One has to understand the difference between Vulkan and OpenGL to understand why Vulkan is a true competitor to DX while OpenGL never really was.
That Vulkan is cross platform, and DX12 is platform restricted makes Vulkan a very useful tool for Software developers, that it is arguably better for games, at least if you have an AMD GPU, is probably going to make it even more attractive to some, not that Nvidia does all that badly on Vulkan, obviously it works just fine, but it does seem that Vulkan will allow AMD to finally play to their strengths. It probably won't take very long for Vulkan to gain significant market share, because unlike Dx12, it supports more versions of Windows that Dx12 does, if anything, Vulkan supports the clear majority of Windows OS's, and if there is one thing that developers are going to be interested in, is that they want to have the largest possible userbase to market their games to, and that is something that Dx12 does not have, why else are games based on Dx9/11, that Vulkan also appears to be superior to Dx12 in some circumstances will probably help a lot. Lets face it, if you have an AMD GPU in your PC, what are you going to do, if you have a game that had 2 versions, one based on Dx12 and the other based on Vulkan, which would you buy? its a no brainer, its going to be the Vulkan version, chances are Nvidia users will make the same choice too, particularly if they don't have Win10, and sure as hell you wouldn't choose the UWP version either.
Phry said:
That Vulkan is cross platform, and DX12 is platform restricted makes Vulkan a very useful tool for Software developers, that it is arguably better for games, at least if you have an AMD GPU, is probably going to make it even more attractive to some, not that Nvidia does all that badly on Vulkan, obviously it works just fine, but it does seem that Vulkan will allow AMD to finally play to their strengths. It probably won't take very long for Vulkan to gain significant market share, because unlike Dx12, it supports more versions of Windows that Dx12 does, if anything, Vulkan supports the clear majority of Windows OS's, and if there is one thing that developers are going to be interested in, is that they want to have the largest possible userbase to market their games to, and that is something that Dx12 does not have, why else are games based on Dx9/11, that Vulkan also appears to be superior to Dx12 in some circumstances will probably help a lot. Lets face it, if you have an AMD GPU in your PC, what are you going to do, if you have a game that had 2 versions, one based on Dx12 and the other based on Vulkan, which would you buy? its a no brainer, its going to be the Vulkan version, chances are Nvidia users will make the same choice too, particularly if they don't have Win10, and sure as hell you wouldn't choose the UWP version either.
Still beating that dead horse?
Unfortunately for you, developers aren't as shortsighted. Developers know that the market is going one direction only - towards Win10 and DX12.
Phry said:
That Vulkan is cross platform, and DX12 is platform restricted makes Vulkan a very useful tool for Software developers, that it is arguably better for games, at least if you have an AMD GPU, is probably going to make it even more attractive to some, not that Nvidia does all that badly on Vulkan, obviously it works just fine, but it does seem that Vulkan will allow AMD to finally play to their strengths. It probably won't take very long for Vulkan to gain significant market share, because unlike Dx12, it supports more versions of Windows that Dx12 does, if anything, Vulkan supports the clear majority of Windows OS's, and if there is one thing that developers are going to be interested in, is that they want to have the largest possible userbase to market their games to, and that is something that Dx12 does not have, why else are games based on Dx9/11, that Vulkan also appears to be superior to Dx12 in some circumstances will probably help a lot. Lets face it, if you have an AMD GPU in your PC, what are you going to do, if you have a game that had 2 versions, one based on Dx12 and the other based on Vulkan, which would you buy? its a no brainer, its going to be the Vulkan version, chances are Nvidia users will make the same choice too, particularly if they don't have Win10, and sure as hell you wouldn't choose the UWP version either.
Still beating that dead horse?
Unfortunately for you, developers aren't as shortsighted. Developers know that the market is going one direction only - towards Win10 and DX12.
Sorry, but thats clearly not true. And if there is any flagellating going on of deceased equines, its probably Dx12. But, hell if MS wants to keep whipping that baby.. its their horse to do with as they please
Phry said:
That Vulkan is cross platform, and DX12 is platform restricted makes Vulkan a very useful tool for Software developers, that it is arguably better for games, at least if you have an AMD GPU, is probably going to make it even more attractive to some, not that Nvidia does all that badly on Vulkan, obviously it works just fine, but it does seem that Vulkan will allow AMD to finally play to their strengths. It probably won't take very long for Vulkan to gain significant market share, because unlike Dx12, it supports more versions of Windows that Dx12 does, if anything, Vulkan supports the clear majority of Windows OS's, and if there is one thing that developers are going to be interested in, is that they want to have the largest possible userbase to market their games to, and that is something that Dx12 does not have, why else are games based on Dx9/11, that Vulkan also appears to be superior to Dx12 in some circumstances will probably help a lot. Lets face it, if you have an AMD GPU in your PC, what are you going to do, if you have a game that had 2 versions, one based on Dx12 and the other based on Vulkan, which would you buy? its a no brainer, its going to be the Vulkan version, chances are Nvidia users will make the same choice too, particularly if they don't have Win10, and sure as hell you wouldn't choose the UWP version either.
Still beating that dead horse?
Unfortunately for you, developers aren't as shortsighted. Developers know that the market is going one direction only - towards Win10 and DX12.
shame that not to long ago Microsoft was looking into buying AMD.. wouldn't that make your "dead horse" theory interesting.
Well, unless you suffer from the delusion described above....
Wow, how short sighted off you, i don't have any delusion that any OS is going to trump windows in the near or far future, however if Microsoft purchaced AMD for which vulkan is essentially built off proprietary software built specifically for AMD's strengths including extremely good cross platformability with console (xbone), what do you think Microsoft is going to do.
Right, because 5 years from now on, we all be on Linux or some other derivate. Or is it SteamMachine? I can never remember...
This delusion is going for decades.
Linux? i think your forgetting the elephant in the room. Win 7 and Win 8, hell just Win7 alone comprises a significantly greater proportion of the installed Windows base than Win 10 does, that in itself is the reason why Vulkan will prove to be a more popular choice, not just for people with those operating systems, but for developers who want their games to be usable on the highest number of OS's possible, it makes absolutely no sense right now to make a game based on Dx12, the userbase is the smallest its ever been, it might just as well be the same as developing a game for Linux, why would you do it? And thats why Vulkan is such a big thing, its cross platform, and unless MS changes its mind on which OS's can use Dx12, then it will never be able to compete with Vulkan just on that basis alone, any benefits to people who use linux is frankly irrelevant, though i can imagine they will probably be pretty happy about it too.
Might want to check a dictionary for exactly what delusion means, all things considered.
Phry said:
Win 7 and Win 8, hell just Win7 alone comprises a significantly greater proportion of the installed Windows base than Win 10 does, that in itself is the reason why Vulkan will prove to be a more popular choice
It isn't.
This "advantage" is just very temporary phenomenon, not worthy switching over.
You are still beating that same dead horse...cross-platform is a non-factor and always has been. If it wasn't, developers would have swicthed to OpenGL long, long ago.
Phry said:
it makes absolutely no sense right now to make a game based on Dx12
Sure, but that does not mean I should switch to Vulcan.
I just stick with DX11 and switch to DX12 later. Just like devs did with DX10.
Right, because 5 years from now on, we all be on Linux or some other derivate. Or is it SteamMachine? I can never remember...
This delusion is going for decades.
Linux? i think your forgetting the elephant in the room. Win 7 and Win 8, hell just Win7 alone comprises a significantly greater proportion of the installed Windows base than Win 10 does, that in itself is the reason why Vulkan will prove to be a more popular choice, not just for people with those operating systems, but for developers who want their games to be usable on the highest number of OS's possible, it makes absolutely no sense right now to make a game based on Dx12, the userbase is the smallest its ever been, it might just as well be the same as developing a game for Linux, why would you do it? And thats why Vulkan is such a big thing, its cross platform, and unless MS changes its mind on which OS's can use Dx12, then it will never be able to compete with Vulkan just on that basis alone, any benefits to people who use linux is frankly irrelevant, though i can imagine they will probably be pretty happy about it too.
Might want to check a dictionary for exactly what delusion means, all things considered.
I'm sure we can expect Microsoft to announce the end of DX12 any day now.
What would be the point of continuing with it, when everybody is going to be moving to Vulkan ?
Perhaps MS will be forced to offer financial/promotional/developmental incentives to keep developers in the DX12 stable. But that will be futile, because devs will always choose the better tech rather than the money..
Right, because 5 years from now on, we all be on Linux or some other derivate. Or is it SteamMachine? I can never remember...
This delusion is going for decades.
Linux? i think your forgetting the elephant in the room. Win 7 and Win 8, hell just Win7 alone comprises a significantly greater proportion of the installed Windows base than Win 10 does, that in itself is the reason why Vulkan will prove to be a more popular choice, not just for people with those operating systems, but for developers who want their games to be usable on the highest number of OS's possible, it makes absolutely no sense right now to make a game based on Dx12, the userbase is the smallest its ever been, it might just as well be the same as developing a game for Linux, why would you do it? And thats why Vulkan is such a big thing, its cross platform, and unless MS changes its mind on which OS's can use Dx12, then it will never be able to compete with Vulkan just on that basis alone, any benefits to people who use linux is frankly irrelevant, though i can imagine they will probably be pretty happy about it too.
Might want to check a dictionary for exactly what delusion means, all things considered.
Soon >50% of gamers will be on Win10. And MS wants to push DX12. Do your math. Games will be made in DX12 and ported to DX11.
"I used to think the worst thing in life was to be all alone. It's not. The worst thing in life is to end up with people who make you feel all alone." Robin Williams
Phry said:
That Vulkan is cross platform, and DX12 is platform restricted makes Vulkan a very useful tool for Software developers, that it is arguably better for games, at least if you have an AMD GPU, is probably going to make it even more attractive to some, not that Nvidia does all that badly on Vulkan, obviously it works just fine, but it does seem that Vulkan will allow AMD to finally play to their strengths. It probably won't take very long for Vulkan to gain significant market share, because unlike Dx12, it supports more versions of Windows that Dx12 does, if anything, Vulkan supports the clear majority of Windows OS's, and if there is one thing that developers are going to be interested in, is that they want to have the largest possible userbase to market their games to, and that is something that Dx12 does not have, why else are games based on Dx9/11, that Vulkan also appears to be superior to Dx12 in some circumstances will probably help a lot. Lets face it, if you have an AMD GPU in your PC, what are you going to do, if you have a game that had 2 versions, one based on Dx12 and the other based on Vulkan, which would you buy? its a no brainer, its going to be the Vulkan version, chances are Nvidia users will make the same choice too, particularly if they don't have Win10, and sure as hell you wouldn't choose the UWP version either.
Still beating that dead horse?
Unfortunately for you, developers aren't as shortsighted. Developers know that the market is going one direction only - towards Win10 and DX12.
Sorry, but thats clearly not true. And if there is any flagellating going on of deceased equines, its probably Dx12. But, hell if MS wants to keep whipping that baby.. its their horse to do with as they please
Something worth pointing out if DX12 is failing then why has Epic put such a huge amount of time into getting it working correctly in UE4. And why has Unity taken a whole dev cycle to get Dx12 support working in Unity. Once both engines fully support DX12 and cross platform play comes in (don't forget Xbox One has native Dx12 support. When the buck stops Console development really directs where the market moves in. If you can program a game once in Dx12 and hit both the PC Market and half the Console market then that is where you are gonig to go. As long as MS keeps the Xbox One locked down and doesnt support Vulkan then there is little chance that the mainstream devs are going to pick it up.
Vulkan won't be mainstream and from the early looks there is really little support outside of a few companies that are pushing it.
Microsoft currently firmly controls the lion's share of the gaming market, because they control Windows.
Any developer that chooses to abandon DX is putting themselves in a very risky position. A bet against DX is a bet against Microsoft.
Microsoft will always guarantee that DX versions will work optimally in Windows. They offer no such guarantee for any 3rd-party solutions...
Yes Microsoft will have controls even for long time now. Vulkan may break that some if Dev start porting over to other OS. But is not risky position to abandon DX when OpenGL runs on Windows and other OS. If there trying to get on Microsoft store then yes. If it become big. But seeing the Drivers update with Doom and OpenGL. It was mostly driver problem with the video cards makers. It's why sometimes OpenGL seem like it's not keeping up with DX but a lot the times it does.
My biggest hope is that Vulkan becomes a thing and that I can start running games properly on a Linux distro. I would actually bother to learn Linux if that became a possibility.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
My biggest hope is that Vulkan becomes a thing and that I can start running games properly on a Linux distro. I would actually bother to learn Linux if that became a possibility.
Vulkan won't hurt, but by itself won't really do a whole lot for Linux.
OpenGL has been around for decades - that didn't really move the needle at all for Linux, but it appeared to have been good enough to push Mobile up... which leads me to think that Linux doesn't suffer from good graphics APIs - it suffers from a more basic lack of standards on a whole 'nother level below that.
That's Linux's biggest weakness, and one of it's biggest strengths - the diversity of ~everything~ in that ecosystem. Unfortunately, it means that you can't just target a common denominator, because there isn't one.
What's crazy to me is how stupidly optimized the engine for the new Doom is in the first place. It runs absolutely beautifully even on lower end systems. It really just goes to show how lazy and inept many of the "AAA" studios can be when they're making their core functionality.
Think you meant to say Alien Isolation.
Doom can't even keep 75FPS (75Hz monitor) on my 5930K and SLI 780 system; regularly drops into the 50's in places, and that was only the first level. It looks worse than AI, meanwhile that game runs at over 100 FPS maxed out.
Comments
Lets face it, if you have an AMD GPU in your PC, what are you going to do, if you have a game that had 2 versions, one based on Dx12 and the other based on Vulkan, which would you buy? its a no brainer, its going to be the Vulkan version, chances are Nvidia users will make the same choice too, particularly if they don't have Win10, and sure as hell you wouldn't choose the UWP version either.
Unfortunately for you, developers aren't as shortsighted. Developers know that the market is going one direction only - towards Win10 and DX12.
And if there is any flagellating going on of deceased equines, its probably Dx12. But, hell if MS wants to keep whipping that baby.. its their horse to do with as they please
This delusion is going for decades.
Well, unless you suffer from the delusion described above....
Wow, how short sighted off you, i don't have any delusion that any OS is going to trump windows in the near or far future, however if Microsoft purchaced AMD for which vulkan is essentially built off proprietary software built specifically for AMD's strengths including extremely good cross platformability with console (xbone), what do you think Microsoft is going to do.
And thats why Vulkan is such a big thing, its cross platform, and unless MS changes its mind on which OS's can use Dx12, then it will never be able to compete with Vulkan just on that basis alone, any benefits to people who use linux is frankly irrelevant, though i can imagine they will probably be pretty happy about it too.
Might want to check a dictionary for exactly what delusion means, all things considered.
This "advantage" is just very temporary phenomenon, not worthy switching over.
You are still beating that same dead horse...cross-platform is a non-factor and always has been. If it wasn't, developers would have swicthed to OpenGL long, long ago.
Sure, but that does not mean I should switch to Vulcan.
I just stick with DX11 and switch to DX12 later. Just like devs did with DX10.
What would be the point of continuing with it, when everybody is going to be moving to Vulkan ?
Perhaps MS will be forced to offer financial/promotional/developmental incentives to keep developers in the DX12 stable. But that will be futile, because devs will always choose the better tech rather than the money..
Anyway, RX480 vs GTX980
Vulkan won't be mainstream and from the early looks there is really little support outside of a few companies that are pushing it.
the only thing now missing are CPU tests to see how multicore CPUs scale.
Any developer that chooses to abandon DX is putting themselves in a very risky position. A bet against DX is a bet against Microsoft.
Microsoft will always guarantee that DX versions will work optimally in Windows. They offer no such guarantee for any 3rd-party solutions...
http://wccftech.com/doom-dev-going-forward-compute-will-used-extensively-idtech-6-developers-will-take-advantage/
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
OpenGL has been around for decades - that didn't really move the needle at all for Linux, but it appeared to have been good enough to push Mobile up... which leads me to think that Linux doesn't suffer from good graphics APIs - it suffers from a more basic lack of standards on a whole 'nother level below that.
That's Linux's biggest weakness, and one of it's biggest strengths - the diversity of ~everything~ in that ecosystem. Unfortunately, it means that you can't just target a common denominator, because there isn't one.
Doom can't even keep 75FPS (75Hz monitor) on my 5930K and SLI 780 system; regularly drops into the 50's in places, and that was only the first level. It looks worse than AI, meanwhile that game runs at over 100 FPS maxed out.
Hardly as 'optimized' as you think.