since dx12 and vulkan will displace most of the graphics work to the gpu and finally support multi-core processing much better, will the ole fx cards make a combat or are they just too outdated?
>>52056406
direct x 12 has amd making huge gains as far as gpus go. prob cpus, too. nvidia stays the same or gets worse with direct x 12.
>>52056406
They're just too old, you need to OC the shit out of them to keep up with even a lowly i3, the IPC is just too low, although it can keep up with modern i7s in multi-threaded applications still when it's at 4.5ghz and higher
>>52056656
What?
>>52056406
by the time they make a comeback, the chips will be so old that won't be enough of a gain to remain competitive anyway.
>>52056406
DX12 and Vulcan won't magically make games less single-threaded bound. Certain parts of the GPU draw calls will have less impact on the most demanding thread, but you can't just arbitrarily split up your AI code and whatnot because of a different GPU API.
TL:DR they'll keep them limping along in demanding games, but FX CPUs will remain sub-standard and worse than Intel i5 CPUs.
>>52056406
>since dx12 and vulkan will displace most of the graphics work to the gpu and finally support multi-core processing much better,
Not a single thing about this statement is true.
The performance gains from DX12 over DX11 are marginal. It does literally nothing to change how well threaded a game engine is, it only affects tertiary things like passing draw calls to the GPU over multiple threads instead of relying on a singular thread and building queues.
There are already numerous game engines and titles that are extremely well threaded, and AMD processors manage to handle them well enough. DX12 is not revolutionary. DX12 is not a game changer.
>>52056406
>>52056683
Regardless of DX12 and Vulcan, they're still shit and slower than i3s in gaming.
Hell, i3s can be OCed now so the gap is widened even further now.
They're only good for multithreaded non-gaming workloads. Even then, if that's your focus, you could just get any old cheap Westmere Xeon like an X5650 and an X58 board for less than the majority of the FX chips by themselves. Hell, even those are better for gaming than the FX chips,
Until Zen drops, there's no real reason to grab the FX chips unless you're upgrading from an AM3+ build and dont want to throw out your board.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_DirectX_12_support
what's even the point
>>52059844
It's only going to get bigger unless nvidia starts handing out boatloads of cash to get DX11 exclusivity
>>52059916
Even without Nvidia paying most devs won't jump into DX12 because it would require a lot more of work, and not many devs would want to buy a license to use one of the DX12 engines.
>>52057751
>DX12 is not revolutionary. DX12 is not a game changer.
>mixing and matching nvidia and AMD cards not revolutionary
DX12 is a step forward, but this time around it seems to be a leap forward.
If you're a dev wouldn't you take advantage of the new features at your disposal ?
its only a matter of time before requirement creep catches up to everyone and DX12 will be the min supported.
The newest COD already requires DX11 , TW3 same thing.
Granted DX11 came out 2009, but the flip side is the XBOne also utilizes DX12
There was no point in x86 ion consoles if they gotta do twice the work still, expect them to port over xbox dx12 features to PC and soon it will be a min requirement
>>52059953
Vulkan should help out a lot with that
