DX12 was released in 2015. Why is the RF Beta using DX11, released in 2009?

[Bill Stuntz]

The title pretty much says it all. Why upgrade from DX9 (2002) to DX11? Why is RF upgrading to DX11 instead of DX12? Wouldn't it make sense to upgrade to the current version?

 

[legoman]

The title pretty much says it all. Why upgrade from DX9 (2002) to DX11? Why is RF upgrading to DX11 instead of DX12? Wouldn't it make sense to upgrade to the current version?

I believe it is so it can still be run by older pcs (potatos) while still working on the new ones. and the require not being so extreme that it becomes the next RF-X where you need a expensive pc to even start it and a more expensive pc for it too run. My local hobby shop could not afford a pc to run it and did not stock it because it had too many returns.

I think it a happy medium. even brand new games are not running 12. and if the market for rf is people who are learning to fly RC not gamers with 1500 dollar PC

 

[Bill Stuntz]

AFAIK, DX12 doesn't require a supercomputer like RF-X using uengine did. My 4th gen laptop with only onboard graphics uses DX12. It won't set the world on fire, but RF8 is usable on it. DX12 is supposed to be faster than DX9 on the same hardware, so I'm not sure that's a valid argument. I'm pretty sure RF-X's problem was that it was using uengine instead of DirectX.

 

[technoid]

Couple that with the fact there is nothing about RealFlight that needs DX12 and they had experience with DX11, but none with DX12. These high-performance API's aren't plug and play there's a steep learning curve, so having previous experience with DX 11 was a big plus for them.

 

[technoid]

AFAIK, DX12 doesn't require a supercomputer like RF-X using uengine did. My 4th gen laptop with only onboard graphics uses DX12. It won't set the world on fire, but RF8 is usable on it. DX12 is supposed to be faster than DX9 on the same hardware, so I'm not sure that's a valid argument. I'm pretty sure RF-X's problem was that it was using uengine instead of DirectX.

Uengine uses DirectX to talk to the hardware.

 

[csgill75]

DX11 is still very much relevant with many game developers. It will be supported for quite a long time. There is nothing that DX12 offers Realflight that isn't already found in DX11. DX12 would be nice, but for the next few years, it really isn't needed for Realflight.

 

[RemyHeli]

@Bill Stuntz Good question. This has been already discussed and explained here:

So far, so good

I just switched to using the DirectIX 11 Beta. I am only just getting started with it but so far everything seems to work well. I do have a 12th gen intel cpo and when I use the internal graphics everything works as expected whereas before it would not work at all. I have a graphics card in my...

forums.realflight.com

 

[Bill Stuntz]

DX12 is apparently MUCH more complex than DX11, so I suppose the knowledge of 11 makes sense. Is it a stepping stone to DX12? I also understand that DX12 is multi-threaded for both the CPU & GPU, and DX11 isn't. Wouldn't that be likely to increase frame rates? Looking at RF8 in Task Manager, it certainly isn't stressing my i7-4790 very much, but does seem to be working my GTX-960 fairly hard. I'm also running Edge, Firefox, Thunderbird, Spider Solitaire, Task Manager & a file manager using about 4%CPU & 5%GPU. The TM screen shots are with RF8 running in addition to the other stuff. I know I'm comparing apples & oranges with RF8/DX9 vs Evo/DX11. What kind of CPU/GPU usage do you guys see from Evo DX9 vs Evo DX11?

I'm trying to invent a reason to upgrade from RF8 to Evo. So far, I just don't see it. I turn 75 this month, and haven't been able to fly in real life for several years now, so I don't expect that I'll ever own a Spektrum radio or a plane with Safe Select, etc..

@Bill Stuntz Good question. This has been already discussed and explained here:

So far, so good

I just switched to using the DirectIX 11 Beta. I am only just getting started with it but so far everything seems to work well. I do have a 12th gen intel cpo and when I use the internal graphics everything works as expected whereas before it would not work at all. I have a graphics card in my...

forums.realflight.com

I saw that, and yes, that's part of what I'm saying here. But I'm looking for a bit more detail than that.

 

[RemyHeli]

@Bill Stuntz The main reason motivating me to use EVO DX11 is that since many years the heli main rotor disk wasn't displayed anymore at low rpm (scale helis) which was a non sense for such software, hence not realistic at all and because, we pilots, look also after rotor disk for aircraft position (I fly Vario Bell 212 turbine, see my Avatar or YT channel SuperVideoHeli, recently flying over water).

I'm also looking forward new features and performance improvements with DX11, this migration should allow, but not super essential or urgent to me.

We also have to remember that one of the priorities is RF to run also on plattforms not supporting anymore DX9, as matter of urgency. Last gen devices can be affected.

I do understand that Dev team is now also setting fundations for future improvements/features, which looks a lot migration work, seeing the various cases being discussed here and those we even don't know. Typically they can't use certain APIs same way as DX9, e.g., to reproduce water, if I'm correct.

Of course, if DX12 has less footprint performance wise, I'm interested too as my PC is an old i7 with recent RTX3060 graphic card but not much exploited dues to old motherboard architecture etc (Asus P6T).
Having said that, not much a problem when flying at photo fields as I do generally (there is one looking very similar to my club). Also, nicer looking aircraft is a plus but not must have for me, key is rather physics and seeing all parts of the aircraft as it should be !

Will probably not answer all your questions but I wanted to share my status.

Congrats for your age, nice to hear.