gamerk316 :
blackkstar :
@gamerk,
I find it far more likely that DX12 is a knee-jerk reaction to:
1. SteamOS and Valve doing what they can to pro-actively reduce reliance on Windows
2. AMD releasing Mantle, which has potential to go cross platform.
3. EA is a major part of Mantle. Origin is developed in QT4 which is cross-platform, which to me hints that EA is keeping that door open
4. MS has lost power. Do you not find it odd that game developers went to someone besides MS to come up with an answer to a lousy graphics API when DX is the standard?
5. Game developers are turned off by Metro and Windows 8 and feel the need to no longer depend on MS
DX12 is a reaction to "Mantel" as you love to call it. It is also a reaction to trying to maintain vendor lock in for gaming PCs. It is a reaction to keep game developers in Windows.
One thing you more than likely love, because you seem to be so resistant to any form of change that you'd go as far as to derive insane conspiracy theories with absolutely zero evidence to continue justifying your beliefs.
You are in the wrong field if you are so opposed to changes. Technology is rapidly evolving. You remind me of a crotchety old man who whines about every new change. "OMG BLACKS CAN VOTE!!! THE WORLD IS OVER", "OMG GAYS CAN MARRY SOCIETY IS FINISHED!!!"
I just imagine you on some Pentium G running DX12 on an Nvidia card yelling at kids with fast CPUs playing games with Mantle on Linux going "YOU RUINED EVERYTHING I HATE YOU DAMN KIDS"
No, its not. DX12 has been kicking for YEARS. That's how versioned development works: You have one team working LTS, and another starting up the next version as soon as the previous one is finished. Hence why NVIDIA confirmed they were working on the specifications with MSFT four years ago.
As for your individual points: Tell me when Linux market share actually gets past 2% on Desktops.
gamerk316 :
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-Talks-DX12-DX11-Efficiency-Improvements
Since Juanrga likes AMD sponsored charts:
Um, you are aware that Star Swarm dynamically controls how many objects are on a screen based on performance, right? Did you not watch the presentation where Oxide is talking about how Mantle allows them to throw a ton of stuff on the screen? The first marketing slide is basically the equivalent of AMD posting a benchmark where GTX 780 is running PhysX on the rendering GPU and then going "WE R SO FAST XDDD" The two don't provide the same game experience, and it's comparing apples to oranges.
The Mantle experience differs completely from the DirectX experience. Oxide is using Mantle to provide a more unique gaming experience from DX, while EA/DICE are using Mantle to do nothing but increase performance. Which makes sense when you consider EA is money grubbing and making their games available to more people means more money. But it seems like there's a big perception that Mantle's only purpose is to make games more available to people with lower end systems. It is a problem Mantle helps solve, but it's not the only thing Mantle is capable of. It can definitely be used to just throw more things at the CPU to provide a better experience, and that's exactly what Star Swarm is doing. But it's pretty difficult to put "we played Star Swarm with Mantle and there were a ton more units on screen" into a bar graph, and it's pretty easy to leave that out.
The second graph is a 3 fps difference. In a marketing slide. Meaning that Nvidia is doing everything it can to grasp at straws and seem relevant.
Also, we have no idea what CPUs were used for those market slides. If Nvidia used a super high end Intel CPU, of course Mantle won't matter.
But it's a marketing slide. Doing something like benchmarking with 4960X, not telling anyone, and then going "look the new Nvidia driver is just as good as Mantle!" and implying that's with every CPU is the goal of this market slide.
And look, it's working like a charm. I don't think I've ever seen people get so excited about 3fps.
Critical thinking can take you far and it can really save you from embarrassment. :^)
However, I have a good feeling about your response, and I personally (and I'm quite sure others agree with me) trust Nvidia marketing the least out of AMD, Intel, and Nvidia. All marketing slides tend to exaggerate, but Nvidia does have the whole "our GPU is in great shape! Look at it! Oh ignore the wood screws it really works!" thing. And Intel has the whole "look at how great this game plays on the new Intel GPU!! (cuts to VLC video of gameplay)".
AFAIK, AMD is the only company of the big three that hasn't blatantly been caught pulling a massive marketing deception. There have been issues like JF-AMD making claims that aren't real, but it wasn't official mention endorsed by the company.