id software的一些訪談內容, id並非任何一方partner, 可以參考
小弟簡單翻一下, 不很精準, 引號內才是id人員的說法


http://www.dsogaming.com/news/id-so...ross-platforms/

id Software: Async Compute 將成為爾後各平台遊戲引擎的一個重要元素

A lot has already been said about Async Compute. And after everything we’ve seen so far from NVIDIA’s side (including its latest GPUs), it appears that AMD will triumph in all games supporting it. Not only that, but it appears that more and more engines will support this specific feature of DX12 and Vulkan.

Async Compute已經有很多討論, 目前就我們所看到NV方的GPU(含最新),
AMD將能在有支援的遊戲上取得勝利。不只如此, 將有越來越多的引擎於DX12
和Vulkan上支援此項技術。



In a lengthy interview with Eurogamer, id Software’s Billy Khan claimed that it is almost certain that more developers will take advantage of Async Compute in the future.

is Software的Billy Khan在接受Eurogamer的一個冗長訪談中, 宣稱未來將有更
多開發商將使用Async Compute。

“Doom is already a clear example where async compute, when used properly, can make drastic enhancements to the performance and look of a game. Going forward, compute and async compute will be even more extensively used for idTech6. It is almost certain that more developers will take advantage of compute and async compute as they discover how to effectively use it in their games.”

"Doom本身就是一個活鮮的例子, 證明async compute只要使用得當, 可以大大
提升效能與遊戲的呈現。爾後idTech6引擎將會更加廣泛使用async compute, 幾
乎可以確定的是, 當更多開發商發現如何更有效率的在遊戲中使用compute與
async compute時, 他們將會好好利用此項技術。"


This obviously does not surprise us. After all, we’ve seen most games supporting DX12 taking advantage of Async Compute. However, this will undoubtedly give a big boost to AMD’s GPUs as they benefit greatly from Async Compute.

明顯的這沒有讓我們很驚訝, 畢竟, 我們已經看過泰半DX12遊戲使用async
compute的情形, 無論如何, 這無疑將對AMD GPU有重大效能上的增進, 他們
能夠從async compute獲得很大的幫助。


id Software also claimed that developers should adopt Vulkan as soon as possible.

id Software亦表示開發商應儘早採用Vulkan。


“There is definitely a learning curve, but the benefits are obvious.” said Axel Gnetting and continued.
“Vulkan actually has pretty decent tools support with RenderDoc already and the debugging layers are really useful by now. The big benefit of Vulkan is that shader compiler, debug layers and RenderDoc are all open source. Additionally, it has full support for Windows 7, so there is no downside in OS support either compared to DX12.”

"雖然新技術需要學習, 但其好處是相當明顯的" , Axel Gnetting表示, "Vulkan已
經有很多很棒的RenderDoc工具之支援, debugging layers也相當好用, 而且
shader compiler、debug layers、RenderDoc都開放原碼, 除此之外, 支援win7, 因
此就作業系統之支援來說, 與dx12相比, 沒有不利的阻因。"


Tiago Sousa added:
“From a different perspective, I think it will be interesting to see the result of a game entirely taking advantage by design of any of the new APIs – since no game has yet. I’m expecting to see a relatively big jump in the amount of geometry detail on-screen with things like dynamic shadows. One other aspect that is overlooked is that the lower CPU overhead will allow art teams to work more efficiently – I’m predicting a welcome productivity boost on that side.”

Tiago Sousa補充
"從不同角度來看, 我認為期待一個完全使用新API來製作的遊戲將會非常有趣,
雖然目前還沒有。我期待能在螢幕上看到由超級多的幾何圖形所呈現出來的畫面
細節, 像動態陰影之類。另一方面, 由於較低的CPU overhead, 將使遊戲美術團
隊能更有效率發揮, 我預測遊戲將在這方面有非常大的成長。"






http://www.dsogaming.com/news/id-so...ver-directx-12/


id Software on OpenGL versus DirectX 11 and on why it chose Vulkan over DirectX 12

A couple of weeks ago, we had the pleasure of interviewing id Software’s Tiago Sousa and Axel Gneiting. And as you may have guessed, we asked the team about the advantages of OpenGL over DX11 (and vise versa) and why it chose Vulkan over DX12.

幾個星期前, 我們訪談了id Software的Tiago Sousa和Axel Gneiting, 如你們所猜
測, 我們問他們為何使用opengl而不用dx11, 與為何用Vulkan而捨dx12


As Axel told us, OpenGL has a bigger feature set through extensions and it is less restrictive in terms of certain GPU operations, something that was ideal for what id Software was going for.

“Overall we had very little issues developing DOOM with OpenGL. DirectX 11 might have an advantage when it comes to optimizations on driver side, as more effort was put into that over the years by the IVHs compared to OpenGL. Also admittedly, there is a broader range of tools that work with DirectX than OpenGL at this point in time. On the other hand, OpenGL has a bigger feature set through extensions and it is less restrictive in terms of certain GPU operations.”


(dx11略)


As for DX12 and Vulkan, Alex had this to say:
“DirectX 12 and Vulkan are conceptually very similar and both clearly inherited a lot from AMD’s Mantle API efforts. The low level nature of those APIs moves a lot of the optimization responsibility from the driver to the application developer, so we don’t expect big differences in speed between the two APIs in the future. On the tools side there is very good Vulkan support in RenderDoc now, which covers most of our debugging needs. We choose Vulkan, because it allows us to support Windows 7 and 8, which still have significant market share and would be excluded with DirectX 12. On top of that Vulkan has an extension mechanism that allows us to work very closely with AMD, NVIDIA and Intel to do very specific optimizations for each hardware.”

以dx12和vulkan來說, Alex表示：
"dx12和vulkan概念上非常類似, 很多部份源於AMD Mantle API。低階的API
讓很多最佳化之工作由驅動程式轉移到開發者身上, 對於dx12和vulkan我們認
為這兩者未來在效率上將不會有很大之不同。以開發工具來說, vulkan目前已經
有很好的RenderDoc之支援, 滿足我們大部份的debugging需求, 我們選擇
vulkan, 因為它支援市佔仍然很高的win7、win8, 如果用dx12就不行了。最重要
的, vulkan的擴充機制允許我們密切的和amd、nvidia、intel合作, 以針對每個硬
體去做特別的最佳化需求。"