Bits DirectX 11: A look at what's coming

[Tim S]

http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2008/09...hat-s-coming/1

At Nvision, we managed to sit in on Kevin Gee's introduction to DirectX 11 and since then, we've kept our ear to the ground. We've managed to gather a lot of insight into what Gee talked about from various sources inside the industry, so join us as we take a look at what makes DX11 tick.

[zr_ox]

So few titles using DX10....scratches head!

Look at the evolution of DX9, that took a few years to become fully realized and optimimized. DX10 has been around for two and there are still only a handfull of DX10 games.

Not being anti-progress but this is a little confusing, is DX10 that bad that there will be no further developement? Perhaps DX11 will be the one to get developers onboard?

Anyway it was a great article and further proof that true cinematic gaming experiences are not THAT far away.

[The boy 4rm oz]

Yeah I agree, a great article once again. I am looking forward to see how this turns out. I do agree with zr ox, is DX10 so bad that they need a newer version straight away???

[liratheal]

Okay, shoot me if it was in the article, but are we going to need new cards for DX11 even though 10 is barely a year old?

[Matticus]

The only reason there are so few DX10 games is because they would either be vista only or give different experience to vista and XP users, I don't think game makers want to take that risk.

I assume by the time DX 11 is out everyone will be using vista (with some using windows 7?) so it will be widely used, vista + DX 10 seems to be a bit of a stepping stone, one that many people will try their hardest to just jump straight over.

[Nikumba]

liratheal DX 10 is nearly 2 years old now, if it comes out 2009/2010 it will be 3 or 4 years old, i think the time bewtween DX8 and DX9 was longer than that

Kimbie

[Tim S]

Originally Posted by liratheal

Okay, shoot me if it was in the article, but are we going to need new cards for DX11 even though 10 is barely a year old?

DX10's going to be a minimum spec for quite some time now... it's been around since late 2006 and the first games shipped in the middle of last year. The first DX11 games are likely to ship in the 2011 timeframe I would say.

[liratheal]

Originally Posted by Matticus

The only reason there are so few DX10 games is because they would either be vista only or give different experience to vista and XP users, I don't think game makers want to take that risk.

I assume by the time DX 11 is out everyone will be using vista (with some using windows 7?) so it will be widely used, vista + DX 10 seems to be a bit of a stepping stone, one that many people will try their hardest to just jump straight over.

Originally Posted by Nikumba

liratheal DX 10 is nearly 2 years old now, if it comes out 2009/2010 it will be 3 or 4 years old, i think the time bewtween DX8 and DX9 was longer than that

Kimbie

Originally Posted by Tim S

DX10's going to be a minimum spec for quite some time now... it's been around since late 2006 and the first games shipped in the middle of last year. The first DX11 games are likely to ship in the 2011 timeframe I would say.

They are just out to confuse me, aren't they. Also, yeah, my DX10 time estimate is off (It barely feels like six weeks since I was 20, let alone 21), probably not helped by there being a fat lot bugger all DX10 games that're spectacular looking at the moment.

I assume, then, that DX11 will be on Vista and 7, or is it likely to be another 'if you want the latest hardware, you better buy another OS' situation. Nevermind. It's too early to speculate that.

[bowman]

'What the Radeon’s tessellation unit does do though is enable developers to play around with tessellation on the PC and it will also give them an idea of how code is going to port from Xbox 360 to PC, as commercial reality dictates that the Xbox is more than likely the primary platform for most developers these days. The fact of the matter is that it also strengthens Microsoft's foothold in the next generation of consoles too, because the likelihood is that it will further strongly correlate the Windows gaming platform to the Xbox one and allow for even easier cross-platform development and great cost efficiency for developers.'

Microsoft is just looking to shepherd us onto their next batch of consoles if not the current one. Heck, the way things are going I'll probably end up giving up myself and getting one of the stupid boxes..

[Tim S]

Originally Posted by liratheal

They are just out to confuse me, aren't they. Also, yeah, my DX10 time estimate is off (It barely feels like six weeks since I was 20, let alone 21), probably not helped by there being a fat lot bugger all DX10 games that're spectacular looking at the moment.

I assume, then, that DX11 will be on Vista and 7, or is it likely to be another 'if you want the latest hardware, you better buy another OS' situation. Nevermind. It's too early to speculate that.

D3D11 is Vista and Windows 7.

Some of the D3D11 features (specifically multi-threading) will be available to DX10 hardware in a limited fashion providing drivers are updated by AMD/Nvidia.

[Veles]

Originally Posted by liratheal

Okay, shoot me if it was in the article, but are we going to need new cards for DX11 even though 10 is barely a year old?

Why halt progress just because the last new thing hasn't been out too long?

[Tim S]

Originally Posted by bowman

'What the Radeon’s tessellation unit does do though is enable developers to play around with tessellation on the PC and it will also give them an idea of how code is going to port from Xbox 360 to PC, as commercial reality dictates that the Xbox is more than likely the primary platform for most developers these days. The fact of the matter is that it also strengthens Microsoft's foothold in the next generation of consoles too, because the likelihood is that it will further strongly correlate the Windows gaming platform to the Xbox one and allow for even easier cross-platform development and great cost efficiency for developers.'

Microsoft is just looking to shepherd us onto their next batch of consoles if not the current one. Heck, the way things are going I'll probably end up giving up myself and getting one of the stupid boxes..

lol, the reason the X360 is the primary development platform at the moment is because of the toolsets Microsoft makes available. It means with very little effort you can create a PC version of the console game - obviously, some publishers (I don't think it's necessarily developers being overly lazy out of choice) take very little effort quite literally and push developers into unrealistic timeframes, which results in rubbish console ports like Merc 2 for example.

Sadly, leading development on consoles is going to be the way things are nowadays - it's the commercial reality of creating video games because they're now multi, multi million dollar projects. Therefore the developer/publisher needs to extract maximum return - the PC alone will not deliver that return. A lot of that is to do with piracy, which in turn is related to users revolting against overly intrusive DRM employed by publishers. The 360 version will undoubtedly sell more in most scenarios, so that's why they're moving in that direction and not putting all their eggs in one basket on the PC.

[liratheal]

Originally Posted by Veles

Why halt progress just because the last new thing hasn't been out too long?

Because I like my cave. Much nicer than those lah-de-dah mud/straw huts!

[glaeken]

From what I've heard among some developers on gamedev and other companies, a lot of developers might skip DX10 completely and go straight to DX11.

[liratheal]

Originally Posted by Star*Dagger

One of the most honest statements I have ever heard from the "I'll Wait/That wont work/We dont need that" Cyber-Luddites that I have ever heard.

I am looking forward to dx11, and as an early adopter of the 8800gtx, I am here to tell you that I was never sorry that I bought that card, it played all the dx9 games and the dx10 ones as well.
I just played Crysis on my new 4870x2 and it reminded me of the type of revolution that happened the first time I had 3dfx in sli in quake 1 with glide. "Gaming will never be the same" I said to myself, and it wasnt.

DX10 and its child, dx11 are major leaps forward. The unfortunate thing is that people who have never played a dx10 game with the proper equipment poo-poo the tech.

Yours in Forward Looking Graphical Plasma,
Star*Dagger

I'm not that much of a cyber luddite - I enjoy buying new parts for my pc. Hell, I go through more componants than most computer stores (I jest), but it just seems like we've barely played with Dx10 before they're talking about releases for DX11. Time's flying, now, and these tech upgrades are making me notice it more than usual

[Tim S]

Originally Posted by glaeken

From what I've heard among some developers on gamedev and other companies, a lot of developers might skip DX10 completely and go straight to DX11.

That wouldn't surprise me, although DX10 might be the minspec, unless they're falling back to DX9c

[Sebbo]

Originally Posted by Tim S

lol, the reason the X360 is the primary development platform at the moment is because of the toolsets Microsoft makes available. It means with very little effort you can create a PC version of the console game

very true, the GM of The Creative Assembly said at a little industry meeting we had here in Brisbane this evening that they're essentially getting the PC DX10 version of StormRise for free (ie. no effort) because of the closeness of it and the XBox 360 API, and it might be the only reason they're bothering with a PC version at all...they cbf doing a DX9 version

[TreeDude]

Originally Posted by liratheal

I'm not that much of a cyber luddite - I enjoy buying new parts for my pc. Hell, I go through more componants than most computer stores (I jest), but it just seems like we've barely played with Dx10 before they're talking about releases for DX11. Time's flying, now, and these tech upgrades are making me notice it more than usual

Things are moving faster than they were. That is the nature of technology. It will continue to grow exponentially faster until we see a major change in the way we do computing (meaning 3D computing or quantum computing become the next platform). Then it will slow back down and the cycle will start again.

I must admit it is hard to keep up with the new tech. The next line of cards is hitting every 6 months and literally doubling the previous lines performance. Resisting the urge to buy new hardware is difficult. But I am going to wait till the next line of cards hits and just build a new system. I feel like that will be easier. i hate that my 3870 already seems old and I just bought it 6 months ago. My 6800 GT lasted me pretty long.

[Jojii]

Originally Posted by Article

Currently, both AMD and Nvidia have their own respective GPU or stream computing initiatives that are available to developers to solve non-graphics problems, but they're importantly not compatible with one another.

Why is is important that they are not compatible? any background on that sentence.

[Tim S]

Originally Posted by Jojii

Why is is important that they are not compatible? any background on that sentence.

Because, from a development perspective, you can't write one application that is accelerated by both without an API (or double the effort) right now and for the foreseeable future. Writing general-purpose applications for both AMD and Nvidia hardware doubles your potential installed base (assuming each has 50 percent market share in discrete graphics). Developers (and publishers) really care about installed bases because the bigger the target installed base, the bigger the chance they have of making lots of money.