DayZ Dev hints at possible DX 12 Engine, are you all willing to wait? I know I am

[gibonez 3633]

Since this engine is being developed for DayZ as well as future titles, I think that it is safe to assume that it will eventually support DX12 and DX11 will only be an interim step.

 

The big question is, can the devs get satisfactory performance out of the engine via optimization, prior to adopting DX12. I do not think that we currently have sufficient information to make this determination.

 

As a matter of fact, there are many unanswered questions:

DX12 is only available in W10, which will not be released until the end of the year +/-.

How much horsepower will it take to run W10?

Will enough people have already upgraded to W10, by the time that DayZ is ready to launch ver 1.0?

How much work will it take for the devs to support DX12?

Can a small studio like BI afford to hold DayZ back from release, even though the DX11 version runs satisfactorily?

Can a DX12 patch be released as an update, after the game is launched?

 

At this point there are many more unknowns, than knowns.

 

 

W10 will be free for a year for anyone with windows 7 or windows 8 so thats not a problem.

[BleedoutBill 1636]

W10 will be free for a year for anyone with windows 7 or windows 8 so thats not a problem.

Many folks will wait a few months for the bugs to be addressed, before switching to W10.

Many lower skilled folks may never upgrade.

Still others will not want to to disturb "their setup" if they do not see a compelling benefit.

Hell, there are a lot of folks who are still running XP.

 

I am sure that there are other scenarios. The point that I was making is that for a host of reasons, it may take a while for there to be a meaningful adoption rate for W10. At the same time, BI will most likely want to appeal to the widest possible audience and that will not likely include those who are running W10.

 

It is hard to project out ten months +/-, so there are a lot of unknowns to wrestle with.

[franzuu 211]

See, that's where you're going off the tracks. The engine is capable of doing that, there's something else that causes the issues.

 

Of course not when I'm in a town, but noone gets that - but what this tells us is that the engine is capable of being able to handle this kind of graphics easily. When you enter a town your FPS drops and so does your GPU-Usage. This means it's not a problem with the engine nor will DirectX 12 fix this. It will come down to optimise the objects / amounts of objects as well as how the game handles it.

 

 

 

 

 

It appears you're wrong again. How does the server calculation have to do with FPS on the client? The only thing you're talking about here is serverside-performance, which will not be affected by neither a new renderer / engine nor DirectX12. It is just what it is. Server-Performance.

 

Going DX12 would allow the devs to spread out the rendering tasks on the available cores. This will have a direct impact on GPU utilization. Right now when you enter a town there is too much going on for the single core to handle. Your GPU isn't getting instructions fast enough and works at 20% while you are getting 15 FPS.

 

Server performance does have an affect on client performance. Running the same mission on a crap server vs a good server you will see an  FPS improvement, only thing changing being the server.

[byrgesen 1341]

Not all engines require a vast amount of conversion from one DX version to another. One developer stated that it only took about 50 hours to convert their DX9 engine to a DX11 engine... :/

 

The main reason it takes so long for Bohemia to do it, is because in order to change the renderer, the entire simulation has to be disconnected from it, and it has always been closely connected in the RV engine.

The renderer it self, should not be to much of a workload, but disconnecting the simulation from the old renderer, is a giant task, in the very core of the engine :)

 

As far as DX goes, im all for DX12, if its a viable option.

Doesnt matter to me if it takes 1 month or 6 months more to do it, as long as its done right and the result speaks for it self!

 

 

W10 will be free for a year for anyone with windows 7 or windows 8 so thats not a problem.

 

Thats very true.

But we all also know it will take Microsoft about that time to make it stable aswell  :D

 

 

It should never be the case that if you have an older CPU you will suffer in cities.

 

DayZ does not really have anything ground breaking for it to perform this badly. Compare to battlefield 3 on 64 player maps, sure not same size as DayZ but BF3 on High graphics runs flawless on my system and looks atleast 1000000000 X10^24 times better than DayZ

 

Soooo, in essence, you are saying that new games should not require better hardware?  :huh:

 

Find me another game that can handle the map size of DayZ, the amount of object, the draw distance and the simulation aspects, before you start saying its not doing anything "ground breaking". Theres a reason Arma has been so popular, it does something 99% of most games cannot do.

That doesnt mean it doesnt have drawbacks (low fps as an example) but they are clearly working on it, as we speak and have come up with solutions for the problems.

 

I cant help but laugh abit at your BF3 vs DayZ graphics comparison lol....

Edited February 14, 2015 by Byrgesen

[Grimey Rick 3417]

30% increase in frames is horrible. Its still very much unplayable, that means people with AMD systems even at 4 GHZ will get no more than 23 FPS.

 

Very very unplayable I hope that report is incorrect because I do not think its legal to ship a completely broken product and I don't see them advertising minimum requirements as a intel CPU

There has to be support for AMD.

That's an exaggeration. My son is using one of my old computers running an Athlon Phenom II 955 with a GTX 760 and he gets 30+ FPS on High settings. I think your problem lies elsewhere.

[datcoder 0]

Arma engine has been multithreaded for years now, threading simply isn't enough. The problem with threading is that it's way too low level for something like 3d video game, thread creation requires a lot of memory and a lot of overhead so you can't just keep creating threads whenever you feel like it. So what do we do to fix this? Create 2-3 main threads that we know can run in parallel. The problem with this aprotch is that it it leads to a lot of under utilization, as noted by everyone playing the game

So how do we solve this? Two ways, abstract threading by a lot and make a thread pool, abstract thread pooling a lot and get tasking. Tasking isn't supported by c++(although it is in their new scripting language) so all we're left with is a thread pool, this will be the only way you'll ever get a good CPU usage in dayz standalone, and it needs to happen for directX12 to have meaningful impact on framerate.

For those with a short attention span: thread pools or we're fucked

[john5220 15]

W10 will be free for a year for anyone with windows 7 or windows 8 so thats not a problem.

 

actually its a MASSIVE problem for millions and billions of folks like myself who got their copy of windows 7 from you know from a rather special sauce.

 

But by the time this game is finished and then hits DX 12 I should have a new rig I guess....

Edited February 15, 2015 by John5220

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

In all honesty they should switch to OpenGL and be done with all this nonsensical DirectX hype.

[a_irish_fella 15]

30% increase in frames is horrible. Its still very much unplayable, that means people with AMD systems even at 4 GHZ will get no more than 23 FPS.

 

Very very unplayable I hope that report is incorrect because I do not think its legal to ship a completely broken product and I don't see them advertising minimum requirements as a intel CPU

There has to be support for AMD.

I have a amd machine i built, fx 6300 @ 4.7ghx 8gm ram and r9 280x also overclocked pretty good, i play on customized settings at 1080p some very low some very high, i get 30+ frames in ALL cities and 50-60 in wilderness, is it dayz not being optimized for amd or is it amd being a cheaper cpu with less single core performance? If budget is an option do what i did and get a water cooler for your cpu, i use a cooler master seidon 120v and overclock your cpu higher, for the fx Vishera range im pretty sure all the cpus from 4300 series right up to 9590 series have the  same single core performance at the same ghz so for dayz no need to get 8300 or higher stick with a 4200 or 6300 and overclock the sheet outa it. :~)

Edited February 15, 2015 by A_Irish_Fella

[datcoder 0]

In all honesty they should switch to OpenGL and be done with all this nonsensical DirectX hype.

glnext isn't out yet and opengl isn't aging very well. While I use opengl over directx11 in all my programs, at the current moment it wouldn't be in my highest priority to release for the arma engine(if I was the lead programmer). While it would be nice to lay the ground work for glnext, until we know exactly how the api will function I'd consider opengl to be a dead end.

[Ben_uk 24]

I would think at the very least they would need to do a DX11 version as well as maybe a DX12 version.

[john5220 15]

A 4.7 GHZ FX 6300 is a extremely powerful CPU thats heavy over clocking

 

sorry I don't have that much money or balls

 

I have a Athlon 760K @ 4 GHZ

 

basically a richland 6800K with the GPU disabled. Sadly it has no L3 cache but cache never really helped AMD that much u know

 

Even then I should not be getting 12 fps in cities, I have a friend with a over clocked 750K AMD and its same 12 fps in cities.

Edited February 16, 2015 by John5220

[nillie 30]

A 4.7 GHZ FX 6300 is a extremely powerful CPU thats heavy over clocking

 

sorry I don't have that much money or balls

 

I have a Athlon 760K @ 4 GHZ

 

basically a richland 6800K with the GPU disabled. Sadly it has no L3 cache but cache never really helped AMD that much u know

 

Even then I should not be getting 12 fps in cities, I have a friend with a over clocked 750K AMD and its same 12 fps in cities.

On a similar AMD setup :

 

 I get 15 fps in elektro and 18 in Cherno or Novo.

Normal framerate in small villages or out in the wild is 50+

 

This is unaffected by whatever graphic options i change. I can play full ultra or turn everything on low.

Edited February 16, 2015 by nillie

[HappyXceed (DayZ) 28]

30% increase in frames is horrible. Its still very much unplayable, that means people with AMD systems even at 4 GHZ will get no more than 23 FPS.

 

Very very unplayable I hope that report is incorrect because I do not think its legal to ship a completely broken product and I don't see them advertising minimum requirements as a intel CPU

There has to be support for AMD.

I have AMD with 3.7 GHz and I get more than 23 fps outside cities on decently high settings.

[blacklabel79 949]

we will see how the promised 600% increase in drawcalls with DX12 will turn out on actual machines out int he wild.

[franzuu 211]

we will see how the promised 600% increase in drawcalls with DX12 will turn out on actual machines out int he wild.

It was up to 600% performance increase in draw call bound situations because one AMD GPU was performing really really poorly in DX11. The reported possible draw calls in DX12 is 600,000. DX9 being limited to 6000, realistically to 2000-3000 in application, so a 20,000% to 30,000% increase.

 

The anandtech article, read all pages http://www.anandtech.com/show/8962/the-directx-12-performance-preview-amd-nvidia-star-swarm

 

 

1 interesting thing about the DX11 tests is that Nvidia is about 1/3 better than AMD. In a cpu bound situation when the cards aren't working at 100%, you'd expect identical or very close performance. Just goes to show that AMD drivers suck.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Franzuu

[blacklabel79 949]

yeah it will be very interesting to see the results when dx12 is wildly implemented after win10 Comes out.

Edited February 16, 2015 by {Core}BlackLabel

[lee83 21]

Interesting read this thanks all,

 

I was looking at cheap gaming system for the end of the month but its got amd processor, think this thread has put me off

[john5220 15]

On a similar AMD setup :

 

 I get 15 fps in elektro and 18 in Cherno or Novo.

Normal framerate in small villages or out in the wild is 50+

 

This is unaffected by whatever graphic options i change. I can play full ultra or turn everything on low.

 

yeah my 12 FPS is actually in a fight scene but when running around in elektro its 15 FPS so this sums it up right here.

 

I can play BAttlefield 3 on High with Anti Aliasing just fine and dandy on 64 player servers. From what I was told Frostbite Engine utilizes 4 cores to its max or that is its very efficient at doing so because my older setup with a haswell Pentium G actually ran BF3 slower than my current quad core AMD. In DayZ however its the opposite effect this is why I have a hard time believing DayZ or Arma 3 runs on 4 cores

[Jex 1104]

It should never be the case that if you have an older CPU you will suffer in cities.

 

DayZ does not really have anything ground breaking for it to perform this badly. Compare to battlefield 3 on 64 player maps, sure not same size as DayZ but BF3 on High graphics runs flawless on my system and looks atleast 1000000000 X10^24 times better than DayZ

 

I suspect BF3 doesn't have quite the draw distance that DayZ has. Also, most things in DayZ are actual objects, not phantom bushes for example. Don't know if BF3 have phantom bushes but they're in H1Z1 - you can walk right through them and cities in DayZ have quite a few more objects in them than anything in BF which all add up and the fact that BF3 is released already and optimised, unlike DayZ :)

[blacklabel79 949]

go to the North right after sinistok or toploniki and look east/west... got terrific 3 fps there :D

 

ah well my machine is potato so thats all cool.

[Tatanko 5591]

Interesting read this thanks all,

 

I was looking at cheap gaming system for the end of the month but its got amd processor, think this thread has put me off

"Cheap" hardware and DayZ don't go together very well right now, unfortunately. I sympathize with your desire to get better performance without paying an arm and a leg, but it just isn't possible yet.

[nillie 30]

"Cheap" hardware and DayZ don't go together very well right now, unfortunately. I sympathize with your desire to get better performance without paying an arm and a leg, but it just isn't possible yet.

 

3,1GHz AMD 8 core, big SSD, 16 gigz of ram and dual ATI  HD 6970 was hardly cheap 3 years ago, even when compared to current hardware standards. Besides i can run games like BF4 on ultra without problems.30-40 fps is the lowest i go.

15 fps is just unacceptable.

 

Maybe one day i will actually be able to make some cool videos of my own...something to look forward to i guess.

Edited February 16, 2015 by nillie

[Tatanko 5591]

3,1GHz AMD 8 core, big SSD, 16 gigz of ram and dual ATI  HD 6970 was hardly cheap 3 years ago, even when compared to current hardware standards. Besides i can run games like BF4 on ultra without problems.30-40 fps is the lowest i go.

15 fps is just unacceptable.

I put the word "cheap" in quotes for a reason. What I was getting at is that it is cheap relative to a similar Intel chip, which will do a slightly better job at running this game than its AMD equivalent.

[nillie 30]

Valid point