at a glance, if the graphics card they are about to buy supports all the latest features. Spotting the DX12 Ultimate badge is the key, and I suspect hardware makers will be quick to promote it. Related to that, Microsoft is pitching this as a way of ensuring "future-proof" feature support. There's no such thing as future proofing, of course, but DX12 Ultimate should remain relevant for at least the next couple of years.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DirectX 12 Ultimate is an Attempt To 'Future-Proof' Graphics Hardware More

DirectX 12 Ultimate is an Attempt To 'Future-Proof' Graphics Hardware

Comments Filter:

  • Write once, run everywhere? (Score:3)

    by The New Guy 2.0 ( 3497907 ) on Thursday March 19, 2020 @04:50PM (#59850752)

    If DirectX is the same as OpenGL, and new commands are rolled out to PC and XBox at the same time... is there any difference left?

    • Re:Write once, run everywhere? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by cb88 ( 1410145 ) on Thursday March 19, 2020 @04:54PM (#59850772)
      DX12 and Vulkan are virtually the same feature wise at this point and have shader translation software so you can write in one language and use it in the other for facilitating porting... dunno why you think OpenGL is the same.

      Currently there is Zero reason anyone should be using DX12.. other than they love vendor lock in.

      • Currently there is Zero reason anyone should be using DX12.. other than they love vendor lock in.

        That lovely vendor lock-in that lets your development automatically access a market of 50million additional devices (xbox)? Based on available customer figures alone it would seem there's zero reason to develop in Vulcan.

        It's like saying you shouldn't develop for iOS because of vendor locking. Remember developers don't develop for shits and giggles. They develop for customers, and there's a reason why basically every game on the market is DirectX with Vulcan as an optional extra.

    • Re:Write once, run everywhere? (Score:4, Informative)

      by UnknownSoldier ( 67820 ) on Thursday March 19, 2020 @04:55PM (#59850778)

      Vulkan is functionally equivalent to D3D12. OpenGL is not.

      • Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Vulkan just a subset of OpenGL streamlined/optimized for mobile and gaming, which would be why it was called "OpenGL ES" until it was renamed?

        • > Vulkan just a subset of OpenGL streamlined/optimized for mobile and gaming

          No. You are thinking of OpenGL ES -- the ES stands for Embedded Systems.

          At the time OEM phones weren't going to use M$'s proprietary Direct3D so that left OpenGL as the only cross-platform API to consider. Unfortunately standard OpenGL is bloated so they came up with a modern, slim version and called that OpenGL ES.

          > which would be why it was called "OpenGL ES" until it was renamed?

          Vulkan came from AMD's Mantle [wikipedia.org] ; Vulkan has N

        • Vulkan is more like a superset of OpenGL/CL, with more low-level hardware access. I have seen plans to write OpenGL as a compatibility layer above Vulkan, so that GPU vendors need not publish separate OpenGL drivers, only Vulkan.

    • Yes, the difference is that Microsoft owns one of them outright and is intent on making the others irrelevant.

  • "There's no such thing as future proofing, of course"

    OpenGL works very well towards doing this by allowing extensions that are non-standard, thus ensuring that you can (with some code and enough GPU power) support the latest graphical hoo-hahs.

    • OpenGL works very well towards doing this by allowing extensions that are non-standard

      I'd ask what fresh hell is this, except it really sounds like the same old, stale DLL and driver hell. I remember fondly the time wasted searching for obscure drivers or combinations thereof that would somehow coax some games to run on my vanilla graphics card. Did I say fondly? I meant with loathing.

  • A well-known quote on this topic:

    "All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection"
    - David Wheeler

    And the corollary:

    "...except for the problem of too many layers of indirection."
    - Kevin Henney

    • Not to mention it say "software engineering" not "computer science" since there are a lot of problems in computer science that can't be solved with a layer of indirection.
  • Basically what the USB Group should be doing, rather than the fractured garbage they went with for USB3+ naming and functionality.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Megane ( 129182 )
      You mean like the fractured garbage that is Xbox console naming? I await DirectX 12 One or DirectX 12 Series Ultimate in a few years.

  • What matters is if it does Vulcan.

    Because if you want to develop without MS lock-in, that's what it's gonna be.

    Sorry, MS, you're not monopoly anymore. Mo hard feelings.

    • And even on Windows, I think there's still a majority of gamers using Windows 7, thus unable to have DX12.

      • A majority? Really?

        • I could be behind the times, but that was my understanding not too long ago. No one really likes Windows 10, not even gamers.

          • A lot don't but there isn't much choice these days.

            also FWIW Steam says 80.5% on Win10 and 13% on Win7. I'd bet GOG etc have a higher percentage on Win7.

            • Ha, I'm more leaning towards GoG. And since they have older games that's where I hear the "i upgraded and now my games don't work!" complaints. Whereas Steam feels oriented to brand new games much more often.

          • I could be behind the times, but that was my understanding not too long ago. No one really likes Windows 10, not even gamers.

            No, that was Windows 8.

            • I'm using 8.1 :-) 8.0 was a bit annoying but it's ok now.

              (I may upgrade since my mom needs to upgrade away from Windows 7, and I need the same OS version so I can help her.)

      • And even on Windows, I think there's still a majority of gamers using Windows 7, thus unable to have DX12.

        Why would a majority of gamers stick to a system that is slower, doesn't support features of their gaming hardware, and limits their access to games by locking out a few stores which are Windows 10 only?

        Your "majority" is wishful thinking. In fact back when people were shitting on Windows 8 and 10 for it's flaky and generally shitty experience it was the gamers that were happily migrating to Windows 10.

        • Then this is news to me from last I checked. I remember games bitching aobut W10, lots of concern about games that stopped working, and so forth. W7 is not slower, and the few new features in DX12 weren't enough to entice people to uproot and switch to a new OS (I hate to say "upgrade" in this context). Are there a significant number of important games that are W10 only?

          • Are there a significant number of important games that are W10 only?

            Indirectly, perhaps. I recently discovered that if you want to use any recent Intel chipsets you have to use W10 because there are no drivers for W7.

      • yeah NO. Even steam shows 80% of gamers at Windows 10 now.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by AHuxley ( 892839 )
        As suggested, look at the steam Win 10, GPU use charts.

      • And even on Windows, I think there's still a majority of gamers using Windows 7, thus unable to have DX12.

        You "think"?

        If only there was some way for you to see up-to-date statistics, like Steam:

        https://store.steampowered.com... [steampowered.com]

    • Because if you want to develop without MS lock-in, that's what it's gonna be.

      Yeah but why would you want to?

      Sorry, MS, you're not monopoly anymore. Mo hard feelings.

      Aren't they? DirectX provides automatic support for the PC and Xbox. Vulcan provides support for ... PC. Which one would you code in if you were a game studio attempting to maximise your audience. If you said Vulcan I hope you don't make any strategic decisions at your work.

      There's a reason basically every major game is written in DirectX and the odd one has Vulcan support bolted on the back.

      • Re:Yeah, nobody cares. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by UnknownSoldier ( 67820 ) on Thursday March 19, 2020 @05:53PM (#59850980)

        >> Because if you want to develop without MS lock-in, that's what it's gonna be.
        > Yeah but why would you want to?

        Found the amateur programmer who never actually ported games to other platforms and compilers to:

        a) find bugs, and
        b) take advantage of new markets and platforms.

        Tell me, how is that DX working out for you on PS5 or Switch? Oh wait, it's not available.

        Stop drinking the M$ Kool-Aid (TM).

        • Tell me, how is that DX working out for you on PS5 or Switch?

          Tell me what colour jacket your strawman is wearing. You're the only one who mentioned PS5 or Switch. Finding bugs in code ported from Windows to Xbox which is written in DirectX is absolutely trivial compared to doing a PS4 of Switch port.

          Your option isn't to abandon DirectX completely. It's only to abandon 50 million xbox customers. You can either code for DirectX + PS4 + Switch, Or you can code for PC + xbox + PS4 + Switch, the latter requiring far more effort and cost for the same result.

          But sure I'm ju

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • We created a new lock-in feature for Xbox and will also lock-in to windows, so please, game developers, ignore that vulkan standard that runs everywhere, use our "in house vulkan like API" that have a beautiful Microsoftâ... nothing else... totally equal while being different enough to lock you in to our platforms! We love your money!

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Wow, how out of touch are you? I suppose you think Sony uses bog standard OpenGL on PlayStation and not their own NIH homebrew libraries like PSGL, GCM, GNM and GNMX?

  • >Up until now, DX12 was the latest version, supported in Windows 10 (and also in Windows 7 for some games)

    No, it's Windows10 only.

  • They'll slap the sticker on crappy Intel gear that barely functions
  • I seem to remember the 'future proofing' when DX 6 came out, and it turned into a mess with 3 different implementations (6, the buggy 6a, and 6b, which was found on Blood 2). Seems like this is a 12A, rather than just going the full point release and doing DX13. Superstitious?
  • There is no future-proof, only future-resistance.

  • DX12 vs Vulkan: any advantages? (Score:3)

    by twocows ( 1216842 ) on Friday March 20, 2020 @06:51AM (#59852554)
    The disadvantages to using DX12 over Vulkan should be pretty obvious I'd think, the other comments go into them multiple times. Are there any advantages to using DX12 instead? Speaking to like functional stuff that maybe DX12 does better. I'm just curious, I'm sure MS has put a decent amount of money and time into developing it, it seems like if it was universally inferior to Vulkan, people would just never use it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      The disadvantages to using DX12 over Vulkan should be pretty obvious I'd think, the other comments go into them multiple times. Are there any advantages to using DX12 instead? Speaking to like functional stuff that maybe DX12 does better. I'm just curious, I'm sure MS has put a decent amount of money and time into developing it, it seems like if it was universally inferior to Vulkan, people would just never use it.

      Well, using DirectX gets you a framework for your entire application from input, voice, networ

  • If they can't even make an audio player and audio files that are future proof, how are we supposed to believe they can do this with graphics?

Slashdot Top Deals

"The following is not for the weak of heart or Fundamentalists." -- Dave Barry

Close