In theory nothing actually prevented. Although, folks usually used other stuff like boost, hpr-rx and stuff like that.
I used in the past without issues, but, mostly, the last time I played Overwatch 2 was on ow classic 2016 event and to look hazard’s kit.
It would be amazing to have with Boosteroid because we can’t enable driver level features!
Not sure if you heard about this but Boosteroid is available now in Brazil!
For now it feels really bad using as even just going through the menus, the hero gallery all has a weird lag to it compared to DX11
So if I switch to 12, what am I looking for in improved performance or quality? Asking for a friend…
Interesting, boosteroid uses amd tech? Didn’t knew.
That’s good to know. Friends of mine would be pleased to know. Dunno about ow, tho. But more options for gamers is always a good thing.
Maybe I use it when visit them sometime in the future
Wouldn’t it be more accurate to call a beta test branch of what is already essentially “live beta” software an “alpha test”?
Is… fps really even that noticeable by the human eye past 120? Who on earth would need 300?
The misconception many people have is that eyes see in frames per second. It’s a constant feed AND it’s “edited” by our brains so that we don’t make ourselves sick when our eyes flick to look at things (this is why if you look back and forth at an analog clock some seconds will seem longer).
It’s perceptible but there’s incredible diminishing returns and for most people they can’t react fast enough for it to matter. There are certain games where they work better or worse just on the game rendering faster alone, but most of those are mobile ports.
If you’re over 30 you probably shouldn’t worry about it, especially if your monitor can’t refresh fast enough anyway.
Usually stability in the communication between cpu and gpu, although is not guarantee that you would achieve more frames or a good experience if you use uncapped framerate.
If your gpu supports dx12 and your cpu can deliver consistently the desired framerate, is expected a more stable experience in terms of latency. Due SIM times would be more consistent on the expected conditions.
The only benefit would be hardware latency per se. But after around 120-180fps overwatch SIM times are really low. Making a small change on overall input latency. Usually reflecting in a big increase of Wattage use by improving overall visual latency by 5-10% at best, but perception can change due how responsive the input itself is.
While the timming reduces proportionately, the value itself is too low to be perceptible. Considering the average human reaction time.
But can be perceived better due you’re forcing the hardware itself to work at that effort. If is stable can improve the experience but if isn’t would be worst more often than not.
So in sumary:
If you have consistent framerate the system itself is keeping the pace and generating consistent experience with low input lag delay. Visually speaking is not that much of deal. Feeling and seeing are two different factors but often folks tie both together.
I cant use Full screen mode while DirectX 12 beta is enabled 
It absolutely is noticeable, but not maybe in a way that is “obvious” or intuitive.
Higher framerates on high refreshrate monitors remove motion blur from games, which with current monitor technologies would require to have closer to 1000fps and 1000hz to not be noticeable by people.
https://blurbusters.com/blur-busters-law-amazing-journey-to-future-1000hz-displays-with-blurfree-sample-and-hold/
Another way to go around it are technologies like black frame insertion but those at the moment come with their own disadvantages - darker screen, flickering and in some cases input delay.
If you get to compare 120fps/120hz vs 480fps 480hz oled on fast motion you’ll most likely see an obvious difference in the clarity of motion handling.
For example if you were to scroll text on the screen fast enough, on 120hz it’ll be blurry and unreadable and on 480hz you can read it.
This same effect then works in anything you throw at it. Look around in overwatch - and in 120hz it’ll look blurry and in 480hz a lot snappier.
Play a game like civilization and if you scroll around the map, at 120hz it’ll look blurry and in 480hz you can see everything clear in motion.
120 fps at 1000 pixels/sec = 8.3ms persistence = 8.3 pixels of motion blur
480 fps at 1000 pixels/sec = 2.1ms persistence = 2.1 pixels of motion blur
Company is owned by Microsoft. They have invested interest in DX12.
Cool I’m gonna try it!
doesnt stop doom eternal and idtech from using vulkan , i mean people who want their games do well and not pony up to phil use it.
even team fortress 2 the supposedly abandoned valve game uses it .
???
Microsoft bought Bethesda in September 2020. Doom Eternal was released in March 2020. IDTech was released in 2018. This was all way before Microsoft got involved in their development.
I mean, they are doing more multiplatform titles. I think their step towards dx12 is actually to try make all versions somewhat similar to each other.
Considering that both Playstation and Switch doesn’t support dx12 but support vulkan.
Making stuff on dx12 or even vulkan would make the transition to another platforms.
For the user, is good to dx exist due more drive to innovation and more features in the long run. But on company side, doesn’t make much sense to rely on dx12 itself. Considering their gaming segment going all platforms and the game pass initiative.
Idtech is somewhat a different topic, tbh.
Yes, one of the most impressive engines I ever saw and learned about it. John Carmack is a legend on it’s own.
Sure but they haven’t yet given in and added dx 12, they have the balls to say no to inferior stuff
while the eyes dont see in frames per second, what we can see on higher refresh rates is a clearer image when turning the camera. less blur, less doubling of contours. what we can feel is noticably less input lag.
when i limit fps to 30 i get motion sickness
when i limit it to 60 it just looks very choppy and it becomes hard to focus for a long period of time.
on 144+ the image is much clearer even with much visual clutter and motion going on.
so yes, 144 hz+ DOES make a huge difference for first person shooters. for singleplayer third person games for example it really doesnt make that much difference.