Khronos Specifications for the Vulkan 1.3 Graphics API

Published by

Click here to post a comment for Khronos Specifications for the Vulkan 1.3 Graphics API on our message forum
#5986974
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/189/189980.jpg
This further consolidates Vulkan as a DirectX real alternative
#5987014
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/201/201426.jpg
anticupidon:

This further consolidates Vulkan as a DirectX real alternative
Sadly way more games dont use vulkan. While some DX12 games run really well, vulkan games run that much better. How battlefield games went from mantle to DX12 and running like crap now...... So much cpu overhead its not every amusing.
#5987037
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/246/246171.jpg
Agonist:

Sadly way more games dont use vulkan. While some DX12 games run really well, vulkan games run that much better. How battlefield games went from mantle to DX12 and running like crap now...... So much cpu overhead its not every amusing.
DX12 took a lot of inspiration from Mantle, as did Vulkan. But to my understanding, DX12 is more popular because it was more of an evolution of what developers already knew, and from what I heard, was easier to work with. Vulkan was a completely new product and still needed time to grow. v1.3 will likely be what's necessary to make Vulkan more popular. It is getting adopted, just slowly.
#5987038
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
DirectX also encompasses far more than Vulkan does - it helps manage sound, multimedia, player input, networking, etc - which makes it more palatable when developing.
#5987061
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/227/227680.jpg
Agonist:

Sadly way more games dont use vulkan. While some DX12 games run really well, vulkan games run that much better. How battlefield games went from mantle to DX12 and running like crap now...... So much cpu overhead its not every amusing.
Can't agree to that. Most of the time is poor developer implementation. If you want to see some really good performing DX12 title, the rise of tombraider and Shadow of tombraider are good example .
#5987071
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/174/174772.jpg
Wagnard:

Can't agree to that. Most of the time is poor developer implementation. If you want to see some really good performaning DX12 title, the rise of tombraider and Shadow of tombraider are good example .
Just had the same thought, it all comes down to the implementation.
#5987080
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/201/201426.jpg
Wagnard:

Can't agree to that. Most of the time is poor developer implementation. If you want to see some really good performaning DX12 title, the rise of tombraider and Shadow of tombraider are good example .
They are very good examples. Resident Evil remakes and Village run really well in Dx12. Im not pissing on Direct X12 at all. I like it. Most developers just lazy with it. I just love vulkan on lower end systems. Even when just using it as a wrapper for DX11 games. Vulkan is fantastic for emulators too.
#5987081
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/216/216349.jpg
I want Vulkan to succeed because it´s not tied to a specific OS, like D12 to W10/11. An API that´s available to all OSes is better than one only available to one OS...
#5987096
data/avatar/default/avatar27.webp
Oh someone is getting rid off of render passes..
#5987189
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/255/255510.jpg
Thats got to be good news for ID software. Monsters from the id John??
#5987203
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/121/121885.jpg
John left ID over Bethseda/Zenimax meddling years ago because they didn't want to embrace VR. So here's hoping that Oculus's Vulkan support continues to improve for the Quest series of headsets as that's where he is now.
#5987245
data/avatar/default/avatar32.webp
I guess there are cases when Vulkan makes more sense than DX12. Games aiming for highest possible FPS seem to prefer Vulkan, like esports titles. Vulkan can make games really light on the CPU.