DX11 is much more high level while DX12 implements direct control over the GPU. 12 is much more like vulkan.
replyI guess since this is emulating the device instead of just passing the commands to vulkan it is easier to do DX11, but I could be wrong about this particular implementation.
DirectX 12 isn't just much more like Vulkan, it's so shockingly similar, it's basically Vulkan. It's jarring when you read it for the first time because you ask yourself why it even exists, but a second later, you realize it's so Microsoft can own their own graphics interface, too.
replyI could be remembering this incorrectly, but that's the impression I remember.
DX12 was over 2 years old by the time Vulkan was released. People in the industry also use DirectX extensively and have for decades (Vulkan is fairly marginal in comparison); many modern graphics API features (mesh shaders, ray tracing) were designed and developed in DirectX, as Microsoft worked with closely with ISVs on these features before they spread to wider audiences and published specifications.
replyHonestly if you are creating games, with the rise of Proton and vkd3d, there is seemingly less need to target Vulkan today than ever before. Just target x86_64 Windows with DirectX11 or DirectX12 and you will even get Linux support (and some day, probably macOS) "for free". That's just for games, though.
There's that small thing of DirectX 12 predating Vulkan (and massively predating the useful Vulkan specs).
replyDX12 is much more complex to implement. Very different API.
reply