According to AMD’s Roy Taylor in an interview with Heise Online, DirectX 11 won’t have a successor. Here is the google-translated version of the interview in german where Roy says that DirectX 12 won’t see the light of day:
We will put together future Game Bundles top games. We believe this is the right way. But also for the industry, it is an important sign. Because the computer industry has benefited for many years from a continuous renewal of the DirectX interface. A new DirectX has time and again refreshed the industry, new graphics cards need more processors and more RAM. But there is no DirectX come 12th That’s it. As far as we know there are no plans for DirectX 12 If this is not correct and someone wants to correct me – wonderful.
What does it mean? That 3D graphics APIs are enough mature that a major new version of Direct3D is no longer necessary? What about new GPU architecture changes? And the future of OpenGL?
Microsoft sent to its XNA and DirectX MVPs, in January 2013, an email saying that as of April 1, 2014 XNA/DirectX will be fully retired from the MVP Award Programme and that DirectX is no longer evolving as a technology.. But in a second email, Microsoft added:
“DirectX is no longer evolving as a technology.” That is definitely not true in any way, shape or form. Microsoft is actively investing in DirectX as the unified graphics foundation for our key platforms, including Xbox 360, Windows Phone and Windows. DirectX is evolving and will continue to evolve. For instance, right now we’re investing in some very cool graphics code authorizing [sic] technology in Visual Studio. We have absolutely no intention of stopping innovation with DirectX
I hope we’ll have shortly some clarifications about this rumor.
11 thoughts on “AMD: There Won’t be DirectX 12!”
Perhaps they’re just going to add any new functionality as a feature level 😉
yep, probably in DirectX 11.2, 11.3, etc.
how about compute shader features:
1) access to graphics card features (e.g. dynamic parallelism GTX 680)
2) access to rasterization stage
AMD did not ever realized full support of directx 11 features (native deferred contexts).
I don’t think OpenGL will stop evolving. If new GPUs have stuff DX doesn’t expose I’m sure OpenGL will take over.
In fact even Valve say GL is better than DX now.
The last time MS had something to say about OpenGL development ended misserably to OGL. MS wanted OpenGL stagnant so that their (then young) DX to catch up.
After that (1,3, or 1,5) OpenGL was developed without MS involvment.
And lets be frank, after OpenGL catch up with DX11 with its 4.x series, ARB did not stopped to see what MS is cooking.
OpenGL ALREADY is full supperset of DX11. And we will see new OpenGL this year too.
(And there are still some low hanging fruits to be standardized for current hardware!)
And OpenGL benefit from recent development of WebGL, and from OpenGL ES development (KHR_debug anyone?).
And there is still some things to do (unified compressed texture format).
For that matter this puts Sony statements about DX11.1+ in new light.
Its not. We need it now. MS will take their sweet time. But:
We need it now, so we must do it our selfs or never have it.
Maybe Microsoft has seen the light and saw there is no future in rasterization hardware.
we all know that for example ATI HD 4000 series can prosec tessleation in some ati dech demos , dx11 is dx9 but more , means it just name! dx 12 dx 13! just a name! dx 9 still can do amazing things….
In Tron Legacy movie
“This year,” the CEO snarks back, “we put a 12 on the box.”
“dx 12 dx 13! just a name! dx 9 still can do amazing things….”
Agree, however MS try to give new number for things that require new hardware. And Khronos/ARB follow the suite for OpenGL. So DX11 require new hardware present on GPU.
And in industry-talk DX9/10/11 mean hardware class too, not only API.
So no DX12 planned by MS may mean two things:
1) MS is not really interested in pushing big changes to DX. And:
2) MS is not really interested in pushing big changes to GPU hardware.
And AMD tessel **vendor extension** in OpenGL used different algorithms than DX11/OpenGL4. Nvidia was reluctant to implement it AMD-way. And MS intervention forced AMD to implement it in new way.
So effects where similar, but method is different.
(You can do amazing stuff on DX9 class hw, however than your artwork team need to do more work as well as your programmers team. DX10/11 bring easier methods which are sometimes more powerfull).
Comments are closed.