DirectX 12 Showcase New Features and Benefits of D3D12 API

[opethdisciple]

Possibility for Dx12 to be based on Mantle sure. It has just been open sourced after all and given to the krohnos group.

However on the flip side, if it was based on Mantle then that would mean DX12 would be very very similar to Vulcan (in it's early stages) which as far as we know is not the case.

No developer that has looked at the source code of DX12 has ever said "THIS IS MANTLE"!!!!!

 

[Mauller]

Actually, quite a few devs on their twitters have indirectly said that dx12 is nearly identical to mantle, just with renamed functions, even the dx12 reference guide is near identical to mantles as stated.

 

[Orangey]

Possibility for Dx12 to be based on Mantle sure. It has just been open sourced after all and given to the krohnos group.

However on the flip side, if it was based on Mantle then that would mean DX12 would be very very similar to Vulcan (in it's early stages) which as far as we know is not the case.

No developer that has looked at the source code of DX12 has ever said "THIS IS MANTLE"!!!!!

Probably because only MS can see the source.

And there was a post recently showing how the literature is word-for-word the same. It was noticed by plenty of developers and what do you think the words that sprang into their heads were...

So please, less of the ill-informed FUD.

 

[layte]

Probably because only MS can see the source.

And there was a post recently showing how the literature is word-for-word the same. It was noticed by plenty of developers and what do you think the words that sprang into their heads were...

So please, less of the ill-informed FUD.

You mean the similarities between the Mantle and Vulcan documentation yes. As the previous stuff somebody posted with a comparison does not exist on MSDN.

 

[mmj_uk]

It has just been open sourced after all and given to the krohnos group.

Is this actually the case? I thught they had just licensed it to the Krohnos Group which is very different to making it open source.

 

[humbug]

You mean the similarities between the Mantle and Vulcan documentation yes. As the previous stuff somebody posted with a comparison does not exist on MSDN.

No he's talking about the DX12 documentation.



Its virtually a cut and paste.

 

[SiDeards73]

reading comprehension fails on this forum are occasionally spectacular, or rather people are just too lazy to read what is presented to them, have already made their own minds up to follow the herd of other people who dont want to believe, and then come and present that as fact to us all...

 

[layte]

Yet we know Microsoft have been developing DX12 since long before AMD started telling the world how Mantle was going to change it (before it got quietly brushed aside), the first demo was on NV hardware, at a time when even slight variations of GCN had issues with Mantle. It could easily be argued that Mantle was AMD taking what they saw of early DX12/XB One development and attempting to steal a march on everyone else. The issues surrounding the launch would suggest things were rushed out before being ready.

If it was based upon Mantle, I'm sure Microsoft would acknowledge this or AMD would be shouting from the rooftops about it, as we know they are found singing their own praises.

If that is the best that can be found for the conspiracy theorists than its a bit meh. I'm more inclined to think Mantle as a early rushed version of DX12.

DX12 is a collaboration between MS, AMD, NV and Intel after all.

Edit: I see it was AMDMatt who originally linked to the twitter post. So I would like to ask is that AMD's official stance on the matter? As a AMD employee are you stating that Microsoft have taken Mantle and used it to produce DX12. This would certainly clear up the matter, and I would be happy to be proven wrong if I have been arguing in error.

 

[humbug]

Yet we know Microsoft have been developing DX12 since long before AMD started telling the world how Mantle was going to change it (before it got quietly brushed aside), the first demo was on NV hardware, at a time when even slight variations of GCN had issues with Mantle. It could easily be argued that Mantle was AMD taking what they saw of early DX12/XB One development and attempting to steal a march on everyone else. The issues surrounding the launch would suggest things were rushed out before being ready.

If it was based upon Mantle, I'm sure Microsoft would acknowledge this or AMD would be shouting from the rooftops about it, as we know they are found singing their own praises.

If that is the best that can be found for the conspiracy theorists than its a bit meh. I'm more inclined to think Mantle as a early rushed version of DX12.

DX12 is a collaboration between MS, AMD, NV and Intel after all.

Ridiculous.. if AMD nicked Microsofts work and claimed it as their own they would find themselves in court.

You right about one thing, AMD did work with Microsoft on DX12.
Where i differ is that i think it was for the XBox One. it was AMD's API developed along side the GCN architecture for the XBox One and PC. but Microsoft refused to to release it to PC for the same reason they have been refusing to realise their own low level Console API's for 10+ years, they make money from users and publishers fee's on the console market that they don't on PC, they didn't want PC Gaming to eat into that market.

Mantle is not DX12, if it was AMD wouldn't have it.

If this API was developed by AMD for the GCN architecture it would run with all the main compatibility. the evidence so far is it does.

Same goes for Nvidia. Kepler has minimal compatibility Maxwell 2 more but still not full compatibility.
It was not designed for Nvidia, at least not from the start as Nvidia claim, its a later arrival and gradual with Nvidia catching up 'mostly' with Maxwell v2.

'The core at least' of DX12 is Mantle.



I wonder why they took that down.

 

[drunkenmaster]

Vulkan is a collaboration between AMD, Nv, Intel and dozens of other companies, doesn't stop it being based entirely on Mantle though.

It's also just a slight coincidence that Nvidia have been working on DX12 forever.... yet don't support it as well as 3-4 year old AMD cards, which basically feature full support for it... almost as if the API was directly written in every way for the specific hardware features of GCN.

Just because Nvidia shouts everything from the rooftop, AMD don't, because it's not good for everyone to do so. If AMD went around very loudly saying DX12 was Mantle, Nvidia would be reluctant to support it, and if one of two major graphics brands didn't support it, game devs wouldn't focus on it.

Some companies consistently for years do things that benefits the gaming industry and pushes it forwards, another company just screams and shouts about how awesome it is while ripping off their customers.

 

[layte]

It's also just a slight coincidence that Nvidia have been working on DX12 forever.... yet don't support it as well as 3-4 year old AMD cards, which basically feature full support for it... almost as if the API was directly written in every way for the specific hardware features of GCN.

The only source you have on that is a forum post, with no backup. Currently NV hardware (Maxwell2) supports more features of DX12 than anything from AMD, and the only full game engine based benchmark we have seen and not just a synthetic test of one small part was Star Swarm, NV hardware crushed AMD.

Just because Nvidia shouts everything from the rooftop, AMD don't, because it's not good for everyone to do so. If AMD went around very loudly saying DX12 was Mantle, Nvidia would be reluctant to support it, and if one of two major graphics brands didn't support it, game devs wouldn't focus on it.

Yea, we know that wouldn't happen as NV would get crushed in any DX12 benchmarks, and not supporting a major DX version would be commercial suicide. It would be awesome PR if they could rightfully claim the Microsoft have taken their (supposed by some) hard work and used it to make the next version of such a well known API.

Some companies consistently for years do things that benefits the gaming industry and pushes it forwards, another company just screams and shouts about how awesome it is while ripping off their customers.

I just rolled my eyes so much they fell out and I had to chase them down the corridor like something out of Red Dwarf.

 

[humbug]

The only source you have on that is a forum post, with no backup. Currently NV hardware (Maxwell2) supports more features of DX12 than anything from AMD, and the only full game engine based benchmark we have seen and not just a synthetic test of one small part was Star Swarm, NV hardware crushed AMD.

No it does not, Maxwell 2 is Tier 2, All AMD's GCN 'Including its 3 - 4 year old 7970' is Tier 3, Maxwell has a couple of flags from DX11.1 carried over, the rest of the flags are DX12 hardware based with Maxwell 2 missing a couple that are needed to get Tier 3.

We are basing our arguments on bits of evidence floating are the internet and adding reasoning to it.

All you have done if made a bunch of unsubstantiated baseless statements.

 

[D.P.]

Yet we know Microsoft have been developing DX12 since long before AMD started telling the world how Mantle was going to change it (before it got quietly brushed aside), the first demo was on NV hardware, at a time when even slight variations of GCN had issues with Mantle. It could easily be argued that Mantle was AMD taking what they saw of early DX12/XB One development and attempting to steal a march on everyone else. The issues surrounding the launch would suggest things were rushed out before being ready.

If it was based upon Mantle, I'm sure Microsoft would acknowledge this or AMD would be shouting from the rooftops about it, as we know they are found singing their own praises.

If that is the best that can be found for the conspiracy theorists than its a bit meh. I'm more inclined to think Mantle as a early rushed version of DX12.

DX12 is a collaboration between MS, AMD, NV and Intel after all.

Edit: I see it was AMDMatt who originally linked to the twitter post. So I would like to ask is that AMD's official stance on the matter? As a AMD employee are you stating that Microsoft have taken Mantle and used it to produce DX12. This would certainly clear up the matter, and I would be happy to be proven wrong if I have been arguing in error.

I do think if AMD basically gave the Mantle API to Microsoft then AMD wouldn't do it without a large acknowledgement. neither MS or AMD make much fuss about it so it seems neither of them seem to think it matters.


what is likely is some aspects of Mantle made its way into DX12, just like we know Nvidia have also contributed API to DX12 AND project Vulkan. IF AMD supplied some API functionality then they likely provided the documentation for that and MS quickly incorporated that documentation without re-wording the document.

We know from the XBone that MS have been working on a faster more efficient graphics API for some time.

 

[layte]

Ridiculous.. if AMD nicked Microsofts work and claimed it as their own they would find themselves in court.

Yet you are stating that the opposite has happened and nothing. It's almost as if they were all working to put together a standard and AMD decided to rush off with what was there to bring out Mantle (I dare anyone to claim the Mantle launch was not a messy affair). Companies produce products based upon standards yet to be finalised all the time.

 

[layte]

I do think if AMD basically gave the Mantle API to Microsoft then AMD wouldn't do it without a large acknowledgement. neither MS or AMD make much fuss about it so it seems neither of them seem to think it matters.


what is likely is some aspects of Mantle made its way into DX12, just like we know Nvidia have also contributed API to DX12 AND project Vulkan. IF AMD supplied some API functionality then they likely provided the documentation for that and MS quickly incorporated that documentation without re-wording the document.

We know from the XBone that MS have been working on a faster more efficient graphics API for some time.

Yes, exactly this.

Something along these lines should be quoted in the first post of every DX12 thread.

 

[D.P.]

Vulkan is a collaboration between AMD, Nv, Intel and dozens of other companies, doesn't stop it being based entirely on Mantle though.

It's also just a slight coincidence that Nvidia have been working on DX12 forever.... yet don't support it as well as 3-4 year old AMD cards, which basically feature full support for it... almost as if the API was directly written in every way for the specific hardware features of GCN.

Just because Nvidia shouts everything from the rooftop, AMD don't, because it's not good for everyone to do so. If AMD went around very loudly saying DX12 was Mantle, Nvidia would be reluctant to support it, and if one of two major graphics brands didn't support it, game devs wouldn't focus on it.

Some companies consistently for years do things that benefits the gaming industry and pushes it forwards, another company just screams and shouts about how awesome it is while ripping off their customers.

AMD cards have a higher support is meaningless. Both AMD and Nvidia as well as others are on the DX design board. If AMD cards had specific features then they could request support for them in the APi, just like if Nvidia developed its own features it could request them to be added, as has happened in previous versions of DX.



DX doesn't handle extensions in the same way OepnGL does so vendor specific features need incorporating into the API.

 

[humbug]

Yet you are stating that the opposite has happened and nothing. It's almost as if they were all working to put together a standard and AMD decided to rush off with what was there to bring out Mantle (I dare anyone to claim the Mantle launch was not a messy affair). Companies produce products based upon standards yet to be finalised all the time.

Your still trying to argue AMD ran off with Microsoft DX12.

Its the only argument you have to balance your reasoning as to why AMD has full support DX12 while Nvidia don't.

And its utterly insane, straight faced and completely serious. AMD stole it.

 

[layte]

No it does not, Maxwell 2 is Tier 2, All AMD's GCN 'Including its 3 - 4 year old 7970' is Tier 3, Maxwell has a couple of flags from DX11.1 carried over, the rest of the flags are DX12 hardware based with Maxwell 2 missing a couple that are needed to get Tier 3.

We are basing our arguments on bits of evidence floating are the internet and adding reasoning to it.

All you have done if made a bunch of unsubstantiated baseless statements.

No version of GCN has hardware support for a number of DX12 features found in Maxwell 2. Raster Ordered Views is the one that immediately comes to mind. The different Tier levels will have no effect of feature support, it is different to feature level.

 

[humbug]

Vulkan is a collaboration between AMD, Nv, Intel and dozens of other companies, doesn't stop it being based entirely on Mantle though.

It's also just a slight coincidence that Nvidia have been working on DX12 forever.... yet don't support it as well as 3-4 year old AMD cards, which basically feature full support for it... almost as if the API was directly written in every way for the specific hardware features of GCN.

Just because Nvidia shouts everything from the rooftop, AMD don't, because it's not good for everyone to do so. If AMD went around very loudly saying DX12 was Mantle, Nvidia would be reluctant to support it, and if one of two major graphics brands didn't support it, game devs wouldn't focus on it.

Some companies consistently for years do things that benefits the gaming industry and pushes it forwards, another company just screams and shouts about how awesome it is while ripping off their customers.

Some sanity back to the debate. thank you.

 

[Ayahuasca]

No version of GCN has hardware support for a number of DX12 features found in Maxwell 2. Raster Ordered Views is the one that immediately comes to mind. The different Tier levels will have no effect of feature support, it is different to feature level.

Some sanity back to the debate, thank you.