4 ms·
As stated by others in the comments section, DX9 is a huge, complicated beast. nvidia and AMD have decades of experience here, so dragging it along with new gen
by fps_doug 4y ago
As stated by others in the comments section, DX9 is a huge, complicated beast. nvidia and AMD have decades of experience here, so dragging it along with new generations of GPUs is relatively easy. Intel would've had to start almost from scratch. They're betting on the future, where backwards compat with it becomes less and less important, and the power of their GPUs keeps increasing, so the overhead for older titles is getting less noticeable.
- flohofwoe 4y agoIntels integrated GPUs have pretty good "legacy D3D" support though (much better than their legacy GL support anyway)... it's not like they are newcomers when it comes to graphics driver development. Also D3D11 support will be relevant at least for the next 10 years
- navjack27 4y agoI forget where but in one YouTube video at least where they were being interviewed they explained that they thought this too. They thought that their integrated graphics legacy would be able to be essentially transferred over to making desktop cards but it sadly wasn't the case. The things that they did for the drivers for the integrated chips and the way that they designed the integrated chips were not transferable knowledge. So they did have to start mostly from the ground floor to work on the Arc gpus.
- mrguyorama 4y agoMaybe if they hadn't spent the last 20 years making godawful iGPUs they would have actually had some transferable knowledge.