Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD Demonstrates First DirectX 11 GPU

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 38 comments

It goes to 11.

AMD today publicly demonstrated in Taipei the world’s first DirectX 11 GPU. We won’t be getting our hands on final hardware until the end of 2009, but AMD was happy to show off that it was first on the DX11 scene.

While the games of today won’t know how to take full advantage of upcoming DX11 hardware, certain advancements in the API will make it clearly better than DX10.1.

New features such as tessellation will enable artists to make smoother and less blocky models in 3D games. DX11 is also better able to take advantage of CPUs with multiple cores. The biggest addition of all will be the compute shader, which will finally bring in the GPGPU that’s been all the buzz lately.

 “AMD has a long track record of delivering pioneering features that have gone on to become mainstays in the DirectX experience, and we’re doing it again with two mature, AMD-developed technologies in DirectX 11 – tessellation and the compute shader – both of which enable a better DirectX 11 experience for consumers,” said Rick Bergman, Senior Vice President, AMD Products Group. “Today, we’re previewing AMD’s DirectX 11 graphics processor to build enthusiasm for this key technology so developers will have games available at launch and shortly thereafter. With the benefits it delivers to gaming, applications and Windows 7, developers are lining up to get their hands on our hardware, and we’re confident that consumers will too.”

Richard Huddy, Sr. Manager Developer Relations at AMD, listed on his blog a few predictions on just what DX11 will mean to the gamer. They are:

  • We’ll see higher frame rates because the way DirectX 11 uses CPUs will be more efficient.
  • We’ll see higher frame rates because games developers will be able to use our GPUs more like CPUs.
  • We’ll see smoother, more realistic characters and more realistic terrain as we move away from blocky polygonal representations to the kind that are used in movies.
  • And a side-benefit, that will help PC gaming generally, is that the new version is easier to use, so it will help to keep game development costs down.

Unlike what was the case for Windows Vista, the new DirectX won’t be tied to the upcoming Windows 7 release. DX11 will be available as an upgrade for Windows Vista at time of release.

Curious to see what else AMD has to say about DX11? Check out the YouTube videos below.

Display 38 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 17 Hide
    Kill@dor , June 3, 2009 4:15 PM
    That's very good news about DX11. Its time to put computing levels to the limit and beyond... I'm really getting tired of buying hardware that offers marginal performance with expensive costs. These companies need to realize we are still in a recession, we still want to purchase their products, but with fair capitalism. Props to AMD for first rant/bragging rights ^_^
  • 15 Hide
    pocketdrummer , June 3, 2009 6:15 PM
    WindowsmeloverWill DX11 be available for Windows Me?


    Please tell me you're not still using that abomination of an OS...
  • 11 Hide
    FlayerSlayer , June 3, 2009 4:38 PM
    WindowsmeloverWill DX11 be available for Windows Me?
    I believe it will only be available for Vista and Win7, not XP or earlier. Just like DX10.
Other Comments
  • 17 Hide
    Kill@dor , June 3, 2009 4:15 PM
    That's very good news about DX11. Its time to put computing levels to the limit and beyond... I'm really getting tired of buying hardware that offers marginal performance with expensive costs. These companies need to realize we are still in a recession, we still want to purchase their products, but with fair capitalism. Props to AMD for first rant/bragging rights ^_^
  • 2 Hide
    bigbadbrad , June 3, 2009 4:20 PM
    when do you think the first DX11 games will hit the shelves?
  • 0 Hide
    hellwig , June 3, 2009 4:36 PM
    Upgrade for Vista? Why didn't Microsoft ever release 10 for XP? Did they really think they could convince gamers to move to the untested Vista just by tying DX10 to the OS? Did anyone upgrade to Vista solely for DX10, and was it worth it?

    DX11 cards are good for one reason, and that reason is that we'll be seeing new GPU product lines. Maybe NVIDIA will finally create a new graphics chip, heck, maybe even two new chips, maybe.
  • 11 Hide
    FlayerSlayer , June 3, 2009 4:38 PM
    WindowsmeloverWill DX11 be available for Windows Me?
    I believe it will only be available for Vista and Win7, not XP or earlier. Just like DX10.
  • 10 Hide
    Anonymous , June 3, 2009 4:41 PM
    so basically dx11 claims to be faster and better?
    i think i remember that claim few years ago about dx10...
    i hope microsoft can deliver as 'hyped' this time
  • 15 Hide
    pocketdrummer , June 3, 2009 6:15 PM
    WindowsmeloverWill DX11 be available for Windows Me?


    Please tell me you're not still using that abomination of an OS...
  • -6 Hide
    sublifer , June 3, 2009 6:24 PM
    hellwigWhy didn't Microsoft ever release 10 for XP? Did they really think they could convince gamers to move to the untested Vista just by tying DX10 to the OS?

    I feel the same way... I hate Vista so my gaming PC has never had it. Don't realy think I've been missing much but I guess its all relative
  • -2 Hide
    scooterlibby , June 3, 2009 6:34 PM
    bigbadbradwhen do you think the first DX11 games will hit the shelves?


    I read that the Battlefield Bad Company 2 was easily ported to DX11 using the Frostbite engine. I think it's being released this Fall.
  • 2 Hide
    cinergy , June 3, 2009 6:46 PM
    Some of those video links are broken/misdirected.
  • 0 Hide
    tipoo , June 3, 2009 7:00 PM
    How come even oldish graphics cards could support up to DX9, but then we needed new ones for DX10, and soon 11?

    Anyways, AMD should have the advantage with DX11 since tessilation is a requirement and they have been using a tessilator for a few generations now, while Nvidia has refused to use one.
  • -1 Hide
    fulle , June 3, 2009 7:05 PM
    I'm weighing the pros and cons between a Lynnfield system, and one centered around the i7 920. The 2.8GHz Lynnfield processor will be faster in games that aren't threaded well, due to its aggressive turbo mode. When 3 or less cores are active, the Lynnfield processor should be faster, and only when that 4th core is needed will the i7 920 end up more effective.

    I ponder for a second whether DX11 will change the picture at all. If DX11 uses multi-core CPUs more efficiently, and that 4th core is utilized more, then perhaps the i7s will be the way to go.

    Unfortunately, any way I slice it a Phenom II system just won't be good enough compared to a Lynnfield. And since the only reason why Phenom IIs are viable, is because of bad scaling, and poor support for multiple-cores and threads... DX11 could amplify that gap between Intel and AMD processors in new games.

    AMD has about to November to release something that doesn't suck, or the shit's going to start hitting that fan hard for them.
  • 5 Hide
    Pei-chen , June 3, 2009 7:08 PM
    Nice, all we need is MS to change something in DX11 and AMD is screwed. Haven't they learned anything from the original Radeon scandal?
  • 2 Hide
    68vistacruiser , June 3, 2009 7:27 PM
    Sounds like it's something being said to keep the investors happy.
  • 3 Hide
    redraider89 , June 3, 2009 7:46 PM
    "AMD has about to November to release something that doesn't suck"

    So now Core 2 Duos suck right, since Phenom IIs are comparable to them.
  • 4 Hide
    apmyhr , June 3, 2009 7:52 PM
    Awesome. Hopefully we will start seeing DX11 games and cards start rolling out this Fall. That way, by the time I want to upgrade from my AMD 4830, which won't be until next summer, there ought to be a cheap DX11 5830 (or nVidia equivalent) and a good range of game titles :) 
  • -2 Hide
    apmyhr , June 3, 2009 7:54 PM
    vorlessBut can it run Crysis?

    That must be a joke. Any card for more than 80 bucks should be able to run Crysis by now. I'm sure whatever DX11 cards we see in the future will handle it easily.
  • -2 Hide
    JAYDEEJOHN , June 3, 2009 8:05 PM
    Oh boy. OK, the kernel . If anyone has taken notice, DX10.1 vs DX10, youll see much higher fps using DX10.1, already out, already being used. Better MT could and should help both Intel and AMD, and especially real cores .
    Ummm speculation has it releasing when W7 does, which isnt the end of 09, guess the writer of the article didnt read what ATI is demoing?
  • 5 Hide
    fulle , June 3, 2009 8:07 PM
    Redraider89"AMD has about to November to release something that doesn't suck"So now Core 2 Duos suck right, since Phenom IIs are comparable to them.



    The $200 2.66GHz chip with HT disabled has performance superior to a Q9650, which is a $300 Core2 gen chip... So YES, Core2 will "suck" for new gaming systems once the Lynnfield processors are released. I didn't think to mention that, however, since its obvious that the new generation Intel processors will be superior to the last. AMD however, has been a gen behind for a looong time now. My point is when multiple threads are better utilized in the near future, they're current offering are going to start looking worse than they already do.
  • 2 Hide
    apmyhr , June 3, 2009 8:12 PM
    jaydeejohnIf anyone has taken notice, DX10.1 vs DX10, youll see much higher fps using DX10.1, already out, already being used.

    Really? I thought benchmarks have shown that the difference is almost negligable between 10 and 10.1, even with games which claim support for 10.1. Supposedly, thats why Nvidia hasn't bothered making 10.1 cards. Can you give me a link to some evidence which suggests otherwise?
Display more comments