Will GSDX update for DX12?

[willkuer]

How did you come up with these numbers?

Because most players can play games at 1xnative but not at 18xnative.
I don't think that the cpu should suffer from putting the internal resolution to 18xnative since the rendering is done on the gpu.

But as I said this is just how I understand the whole thing...

[Blyss Sarania]

I don't think that the cpu should suffer from putting the internal resolution to 18xnative since the rendering is done on the gpu.

But it will because the base GS emulation is done on the CPU itself.

[K.F]

Yeah, I remembered reading it from there before.

It is almost word for word,

The GS plugin has to draw the geometry in the same order as how it was received. That ruins almost all of the caching techniques used by modern games because the Graphics Synthesizer and PC GPUs have very different performance bottlenecks.

The GS plugin has to draw geometry in the same order as it was received. This kills almost all caching techniques used by modern games because the GS and PC GPUs have very different performance bottlenecks.

Either you were just reading it just now - without understanding a single thing might I add, given that you are are linking this to dx12 performance-. or you have the strongest memory ever in human history, and still not understanding a thing.

I'm not interested in spoon feeding.

Yup, can't explain it, just say you don't want to spoon feed it. God, I hate kids in the internet, saying dumb things and getting angry when someone point it out.

Just to point out what you are missing, you are talking about games. PCSX2 is not a game, so all what you just said is useless.

To put it in simple words: old APIs require a CPU overhead no matter what the software implementing them is, a game, a CAD , a generic 3d software, an emulator, it does not matter. New APIs remove a good portion of this overhead, and multi-thread the rest, freeing CPU cycles to do other tasks, so it should be an improvement, especially for software that uses the CPU heavily like PCSX2.

[Akio]

Some people don't understand Mantle/DirectX 12 because they think they are graphics APIs. Mantle and DirectX 12 are mainly for CPUs. Maybe if they are called graphics APIs with CPU workload reducers, it will be easier to understand.

Anyway, I think this is a moot point. Who will implement GSdx12?

[K.F]

Some people don't understand Mantle/DirectX 12 because they think they are graphics APIs. Mantle and DirectX 12 are mainly for CPUs. Maybe if they are called graphics APIs with CPU workload reducers, it will be easier to understand.

Anyway, I think this is a moot point. Who will implement GSdx12?

Will, you can blame Microsoft and AMD for calling them exactly that. I guess what people get wrong is that, these APIs are "GPU things" and have nothing to do with the CPU, which is very wrong since the CPU do most of the coordination, management and preparation for the GPU.

[ssakash]

Just to point out what you are missing, you are talking about games. PCSX2 is not a game, so all what you just said is useless.

I'm not the one talking about PC games here, many of them earlier remarked that it would provide increase in pcsx2 since, it provided massive increase in Native PC games which is not how it works.

To put it in simple words: old API's require a CPU overhead no matter what the software implementing them is, a game, a CAD , a generic 3d software, an emulator, it does not matter. New API's remove a good portion of this overhead, and multi-thread the rest, freeing CPU cycles to do other tasks, so it should be an improvement, especially for software that uses the CPU heavily like PCSX2.

It does reduce the CPU overhead at native PC games but, most of the factors which helps reducing the CPU overhead aren't present in the case of Emulation. In native PC games, it reduces the cpu overhead by generating more draw calls per second which may (or) might decrease cpu overhead in the case of emulation but, it's still not sure on Positive increase and the Multithreaded parallel CPU rendering support also doesn't help much since, pcsx2 isn't emulated in Parallel. though, the Explicit command buffer control might provide some Increase in performance but, it's still not 100% accurate on the case of emulation.

Either you were just reading it just now - without understanding a single thing might I add, given that you are are linking this to dx12 performance-. or you have the strongest memory ever in human history, and still not understanding a thing.

I'm currently looking into a lot of pcsx2's internal stuff to know how it works so, you shouldn't declare things like you know everything about me.

Yup, can't explain it, just say you don't want to spoon feed it. God, I hate kids in the internet, saying dumb things and getting angry when someone point it out.

I can explain it a little better but, it's a drag . so, please drop snide remarks like this in the further future.

[Akio]

In native PC games, it reduces the cpu overhead by generating more draw calls per second which may (or) might decrease cpu overhead in the case of emulation but, it's still not sure on Positive increase

Please explain. You didn't give any reason.

and the Multithreaded parallel CPU rendering support also doesn't help much since, pcsx2 isn't emulated in Parallel.

That is because PCSX2 doesn't use DirectX 12/Mantle. If it used DirectX 12/Mantle, multiple cores could be utilized.

though, the Explicit command buffer control might provide some Increase in performance but, it's still not 100% accurate on the case of emulation.

Please explain. You didn't give any reason.

[Blyss Sarania]

Much crazy. So misunderstanding. Very thread. Wow.

[ssakash]

Please explain. You didn't give any reason.

I assume, you know the reason on why there is less cpu overhead in native PC games on DX12. I was just mentioning that the same can't be guaranteed in pcsx2. since, most of the factors that rely on that aren't applicable for pcsx2. DX12 was designed to improve performance in scenarios where the CPU is the limiting factor but, the factor's on reducing the CPU overhead may/may not be applicable in the case of emulation.

I think there will be no increase because of faster draw call rate since, render targets are used as textures in the draw calls which doesn't provide any Improvements on switching the render targets.

I'm not sure about the other factors on reducing the cpu overhead since, I don't know how it works in-depth on GS.

[Akio]

Just for clarity, multiple cores in this case are for scaling of draw call throughput.

---

DX12 was designed to improve performance in scenarios where the CPU is the limiting factor but, the factor's may/may not be applicable in the case of emulation.

PCSX2 is a very CPU-intensive application.