> Many years ago, I briefly worked at NVIDIA on the DirectX driver team (internship).
I've been a full-time GPU engineer at a couple of major companies for about 6 years now. My colleagues at my current company have all been GPU engineers (and video, prior to that) in the 20--30 year range.
While a lot of the technical details are correct, there are a lot of red-flags in this guy's essay. For instance:
> Although AMD and NV have the resources to do it, the smaller IHVs (Intel, PowerVR, Qualcomm, etc)
Intel owns, what? 60? 70 percent of the desktop market? More? PVR, Qualcomm, etc. own 90% of the mobile market? Intel has an enormous number of GPU engineers---far more than AMD, and easily comparable to (or more than) NV.
Now, to OP's statement about DX12 & Metal: obviously they were developed cojointly with AAA game developers. The major title developers are in constant contact with every major IHV and OS vendor (less so for open-source) at all stages with respect to driver- and API- development.
Furthermore, it's not like the major architects and engineers of these driver teams are total tools; these guys live and breathe GPU architecture (and uarch), and are intimately familiar with what would make a good driver.
The impetus for these low level APIs is differentiation and performance. When those couldn't be had from GPU HW, the next place to look is "one up the stack": driver & API. It surprised no one in the industry that Mantle/Vulkan/Metal/DX12 all came out at about the same time: we've all been pushing for this for years.
Thanks for this. It makes sense that DX12 was developed alongside engine devs. As jsheard notes, Unity and Unreal Engine have already announced support for it, and we're already seeing tech demos of Unreal Engine on DX12:
I've been a full-time GPU engineer at a couple of major companies for about 6 years now. My colleagues at my current company have all been GPU engineers (and video, prior to that) in the 20--30 year range.
While a lot of the technical details are correct, there are a lot of red-flags in this guy's essay. For instance:
> Although AMD and NV have the resources to do it, the smaller IHVs (Intel, PowerVR, Qualcomm, etc)
Intel owns, what? 60? 70 percent of the desktop market? More? PVR, Qualcomm, etc. own 90% of the mobile market? Intel has an enormous number of GPU engineers---far more than AMD, and easily comparable to (or more than) NV.
Now, to OP's statement about DX12 & Metal: obviously they were developed cojointly with AAA game developers. The major title developers are in constant contact with every major IHV and OS vendor (less so for open-source) at all stages with respect to driver- and API- development.
Furthermore, it's not like the major architects and engineers of these driver teams are total tools; these guys live and breathe GPU architecture (and uarch), and are intimately familiar with what would make a good driver.
The impetus for these low level APIs is differentiation and performance. When those couldn't be had from GPU HW, the next place to look is "one up the stack": driver & API. It surprised no one in the industry that Mantle/Vulkan/Metal/DX12 all came out at about the same time: we've all been pushing for this for years.