[Updated] Oxide responds to AotS Conspiracies, Maxwell Has No Native Support For DX12 Asynchronous Compute

[AlwaysFSX]

you know what i meant

No I don't, enlighten me. :mellow:

[PlayStation 2]

No I don't, enlighten me. :mellow:

MOTHERF

I meant full dx12 support

[AlwaysFSX]

MOTHERF

I meant full dx12 support

Then the same applies to AMD, they lied just as much as Nvidia has according to your logic.

[stealth80]

Interesting quote by Nvidia back in January

 

"We’re more than ready. GPUs built on our Maxwell GPU architecture –  such as our recently released GeForce GTX 970 and GeForce GTX 980 – fully support DX12. - See more at: http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/01/21/windows-10-nvidia-dx12/#sthash.bdv8nvbM.dpuf"

[PlayStation 2]

Then the same applies to AMD, they lied just as much as Nvidia has according to your logic.

Sure.

[Mindtrickz]

They didn't. There's multiple tiers of DX12 support. Just because they don't have asynchronous shaders (in Maxwell) doesn't mean they don't support DX12.

 

Well asynchronous shaders is one of the big ones. It allows 290x to perform on level agianst 980 Ti in DX12.

 

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/08/directx-12-tested-an-early-win-for-amd-and-disappointment-for-nvidia/

[AlwaysFSX]

Well asynchronous shaders is one of the big ones. It allows 290x to perform on level agianst 980 Ti in DX12.

 

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/08/directx-12-tested-an-early-win-for-amd-and-disappointment-for-nvidia/

Great, one test that doesn't show the true performance of DX12. Microsoft said minimum gains for all hardware would be in the neighborhood of 20%, which Nvidia clearly did not get. With AMD, Nvidia, and Microsoft having worked on DX12 for the past several years there's something clearly not shown with how these cards are supposed to perform with DX12. Yes, the Radeon cards get a performance boost. Applause for them, whatever. One benchmark is not indicative of true API performance.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Is maxwell not supporting resource binding tier 3 the problem?

[AlwaysFSX]

Is maxwell not supporting resource binding tier 3 the problem?

Seems to be. Do remember, DX12 wasn't even announced or a real thought when Maxwell released so it's not surprising. It wouldn't be necessary to include that in the design.

[Briggsy]

Then the same applies to AMD, they lied just as much as Nvidia has according to your logic.

 

which part of dx12 do they not support, besides the DX12.1 Band-Aid?

[AlwaysFSX]

which part of dx12 do they not support, besides the DX12.1 Band-Aid?

As I said in my original post, it'd take some digging through feature lists to find out which ones.

[Briggsy]

As I said in my original post, it'd take some digging through feature lists to find out which ones.

 

There are a couple, but the same graph shows Pascal as not supporting Asynchronous Shaders, so who knows I guess.

 

[AlwaysFSX]

There are a couple, but the same graph shows Pascal as not supporting Asynchronous Shaders, so who knows I guess.

Heyyy, that's pretty useful.

 

It would honestly surprise me if Pascal doesn't support Asynchronous Shaders, they've known about it long before Pascal went in to pre-production so it should be a feature or they better make the cards have a driver solution. Or just more powerful..

[Sauron]

This could be the breath of fresh air amd needs. If with dx12 a 290x performs like a 980ti, imagine what the fury x can do - and what the furyx2 will mean.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Seems to be. Do remember, DX12 wasn't even announced or a real thought when Maxwell released so it's not surprising. It wouldn't be necessary to include that in the design.

 

It it? Nvidia seems to be pushing DX12 hard with maxwell? 

 

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/01/21/windows-10-nvidia-dx12/

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/02/16/directx-12-geforce/

 

 

We’re more than ready. GPUs built on our Maxwell GPU architecture –  such as our recently released GeForce GTX 970 and GeForce GTX 980 – fully support DX12.

 

[AlwaysFSX]

It it? Nvidia seems to be pushing DX12 hard with maxwell? 

 

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/01/21/windows-10-nvidia-dx12/

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/02/16/directx-12-geforce/

Nobody has defined what "fully support" means yet. Other than what they think it means. So it's up in the air. Maxwell supports DX12, just not all the features. I'm sure every DX11 generation of card has been missing some pieces for DX11 to work perfectly but nobody has complained about that.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Nobody has defined what "fully support" means yet. Other than what they think it means. So it's up in the air. Maxwell supports DX12, just not all the features. I'm sure every DX11 generation of card has been missing some pieces for DX11 to work perfectly but nobody has complained about that.

 

I'm pretty sure Maxwell fully supports all DX12 features (12_1) 

[Misanthrope]

Seems to be. Do remember, DX12 wasn't even announced or a real thought when Maxwell released so it's not surprising. It wouldn't be necessary to include that in the design.

It also makes a pretty compelling argument for DX12 basically being repackaged Mantle only, regardless of what Microsoft said how they've been working on it for years it seems pretty convenient that AMD was just ready and Nvidia is not.

[Tomsen]

It also makes a pretty compelling argument for DX12 basically being repackaged Mantle only, regardless of what Microsoft said how they've been working on it for years it seems pretty convenient that AMD was just ready and Nvidia is not.

There is no doubt that mantle had its influence in DX12.

To what degree is what we could discuss. (I'm certain it had its great deal on DX12 rendering pipeline)

 

It would be wierd if MS (who invested quite the money in AMD for consoles) wouldn't also considering some corporation between the API for the underlying hardware.

 

GCN is certainly ready for the next generation (kinda lies in its name doesn't it? )

[bogus]

It also makes a pretty compelling argument for DX12 basically being repackaged Mantle only, regardless of what Microsoft said how they've been working on it for years it seems pretty convenient that AMD was just ready and Nvidia is not.

 

Well I've been saying this for quite some... specially because Huddy said so a long time ago but the NVIDIA horde tryed to discredit someone who exposed himself and his company to liability... all because NVIDIA said something vague like... "we've been working on DX12 for 4 years".

 

To what extent they used Mantle isn't clear - but for sure they used Mantle. The same like Khronos.

 

People need to give more credit to Johan Andersson, Frostibe, Oxide and AMD.

[GeathX]

Well I've been saying this for quite some... specially because Huddy said so a long time ago but the NVIDIA horde tryed to discredit someone who exposed himself and his company to liability... all because NVIDIA said something vague like... "we've been working on DX12 for 4 years".

 

To what extent they used Mantle isn't clear - but for sure they used Mantle. The same like Khronos.

 

People need to give more credit to Johan Andersson, Frostibe, Oxide and AMD.

And if this is a trend for DX12, all that comes out of this situation is good for the industry/market/consumer.

AMD and Nvidia are only going to get better.

 

[Tomsen]

People need to give the correct amount. DX 12 is not mantle, and how much of mantle was used or ended up in DX 12 is not clear for now. Mantle didn't jumpstart DX 12, because it was already being made. Anyone delusional enough to think otherwise needs a brain scan.

No, but we are sure a fair bit did.

 

Go back to your glorious intel threads, and spread your "wisdom" there instead.

You seems to have a constant negative facade with AMD.

 

Nobody made the claim DX12 wasn't under development..

[patrickjp93]

No, but we are sure a fair bit did.

 

Go back to your glorious intel threads, and spread your "wisdom" there instead.

You seems to have a constant negative facade with AMD.

 

Nobody made the claim DX12 wasn't under development..

Maybe not here, but elsewhere on the net they do. I'm only saying balance the scale, a much more diplomatic approach.

 

AMD's financial future is grim. Whether or not you want to see reason on that is up to you. I can only provide the facts as they stand and give my analysis of those facts as objectively as I can. Whether or not the end result conflicts with your desires so much you abandon rationality is the only variable. Do I sound cocky or just straight to the point?

[Tomsen]

Maybe not here, but elsewhere on the net they do. I'm only saying balance the scale, a much more diplomatic approach.

 

AMD's financial future is grim. Whether or not you want to see reason on that is up to you. I can only provide the facts as they stand and give my analysis of those facts as objectively as I can. Whether or not the end result conflicts with your desires so much you abandon rationality is the only variable. Do I sound cocky or just straight to the point?

Elsewhere on the net the spread hoax on almost everything. Keep it relevant.

A very negative diplomatic approach, I most say. 

 

In regards to something like this, your facts simple isn't enough to predict the future. There are key elements that lies unknown to the public.

I'm by far not saying AMD is on a great stand financially. They are not..

 

Both. Less corckiness is desired.

[MoonSpot]

[removed]

 

True, but He's right.  To suggest that DX12, or any code of this scale, came out of the woodwork virtually over night has issues.  That said, the people involved with DX12 would have been negligent to completely ignore the logic within Mantle.  It'll be good for all of us to get more data, unfortunately we're just going to have to wait for more DX12 titles/benches.

Edited August 31, 2015 by Godlygamer23