Graphics in dx11 and dx12

[garfield]

Well, I was reading a pretty extensive review on uk.hardware.info and it left me a bit confused. You don't have the extensive knowledge of yesteryear, but it bugs me that many graphics cards that people bought for the supposed dx12 support and their fantastic and wonderful speed and graphic quality, see their performance diminished in a brutal way, some even lose 48% of performance, from resolutions of 1080p to medium quality dx11 vs dx12 and on top of that in a somewhat inconsistent way:

• AMD in full remains in some basic models, and in the top of the range it falls.
• Nvidia falls or remains in some up to the 980ti
  It's not that it's unplayable in the mid and high ranges like 280 or 960/70, but the drop in fps is huge. What I don't see is what javisoft comments in his review of the rx480: the framerate.
  I say this not because I don't understand that the supposed quality of dx12 didn't come with a drop in speed, but that its quality went hand in hand with an ostensible improvement in speed, because it was supposed to render in a more efficient way and blablabla.

Well, that's it, whoever can explain it to me is all ears.

[Fassou]

I, who have no idea what I'm talking about

I think it's an article about the game itself, in which they have added these pseudo-tests to improve its visibility, taking advantage of the comparison between versions of DirectX, but being limited to a game, it is too premature and limited to see the differences.

Too many games, rely on the usual purchased engines that are already optimized for DX11, but for DX12 it seems that you have to roll up your sleeves a bit, so it will take time to see something decent, unless they release the franchise games to which those engines belong, and make it easier for the rest.

Salu2!

[garfield]

Well, after asking around and reading, I think I have an idea: the dx12 implementation is not complete, and both AMD and Nvidia have not made it in its final version, but what Microsoft is releasing for now, so it's more of a "Look what we want to do!" rather than what they do. It looks good in the new AMD and Nvidia, that AMD performs better for DX12 than Nvidia because of that little extra they have included.
The support for multi-graphics from different manufacturers seems not to be finished, which was supposed to be the best advance, and it's not.
I think that those who buy a graphics card for the supposed performance in dx12 should focus, for now, on dx11. All this smells dx12.1 to me. Which, on the other hand, is not bad, but seeing the prices in which the second-hand market is moving with the 980, it could be a good option.

[Yorus]

Well, I do have a bit of a problem with DX12. It was supposed to even improve performance on graphics cards not made for DX12 on Windows 10, because it would make better use of the processor cores, use RAM if VRAM is lacking... and I don't know how many other wonders. I might have built a mess in my head that it's not like that, but it was almost the only reason to upgrade to Windows 10 and I don't see it.

On top of that, the only graphics card similar to mine that appears in those tables is a 750 Ti (mine is not the Ti) and there are no DX12 results...

[Obione]

I see it as green, few native DX12 games and cards with drivers to polish.

DX12 I have tested Forza Apex (free on Win 10 store) and it consumes 60% of the micro, Assetto that I even like more consumes 40.

I have lost the clamp and mixed topics, I was looking at another thread that dealt with APIs etc :facepalm:

[Kernel1.0]

For now, it's just something nice to put on the boxes of operating systems, graphics cards, and games

[JuezDred]

Well, I think that as long as they stay above 60fps in full HD, half the planet will be more than enough. With the prices of monitors...
DX12 is still green. And like everything in this world, the first versions are for testing and to create demand.