Asenna Steam
kirjaudu sisään
|
kieli
简体中文 (yksinkertaistettu kiina)
繁體中文 (perinteinen kiina)
日本語 (japani)
한국어 (korea)
ไทย (thai)
български (bulgaria)
Čeština (tšekki)
Dansk (tanska)
Deutsch (saksa)
English (englanti)
Español – España (espanja – Espanja)
Español – Latinoamérica (espanja – Lat. Am.)
Ελληνικά (kreikka)
Français (ranska)
Italiano (italia)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesia)
Magyar (unkari)
Nederlands (hollanti)
Norsk (norja)
Polski (puola)
Português (portugali – Portugali)
Português – Brasil (portugali – Brasilia)
Română (romania)
Русский (venäjä)
Svenska (ruotsi)
Türkçe (turkki)
Tiếng Việt (vietnam)
Українська (ukraina)
Ilmoita käännösongelmasta
I ran DX12 today and that went fine.
350 fps, I think that's important....
It's not that simple, almost ever. DX12 being by MS is fine, it's how it's used and implemented. On a general level (painting with a broad stroke here), Vulkan can get better performance with less legwork from the Developers. Technically speaking, DX12 is VASTLY more performant, but requires a lot more time, effort and polish from the developers, and potentially some support from Microsoft if they're a big enough studio.
Each game has different strengths and weaknesses, different requirements for specific hardware, and each dev team has their own strengths and weaknesses too. Vulkan and DX12 can trade performance depending on the game, depending on the team, depending on the platform you're using.
I noticed this as well...