AMD Questions Nvidia Kepler's DirectX 11.1 Support

[renz496]

the way i see it when people are discussing about DirectX most people will only assume the software is made solely for gaming purpose. this matter has been explained by nvidia

The GTX 680 supports DirectX 11.1 with hardware feature level 11_0, including all optional features. This includes a number of features useful for game developers such as:
Partial constant buffer updates
Logic operations in the Output Merger
16bpp rendering
UAV-only rendering
Partial clears
Large constant buffers

We did not enable four non-gaming features in Hardware in Kepler (for 11_1):
Target-Independent Rasterization (2D rendering only)
16xMSAA Rasterization (2D rendering only)
Orthogonal Line Rendering Mode
UAV in non-pixel-shader stages
So basically, we do support 11.1 features with 11_0 feature level through the DirectX 11.1 API. We do not support feature level 11_1. This is a bit confusing, due to Microsoft naming. So we do support 11.1 from a feature level for gaming related features."

source: http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2012/11/21/nvidia-doesnt-fully-support-directx-111-with-kepler-gpus2c-bute280a6.aspx

 

[jerm1027]

Can we just move on to OpenGL already? Less confusion, more support.

 

[jonjonjon]

[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]Hasn't a partial DX11.1 update already been released for Windows 7 a while back? Or is it still due? I remember reading about it after the uproar caused my MS initially suggesting that DX11.1 is Win 8 exclusive.BTW if Win 7 also only gets partial 11.1 support like Kepler has, won't it make even less of a difference to people?[/citation]

yes windows 7 is getting partial dx11.1 support.
http://techreport.com/news/23907/windows-7-update-brings-some-dx11-1-features

 

[Guest]

AMD is Nigel Tufnel. They go one louder.

 

[matt_b]

[citation][nom]wanderer11[/nom]Most games are still DX9. Does it really matter if they do/don't support DX11.1?[/citation]
This isn't the point. The heart of the matter is that you, the consumer, are told that a product your are looking to purchase has a feature set that just may not in fact have it. False advertising is the term we're looking at if this is proven to be the case.

 

[heffeque]

So... what does this mean for gamers?

- AMD supports Dx11.1 with hardware
- nVida supports Dx11.0 with hardware and the .1 with software.

So when software starts using the .1 part, AMD will have a performance advantage on current hardware.

So basically...

- If you want a future-proof videocard, AMD seems to be the way to go.
- If you update your videocard every couple of years or so... it doesn't really matter because there won't be much software taking advantage of the .1 features.

End of discussion.

 

[Guest]

I upgraded all 15 of my pcs with windows 8.

All you have to do is go to desktop one time, boohoo. Then just use windows key to go from desktop to start menu.

Waaaaah. that's so hard, and complicated isn't it children?

 

[Th-z]

Just like the past, AMD is always faster in terms of rolling out products that support the latest DX standards, from DX 10.1 to DX 11. It will take Nvidia's 700 series to fully support 11.1.

But the lingering problem for AMD is that their driver still hasn't supported DX 11 multithreaded rendering, aka driver command list, though so far Civ 5 is the only game that is affected by it.

 

[kellybean]

Screw MS and their proprietary Direct X, Long live Open GL and thanks to Apple it is making a comback after MS almost killed it off with their monopoly OS and PC Games.

 

[josejones]

When will DX 12 come out??? Will the new XBox '720' include DX 12 support?

 

[Guest]

If dx11 worked in windows xp, we woudla had games using dx11 a long time ago.

The same will be true of anything higher then dx11, since it wont work on windows 7.

With windows xp still having a huge share of the market, dx9 will be the standard for a long time to come. Especially since windows 8 is a flop.

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

By the time anything is released in DX 11.1 I am sure Nvidia will have cards that fully support all features. To be honost graphics are not all that to me, I want solid gameplay before graphics. I have been playing WarZ Emulator which is only dx 9 and not even the best looking dx 9 game, but the game play is unmatchable for me. open world pvp... when you die you loose everything. Love it

 

[The_Trutherizer]

[citation][nom]JOSHSKORN[/nom]You're most likely right. We won't see anything much better until the new consoles come out. By that time, we may have DX 12 and then, devs will finally start focusing much more on DX11 or 11.1.[/citation]

I kind of remember when a new DX version was a big deal, because you absolutely got a lot more gfx quality with each iteration. And the same still holds true. Problem is these days the whole industry suffers from consolitis. It's craaaaap! In a way I blame PC hardware manufacturers. It used to be much easier to choose the right hardware 10 years ago. These days there is just too much to choose from. I manage just fine of course, because I don't mind a bit of research before I purchase, but most people. No.

 

[atikkur]

lesson learned. dont buy nvidia at its first stage of new generation, too many examples.

 

[The_Trutherizer]

[citation][nom]crymeadamnriverchildren[/nom]I upgraded all 15 of my pcs with windows 8.All you have to do is go to desktop one time, boohoo. Then just use windows key to go from desktop to start menu.Waaaaah. that's so hard, and complicated isn't it children?[/citation]

What was that about? Did you comment on the right article?

 

[erick81]

I'm an Amd guy but with so many gamers not going to W8 and I think the .1 in the new Dx just being for 3-D and a W8 exclusive I don't see this bothering Nvidia too much.

 

[JonnyDough]

[citation][nom]kellybean[/nom]Screw MS and their proprietary Direct X, Long live Open GL and thanks to Apple it is making a comback after MS almost killed it off with their monopoly OS and PC Games.[/citation]

As if Apple doesn't do the proprietary trick to make more bank. What do you think we'd all be paying if Apple had remained the king of personal computers?

 

[JonnyDough]

[citation][nom]The_Trutherizer[/nom]I kind of remember when a new DX version was a big deal, because you absolutely got a lot more gfx quality with each iteration. And the same still holds true. Problem is these days the whole industry suffers from consolitis. It's craaaaap! In a way I blame PC hardware manufacturers. It used to be much easier to choose the right hardware 10 years ago. These days there is just too much to choose from. I manage just fine of course, because I don't mind a bit of research before I purchase, but most people. No.[/citation]

I third this. New DX versions seem to give us just a bit more eye candy and ease of development for software developers.

 

[antilycus]

Blah blah blah, NVIDIA knows how to make drivers AMD is still clueless

 

[eodeo]

I still remember vividly dx10 vs dx10.1 back in 2008.

At the end of the day dx10.1 was as useless as a Mac for 3d. It looked possible on paper, but was never used. Unlike the unfortunate Mac OS, dx10.1 was quickly replaced with dx11 and everyone forgot that AMD 48xx series of GPUs supported both dx10.1 and tessellation. Despite this, none of the games that do support dx11 and tessellation today do NOT support these AMD cards.

I could be wrong, but I envision dx12 stomping out any dx11 differences that 0.00001 might utilize in a minor way until such a point.

You had me once AMD and i trusted you- CUDA/PHYSIX/OPENCL "we will work it out- support is just around the corner" said amd in late 2008, as I purchased 4850. Fast forward to 2011 when I got sick of waiting for AMD to step up and and got more inclined to switch to nvidia due to increasing number of useful apps that support CUDA (Adobe, Autodesk...) Their number grows even today, when OpenCL is a bit more than just an empty promise.

For my trust in AMD, I was rewarded with sub-par drivers that do not even support per application 3d settings or unified color settings across 2d/3d and video. While speed in games was always as good as advertised, everything else was a big letdown. In 3 years until I jumped ship they have made NO effort to fulfill their promises or remedy their poor drivers. It will be some time indeed till I purchase a new AMD GPU.

 

[JonnyDough]

[citation][nom]eodeo[/nom]I still remember vividly dx10 vs dx10.1 back in 2008.At the end of the day dx10.1 was as useless as a Mac for 3d. It looked possible on paper, but was never used. Unlike the unfortunate Mac OS, dx10.1 was quickly replaced with dx11 and everyone forgot that AMD 48xx series of GPUs supported both dx10.1 and tessellation. Despite this, none of the games that do support dx11 and tessellation today do NOT support these AMD cards.I could be wrong, but I envision dx12 stomping out any dx11 differences that 0.00001 might utilize in a minor way until such a point.You had me once AMD and i trusted you- CUDA/PHYSIX/OPENCL "we will work it out- support is just around the corner" said amd in late 2008, as I purchased 4850. Fast forward to 2011 when I got sick of waiting for AMD to step up and and got more inclined to switch to nvidia due to increasing number of useful apps that support CUDA (Adobe, Autodesk...) Their number grows even today, when OpenCL is a bit more than just an empty promise.For my trust in AMD, I was rewarded with sub-par drivers that do not even support per application 3d settings or unified color settings across 2d/3d and video. While speed in games was always as good as advertised, everything else was a big letdown. In 3 years until I jumped ship they have made NO effort to fulfill their promises or remedy their poor drivers. It will be some time indeed till I purchase a new AMD GPU.[/citation]


In AMD's defense, that HD 4850 is still viable for running most games even today. I'm running an HD4830 in one of my systems and I can run Fallout New Vegas on Ultra High settings with playable frames.

 

[whitex]

Be careful what you claim, AMD. You might shot yourself in the foot like your Bulldozer did.

 

[11796pcs]

If I'm going to spend hundreds of dollars on a graphics card, I want the best. I don't care if some of the features of DX 11.1 aren't currently being widely used. This is pure laziness on NVIDIA's part and surprising considering AMD came out with their cards for this generation first.

 

[chewy1963]

I guess this makes it official... AMD is no longer the same company that put out such quality-that-speaks-for-itself as the original Athlon 64 series. Now they're getting all aggressive where it doesn't matter.

 

[renz496]

[citation][nom]heffeque[/nom]So... what does this mean for gamers?- AMD supports Dx11.1 with hardware- nVida supports Dx11.0 with hardware and the .1 with software.So when software starts using the .1 part, AMD will have a performance advantage on current hardware.So basically...- If you want a future-proof videocard, AMD seems to be the way to go.- If you update your videocard every couple of years or so... it doesn't really matter because there won't be much software taking advantage of the .1 features.End of discussion.[/citation]

honestly i'm interested with that future proof comment. remember about tessellation engine that exist in AMD cards prior to HD5000 series? people claim about going for radeon is future proof because when the game starts utilizing tessellation they don't necessarily have to upgrade because the hardware already exist in their card. then everyone knows what happen when tessellation becomes one of the key feature of DX11