Microsoft plans to simplify Multi-GPU support in DirectX 12

[WYP]

Microsoft plans to simplify Multi-GPU support in DirectX 12 with a new abstraction layer that will help developers implement support without the need for deep coding.



Read more on Microsoft's new DirectX 12 Multi-GPU abstraction layer.

 

[Kushiro]

Awesome, lets just hope they bother anyways.

 

[shambles1980]

This sounds a lot like ms is saying:

" Remember all the things we said made dx11 slow, so we took em out of dx12 and said you had to code them your self?
Well turns out developers suck, so we are adding them back in and bogging down dx12 to make it easier for developers. "


personally i hope they dont go over board or dx12 will end up no better than dx11 was. and all it will have achieved is to slow down mantel becoming the dominant api.. Although if thats all they wanted to do i guess it works for them.
But on a less cynical note:
if they only add this and it helps with multi gpu usage then thats a good thing.
"cynical again" Although devs should code games properly its getting a bit annoying that they dont bother any more. publishers need to let them do the damn work not force them to hit deadlines.

 

[NeverBackDown]

This sounds a lot like ms is saying:

" Remember all the things we said made dx11 slow, so we took em out of dx12 and said you had to code them your self?
Well turns out developers suck, so we are adding them back in and bogging down dx12 to make it easier for developers. "


personally i hope they dont go over board or dx12 will end up no better than dx11 was. and all it will have achieved is to slow down mantel becoming the dominant api.. Although if thats all they wanted to do i guess it works for them.
But on a less cynical note:
if they only add this and it helps with multi gpu usage then thats a good thing.
"cynical again" Although devs should code games properly its getting a bit annoying that they dont bother any more. publishers need to let them do the damn work not force them to hit deadlines.

I think the root of the problem is the last thing you said. But there are reasons why for everything, so it may not always just be a clear answer

 

[dwatterworth]

There's also the discussion that always comes up anytime multi-gpu is part of the focus; what % of the market of PC gamers buying specific games have multiple GPUs, what % of the market are developers at risk of losing with no multi-gpu support and finally, how do possibly greatly differing performing GPU's pair together.

So the end goal would be to have whatever API act like a hypervisor and just dole out the resources as needed without the specific resource being 'aware' of multiple adapters, eliminating the developer need for extra coding?

Next argument that all presents tagging onto the lazy developer comments: with the hope of easily accessed performance from multiple GPU's whether that's identical cards or differing models, do developers become even more careless and depend on increasing levels of performance to deliver similar experiences / result in more inefficient engines etc?

 

[shambles1980]

historically yes.. that is exactly what they do and is why direct x was used by so many and open gl was left in the stone ages. when initially games came using both, but as dx started doing the work for the devs
"dont crucify me for saying that how i did, it's just easier to say it like that"
it became easier to be lazy and still get the same results. up to a point where what you had actually coded would only work on direct x because you had left out so much open gl dint have a clue what you wanted to do..
this caused a lot of overheads in direct x. And then they decided in dx 12 to fix that... But it seems that devs are used to the extra help from direct x. so they seem to be adding it back in.. Personally i really do hope that this is all they add in.

because there is no point in having dx12 if its no better than dx11. and if its only there to stop mantel/Vulcan being developed for then thats not good for gamers at all..

 

[NeverBackDown]

historically yes.. that is exactly what they do and is why direct x was used by so many and open gl was left in the stone ages. when initially games came using both, but as dx started doing the work for the devs
"dont crucify me for saying that how i did, it's just easier to say it like that"
it became easier to be lazy and still get the same results. up to a point where what you had actually coded would only work on direct x because you had left out so much open gl dint have a clue what you wanted to do..
this caused a lot of overheads in direct x. And then they decided in dx 12 to fix that... But it seems that devs are used to the extra help from direct x. so they seem to be adding it back in.. Personally i really do hope that this is all they add in.

because there is no point in having dx12 if its no better than dx11. and if its only there to stop mantel/Vulcan being developed for then thats not good for gamers at all..

I can see why they are adding mGPU support. With so much other stuff left up to the devs, mGPU will only get put further on the backburner. If Devs can get a good base for it right off the bat, you might see more games support it better and then that translates to happier gamers, which also means more PC sales due to word of mouth and better PC performance perceptions... which means MS/Intel/AMD/Nvidia stay in business longer... so yeah it's worth them doing.

 

[shambles1980]

As long as they only add this then its going to be good "i hope"
But im quite the cynic, and i can see them adding all sorts of Lazy dev help to keep them, using directx x instead of vulcan, Which will only boil down to slower direct x..

Having said that..

given that Windows 10 is technically free.. And that MS should eventually figure out that games for windows live or whatever they call it now is a failure. They may just license Direct X out, which would let games run on all the os's "in theory"
Id imagine they could licence it to devs so they can release the game on other os's or just licence it out to steam with it only being enabled as a part of the steam app..

Which you would expect to remove any temptation devs would have to move over to vulcan to hit a slightly larger audience.

Persoanlly i do think it would be a good move on MS's part to give steam a licence like that.
And like i said with windows being a free platform. Unless they plan to charge for direct x 13 and higher, i dont see why they wouldn't. "other than they want their own store front that is."