It's 2016. Where dat DX12 game?

K

KickAssCop

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 19, 2003
Messages
8,328
So wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything but I thought by now we should have had DX12 games utilizing a sync compute and making my 980 Tis redundant!

Where are they and Jan is also over already. Can someone tell me when these games are being released so I can start saving up.

Thanks.
 
meh your favorite company is holding pc gaming back and games like deus ex, tomb raider will be dx12 async compute heavy but if you want asyn games buy a ps4
 
KickAssCop said:
So wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything but I thought by now we should have had DX12 games utilizing a sync compute and making my 980 Tis redundant!

Where are they and Jan is also over already. Can someone tell me when these games are being released so I can start saving up.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

There coming, honestly, you can bank on that. :p
 
We've had consumer-level CPUs with more than four cores/threads for 10 years, and devs still can't seem to code for 6+ cores..is DX12 the answer to that dilemma as well?
 
Deathroned said:
meh your favorite company is holding pc gaming back and games like deus ex, tomb raider will be dx12 async compute heavy but if you want asyn games buy a ps4
Click to expand...

Rise of the Tomb Raider will not be DX12 at launch. The devs said they might add DX12 later.
 
It takes years to write games. Games coming out now started development ages before DirectX 12 existed. Even the big stock engines (who's programmers do nothing but write engine code) don't all support DirectX 12 yet.

Anyone remember how long it took from DirectX 10's release for games to support it? I was at least 2 years and this is a bigger change than that was.
 
I'm still waiting for every game to support more than one core... Multi-core consumer processors have been out for 12 years!!!
 
they're coming soon...in 2017...they're waiting for Nvidia/AMD to release their next-gen cards...if we're lucky we might see a game or 2 released this year bundled with the new cards
 
ShagnWagn said:
I'm still waiting for every game to support more than one core... Multi-core consumer processors have been out for 12 years!!!
Click to expand...

No, x86 dual-core CPUs only appeared in 2005 with the Pentium D and Athlon X2 (939).
Also, games have supported more than one core since 2005, with Quake 4 being one of the very first to support SMP with two cores.

I think what you mean is we need games to support more than 6+ cores, and actually fully utilize them, other than RTS games, that is. ;)
 
any future ea game will future dx12 since they use the frostbite engine that is currently run on the fury x 3way crossfire
 
Red Falcon said:
No, x86 dual-core CPUs only appeared in 2005 with the Pentium D and Athlon X2 (939).
Also, games have supported more than one core since 2005, with Quake 4 being one of the very first to support SMP with two cores.

I think what you mean is we need games to support more than 6+ cores, and actually fully utilize them, other than RTS games, that is. ;)
Click to expand...

They came out in 2004. It is now 2016. 16-4=12.

That, too.
 
I'm just sittin' here waiting on DX12 patches for Freelancer and Mechwarrior 4. I doubt Karateka, Autoduel, and Prince of Persia will get them, but I'm hopeful.


:p
 
Killer Instinct is coming to Windows 10 in March. One of the developers mentioned in interview that the Windows 10 and Xbox One versions will be using the same DX12 code base. Fighting games aren't a great example of pushing boundaries, but it's a start.
 
GotNoRice said:
Nice google link, I'm sure you thought that was witty. Please tell us, exactly which dual-core processor came out in 2004? Pentium D & Athlon X2 both came out around May 2005.
Click to expand...

Extremely witty reply. How about you use google since you are so witty rather than make me do the footwork? It took me about 3 seconds to find the link above. I'm sure you can do better... So you are making all of these replies because I could be possibly off by ONE year out of 12? Give me a break, troll. Go back under your bridge. :D
 
ShagnWagn said:
Extremely witty reply. How about you use google since you are so witty rather than make me do the footwork? It took me about 3 seconds to find the link above. I'm sure you can do better... So you are making all of these replies because I could be possibly off by ONE year out of 12? Give me a break, troll. Go back under your bridge. :D
Click to expand...

x86 dual-core CPUs were released to the public in Q2 2005, period, this isn't even a debate.
We were talking about when they were released, not when they were being designed circa 2004. ;)
 
KickAssCop said:
So wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything but I thought by now we should have had DX12 games utilizing a sync compute and making my 980 Tis redundant!

Where are they and Jan is also over already. Can someone tell me when these games are being released so I can start saving up.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

And to be honest the 1st generation games using a new or improved API tend to not be that optimized for it.

It might take a while as it did with DX11. Still the amount of DX10 titles that were worth swapping OS for escape my mind ;) .

DX12 would require a lot of work coming from DX9/10(11) . The only DX12 game which has somewhat of a "public" Alpha is Ashes of the singularity.
 
By the time it is worth worrying about DX12 we will be well into the cycle of the next gen of GPUs.
 
fightingfi said:
heres the comment about Tomb Raider

http://www.pcgamer.com/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-review/

read the settings about it on the right hand side half way down a 970 barely runs it LULZ
Click to expand...
That's not what it says at all.

While my 970 GTX couldn't keep up with the demands of running every option at maximum—dropping to a stutter during cutscenes and set pieces—a few sensible reductions had it running smoothly and consistently at 60 frames per second.
Click to expand...
The reviewer had to turn down some more demanding options to achieve a consistent 60 FPS, which is well in-line with what a 970 owner would expect from a modern game. The author makes no note of what resolution he's playing at, but in my experience, many demanding games need to have some options turned down to achieve a consistent 60 FPS at 1080p on a 970.

Typically, If a user wants every single option maxed out on the newest, most demanding games, he'll need the newest, most expensive GPU in his PC. The 970 simply doesn't fit the bill in that regard. Great card, yes. But it's intended purpose isn't to max out every option in every new game.

Hardly "LULZ", as you would say.
 
and thats at 1080p.

any higher reso and you are looking at sli/xfire for ultra...
 
To the OP, your equipment will last a long time as top end before it becomes obsolete (not redundant!). I sense the thread was started to goad some Pro AMD fans who screamed the party line that Async would make the Nvidia line obsolete.

These arguments are nonsense. All of our equipment is subject to the obsolescence stigma as time marches by regardless if it is AMD or Nvidia.

I do agree that the hope of some that high end Nvidia owners would get stabbed in the back when DX12 games came out is silly. I own a 5960x with a single GTX980TI and a 4790k with twin R9 290s in CF so I like both camps.

I bought Ashes of Singularity because I was interested in the benchmarking aspect of a true DX12 game even in Alpha stage. For what it's worth, my single GTX980TI slightly beats 2-R9 290s in CF. It's only only one test but it does show the power of the GTX980TI.

I suspect we might see a few games with DX12 options by the end of 2016 and they might run slightly faster on a Fury X than a GTX980TI, especially at 4k, but that news is likely to be buried by the coverage of the new gpus from both AMD (Polaris) and Nvidia (Pascal).

sigh! Time marches on.
 
Last edited:
SpongeBob said:
DX9 for another 10 years wooooo
Click to expand...
I struggle to think of any AAA game released this year that supported DX9.

Every new release is 64-bit Windows only and DX11 only it seems. A couple years ago you would've been crazy to place such restrictions on a PC title.
 
crusty_juggler said:
I struggle to think of any AAA game released this year that supported DX9.

Every new release is 64-bit Windows only and DX11 only it seems. A couple years ago you would've been crazy to place such restrictions on a PC title.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Now that we're finally over the 32-bit hump, and Microsoft had the mental capacity required to back-port DX11 to Vista, there's enough market share since 2013 for all AAA games to be DX11, and most have been 64-bit.

Also, I understand where the OP is coming from. According to some blind idiots pushing the "optimum viewpoint" hype train before the Windows 10 launch, we were supposed to have a boatload of AAA DX12 native titles out by Christmas 2016. So where are all these announcements?

These people didn't understand the meaning of small DX12 market share, level of difficulty adding DX12 multiprocessor to an engine, but they plowed ahead with their soothsaying anyway. Now we're just waiting for ANY sign of life (aside from a DX12 patch). But I expect the flood to start in 2017, after the DX12 market is well over 50% of Steam gamers.

Also, I'd like to point-out that the majority of games released in the last year have more than two major threads, which is why the Core i3 no-longer stomps the FX-8350E by 20-40% in most games! See here, where only the ancient engine from the Total War, or the 1.5 year old Shadow of Mordor sees a significant difference between the two.

http://www.techspot.com/review/1087-best-value-desktop-cpu/page4.html

The Core i3 is still faster most of the time, but it's not noticeable in most games. So you people were saying we need DX12 to add multiple threads to games? Where have you been the last year?
 
Last edited:
defaultluser said:
According to some blind idiots pushing the "optimum viewpoint" hype train before the Windows 10 launch, we were supposed to have a boatload of AAA DX12 native titles out by Christmas 2016. So where are all these announcements?
Click to expand...

Well, Christmas 2016 is still 11 months away, so I guess we still have some time left ;)

Assuming that you meant Christmas 2015, I recall the general consensus being that Christmas 2015 was not when DX12 adoption would magically happen, but rather, the first occasion where people would be buying significant quantities of new Windows 10 devices. That's really just the first step. Even after the release of Windows 10, many new PCs were (are) still being sold with 7 or 8.1.
 
Brent_Justice said:
Please provide links and proof of future EA games that will be using DX12.
Click to expand...

Johan Andersson said:
Would like to require Win10 & DX12/WDDM2.0 as a minspec for our holiday 2016 games on Frostbite, likely a bit aggressive but major benefits Link
Click to expand...
Not sure I'd call this conclusive, but seems a strong indicator there will be some in the future.

As for Rise of the Tomb Raider: Link Should be in there, but it's behind a pay wall. It was part of a SIGGRAPH presentation on advanced lighting and effects. Not sure they said DX12, just that it's using "compute shaders" and "async compute". That would imply consoles or DX12/Vulkan. However, it doesn't look like the effects made it to PC.

defaultluser said:
Also, I understand where the OP is coming from. According to some blind idiots pushing the "optimum viewpoint" hype train before the Windows 10 launch, we were supposed to have a boatload of AAA DX12 native titles out by Christmas 2016. So where are all these announcements?

These people didn't understand the meaning of small DX12 market share, level of difficulty adding DX12 multiprocessor to an engine, but they plowed ahead with their soothsaying anyway. Now we're just waiting for ANY sign of life (aside from a DX12 patch). But I expect the flood to start in 2017, after the DX12 market is well over 50% of Steam gamers.
Click to expand...
Except Vulkan should have been out last November, but it was delayed. That would have effectively allowed DX12 on non-Win10 systems. So the market share argument is kind of meaningless. So is the implementation argument, since at least in the case of Rise of the Tomb Raider they already coded it that way. They just decided to re-write everything in the process of porting to Windows when they shouldn't have to.
 
Like didn't Win10 and DX12 just basically arrive? I'd give it some more time, maybe 6-12 months. There's a whole lot of people still on 7 and 8.1 that buy games, and whether a game has DX12 or not probably doesn't translate into much difference in sales dollars. The games I play, I couldn't even tell you which tech level they use -- do people actually care that much?
 
xorbe said:
Like didn't Win10 and DX12 just basically arrive? I'd give it some more time, maybe 6-12 months. There's a whole lot of people still on 7 and 8.1 that buy games, and whether a game has DX12 or not probably doesn't translate into much difference in sales dollars. The games I play, I couldn't even tell you which tech level they use -- do people actually care that much?
Click to expand...

Actually I think it was more about getting more out of what we have, related to the consensus that games/software have been holding it back for years. Of course there are the few that wanted to see an AMD revolution, cant say I blame them with some of the posters in forums I have seen, but for the most part just wanted to see more STUFF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top