PDA

View Full Version : Tim sweeney comments on DIrectx10.


Pages : [1] 2

Nv40
10-28-06, 12:45 AM
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/directx_10_graphics_preview/page8.asp

Very interesting interview.. with Epics main engine developer. and his brutally honest answers.. :D


Realistically, DirectX 10 doesn't introduce fundamentally new capabilities, but brings many new features that will enable developers to optimize games more thoroughly and thus deliver incrementally better visuals and better frame rates.

THis is ofcourse is not what you will hear from any developer in a microsoft sponsored event. because they realize gamers are very important in the sales of their OS. People dont buy expensive DELL machines to play with wordperfect. and not many (non gamers) will upgrade to Vista just because it looks pretty. (althought security is a diferent story)

His views of the new DIrectx10 technology are basically that the new technology doesnt add anything new in terms of eye candy but very usefull techniques to optimize for their games. In theory the same Direcx9 effects could be done more efficiently and also more faster in dx10.

look what T.S says is the major step from here that we use DIrectx9.

From here on, there is really only one major step remaining in the evolution of graphics hardware, and that's the eventual unification of CPU and GPU architectures into uniform hardware capable of supporting both efficiently.



The major step that T.S. is looking is for the complete unification between CPU-GPU . Things will work together and both will be used for graphics and physics and everything else .

so two possible scenarios will happen...

1)Unification of the CPU and GPU means either the dead of the PCI express x16 bus (and graphics acelerators the way we know today them.) and eveything will be inside of INTEL/NVidia , AMD/ATI hybrids prosessors



2)or the dead of processors sockets and everything will be done from the unified PCIxpress graphics adapter.

From a practical point of view , Heat ,physical size and power , and market dominance it looks like AMD or INTEL have better chances to dominate in the long run with HYbrids CPUS/GPUS ,designed for nothing else than gaming.

KNowing the size of INTEL AND the buyout of ATI by AMD , shows that in the end will be NVidia vs the World. And Intel will rule them all. :D . unless NVidia begin to design unified CPU/GPU's ,dedicated "gaming PRocessors" too and competes ,or unify with INTEL. MAny here will question the ability of Intel to make powerfull small and integrated graphics Dx10 accelerators .but no one will question the ability of AMD now that they have ATI Engineers. aparently last i heard INTEL is buying large ammounts of NVidia stock shares.. so do the math.

OF course things like UNification will not happen in the near future ,but something that i think will happen sooner or later in the next 5-10 years if technology progress in the same way.

know another interesting question by F.S.

FiringSquad: Based on what you’ve seen with DirectX 10, do you think it will be easier for game developers to program for than DirectX 9 was? If yes, which features really stand out?

Tim Sweeney: You can't really use the word "easier" in conjunction with supporting DirectX 10. Because it's only available on Windows Vista and not XP, all developers who support it will have to continue supporting DirectX9, and henceforth maintain two versions of the rendering code in their engine. It's worth doing this, and we're doing it for Unreal Engine 3. But, far from making our lives easier, it brings a considerable amount of additional development cost and overhead to PC game development,

So there goes all the theories of Directx10 only games.. people should not be alarmed of those games advertised as Directx10/Vista only ,there will be versions of DIrectx9 of the same games and should look identical .unless THe developers have been paid alot $$$ for the exclusivity , enough to sacrifice 60-80% of the gaming community that will not upgrade anytime soon to a top of the line PC ,less for Vista.

now my favorite part..


FiringSquad: We know that Unreal Engine 3 was largely developed with shader model 3.0 in mind, but do you plan on adding any DirectX 10 aspects into Unreal Engine 3 and ultimately Unreal Tournament 2007 or is that coming in UE4?

Tim Sweeney: Unreal Engine 3 will make full use of DirectX 10, and many of our and our partners' games will ship in 2007 with full support for DirectX 10 and Windows Vista. But, despite the marketing hype, DirectX 10 isn't all that different from DirectX 9, so you'll mainly see performance benefits on DirectX 10 rather than striking visual differences.

DirectX 10 is a good and solid step forward for graphics, but it's very much an evolutionary thing, and for a game shipping holiday 2007, DirectX10 will represent maybe 10% of a typical game's customer base, say 35% Xbox 360, 35% PC, 30% PS3 (which will still be ramping up then), with one-third of the PC owners having new computers running Windows Vista with DirectX10 GPUs, and the other two-thirds either running XP or running Vista on DirectX9 hardware. I want to point this out in advance, since the marketing around DirectX 10 exceeds the .....reality.




IN summary TS believes..

1)Dx10 while Good ,its only an incremental step , its ~Dx9 with more efficiency and will not be used as much as the MS adverting claims until many years.
.
2)A big change will happen in the gaming industry ,that will make dedicated graphics or dedicated Physics obsolete in the long term. Everything will move to the CPU again , but now they will be a lot more powerfull ,they will be able to manage latest graphics and physics in Hybrids CPUs. That will have GPUs abilities. I think AMD have the oportunity now to be the first with hybrids CPU/Gpus. time will tell.


Now to clarify , i love Vista ,i will be the first to buy the 64bit version as soon as its released ,and will also buy the 8800 gtx as soon as a shop sells it .but for its performance and new AA and HDR modes ,i dont really care if it is truly Dx10 card or not ,and will love to see ENthusiast ONLY games with incredible graphics ,but unfortunately i cant ignore history that have show us again and again that it takes years before developers completely move all their games code to new technolgy ,less take real advantage of the technolgy. Ask the people who bough the geforce3 (directx8) or the radeon9700 (directx9) because of its Directx capabilities.. at best what we will in the first year of VIsta is a few games with a quick Dx10 patch to help Vista sales.

a12ctic
10-28-06, 11:54 AM
So basicly, dx10 is dx9 accualy optimised for the PC and not just random sloppy code like dx9 was? figures...

Quickstar
10-28-06, 02:54 PM
Its nothing new really. I thought most people already knew that DX10 made performance improvements rather than adding special effects....
I remember reading an article a while back from HardOCP and the only 'new' thing that stood out was the geometry shader.

RAY16
10-28-06, 03:01 PM
So, Sweeney basically confirmed what me and every semi-intelligent person on the planet figured out a billion years ago. Yay.

myshkinbob
10-28-06, 04:07 PM
DX10 has it's other benefits though, in terms of developement, at least in the long term.

They got rid of cap bits right? so there's less code paths to cover (for each brand), just the standard DX10 implementation of things.

I guess the changeover period is always more work, but the payoff this time is less work later. :)

queth
10-28-06, 04:13 PM
DX10 has it's other benefits though, in terms of developement, at least in the long term.

They got rid of cap bits right? so there's less code paths to cover (for each brand), just the standard DX10 implementation of things.

I guess the changeover period is always more work, but the payoff this time is less work later. :)
exactly.

also if it brings better performance by offloading more work, than i say that is a huge feature and something more important than most anything else as it allows for more items on the screen than we could hope for now.

Subtestube
10-28-06, 04:26 PM
Additionally, removing performance bottlenecks makes previously prohibitively slow techniques feasible - hence, even though there may be 'no new effects' that are possible with DX10, DX10 should theoretically make old effects that were in the past just too slow a lot more possible. From a user perspective the two are the same - if we never previously saw a visual effect in a game, but suddenly do now, it doesn't matter if it was never in because it was too slow, or just because it couldn't be done - it's still an effect enabled by the new tech.

RAY16
10-28-06, 05:15 PM
Regardless of the fact that they can pile more effects on with DX10 (or put in effects that were previously too slow), the point is that DX10 isn't going to be as revolutionary as some people make it out to be.

Subtestube
10-28-06, 05:25 PM
Regardless of the fact that they can pile more effects on with DX10 (or put in effects that were previously too slow), the point is that DX10 isn't going to be as revolutionary as some people make it out to be.

Surely that depends on how significant the performance improvements _actually_ end up being - if MS isn't lying when they say they've reduced certain call overheads by almost half, I'd say it certainly _is_ revolutionary in at least one way. Without having production hardware or any real-world comparisons I'd say it's next to impossible to make any kind of statement about how important/revolutionary it'll be. I'll tell you this though, from a code perspective it tidies up _a lot_.

Zelda_fan
10-28-06, 05:30 PM
Folks, take a look at the origional poster. NV40. Why anyone would take this remotely seriously is beyond me.

|MaguS|
10-28-06, 05:48 PM
Folks, take a look at the origional poster. NV40. Why anyone would take this remotely seriously is beyond me.

Why not ignore the post and read the article... gasp! It's still from Tim Sweeny...

Intel17
10-28-06, 07:49 PM
So basicly, dx10 is dx9 accualy optimised for the PC and not just random sloppy code like dx9 was? figures...

Have you ever actually used DirectX9?

WimpMiester
10-28-06, 08:04 PM
Since there isn't anything significantly new added to DirectX10 I'm wondering why itís called 10? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to call it 9.1 or 9.5 etc? Also shows that thereís no reason for MS not to release it for XP other than they want to make us use Vista.

Becoming
10-28-06, 08:05 PM
You didn't read the article I take it.

Subtestube
10-28-06, 08:07 PM
Since there isn't anything significantly new added to DirectX10 I'm wondering why it’s called 10? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to call it 9.1 or 9.5 etc? Also shows that there’s no reason for MS not to release it for XP other than they want to make us use Vista.

It's a total revision of the codebase - more has changed in DirectX 10 than at any time since 7 (before which my knowledge is limited, but I believe 7 added a lot). It's in fact so different that DX 9.0 code will often need to be rewritten to run under DX 10, as a large number of DX 9.0 concepts have either been done away with or changed completely.

If this revision doesn't deserve a new number, then I'm not sure what does ;).

oldsk00l
10-28-06, 08:31 PM
Why not ignore the post and read the article... gasp! It's still from Tim Sweeny...

ZF has a valid point, this was called into question by Nv40.

He is a horrible inarticulate shill who for some reason waded out into this territory.

Guys, ignore everything he has to say, just look at the real dirt by Sweeney.

spoop
10-28-06, 09:53 PM
Since there isn't anything significantly new added to DirectX10 I'm wondering why it’s called 10? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to call it 9.1 or 9.5 etc? Also shows that there’s no reason for MS not to release it for XP other than they want to make us use Vista.

Did you program XP, Vista, DX9 and DX10? Then how do you know that it could be released in XP?

I hate how people have complained that Windows is full of old, bloated code but when Microsoft tries to fix that people complain.

Nv40
10-28-06, 11:53 PM
ZF has a valid point, this was called into question by Nv40.

He is a horrible inarticulate shill who for some reason waded out into this territory.

Guys, ignore everything he has to say, just look at the real dirt by Sweeney.


I never knew you were some kind of an authority here at NVnews ,who can decide who can post or not and where. if you dont like my grammar ,go somewhere else . is that simple.

oldsk00l
10-29-06, 12:18 AM
I never knew you were some kind of an authority here at NVnews ,who can decide who can post or not and where. if you dont like my grammar ,go somewhere else . is that simple.

I didn't say you can't post, but I can inform all the other members that you're a complete moron regurgitating crap and spewing out bile.

Seriously though, looking at your original post...how can anyone take you seriously when you write like

People dont buy expensive DELL machines to play with wordperfect. and not many (non gamers) will upgrade to Vista just because it looks pretty. (althought security is a diferent story)

NAAAWWWW REALLY!!?!?!?

http://home.comcast.net/~jonnormand/master_of_the_obvious.jpg

All you did was waste everybody's time involved in this discussion, with the exception of quoting Tim Sweeney. However any insight you attempted to articulate was far from an epiphany. You're like this guy auditioning for a newscaster except doing a horrible job at it.

Nv40
10-29-06, 01:00 AM
[QUOTE=oldsk00l]
NAAAWWWW REALLY!!?!?!?

http://home.comcast.net/~jonnormand/master_of_the_obvious.jpg

.


WHat looks obvious to you is not so obvious for the average Joe ,who doesnt know why he needs a top of the line DELL Computer ,just that he wants a computer. OBviously you have never seen the power that marketing can do ,at the time people choose to buy a new computer.

I read everyday lots of hype for technology that while necessary for progress is not going to make their games significantly better ,just because it was done in Dx10. so i though the interview will show whether the average Joe ,will need to upgrade to the new technology or not in the near future. Even when im only the messenger , I think i have done a good job educating you of the benefits or not for a new API. THanks? .. np ..it was nothing.. ;)

oldsk00l
10-29-06, 01:03 AM
WHat looks obvious to you is not so obvious for the average Joe ,who doesnt know why he needs a top of the line DELL Computer ,just that he wants a computer. OBviously you have never seen the power that marketing can do ,at the time people choose to buy a new computer.

I read everyday lots of hype for technology that while necessary for progress is not going to make their games significantly better ,just because it was done in Dx10. so i though the interview will show whether the average Joe ,will need to upgrade to the new technology or not in the near future. ;)

OH THANK YOU SIR FOR SAVING US ALL FROM TEH MARKETING!!!

None of us here at nvnews would have ever been able to figure this out.

Becoming
10-29-06, 01:38 AM
Does anyone else's brain almost explode trying to decipher nv40's posts, or is it just me?

Intel17
10-29-06, 07:36 AM
Guys, I know I'm not a moderator, but seriously, lay off of Nv40. He's not making any offensive or rude posts and is only trying to share this article he came across as well as his opinions on it.

brady
10-29-06, 08:07 AM
Yeah. I'm no Nv40 fan and I know his record isn't great around here but I don't think he deserves a whipping for this. Also, I think his grammer is actually getty much better. I mean compared to like 6 months ago.

oldsk00l
10-29-06, 11:08 AM
lol you guys are just getting soft

at least it seems his history is well known

I shall ease up then, but I do contend that he has some other malevolent greed motivated purpose for even mentioning it....or a poorly informed one. I just don't know what that is yet since it's behind the guise of Sweeney quotes, and Sweeney is teh man.