DX 9 test

[Guest jase439]

The download link at Microsoft (see the link earlier in this thread) refers to a time expiration in the spring. There was no mention of RC0 at this site, however...just "DirectX 9 Public Beta" - which I assume is the same build (Build 308 - what build # are you running, Mike)?Either way, I'm sure DX9 Final will be out long before then.J

[Guest PaulL01]

>I feel you have taken a forum for a group of hobbyists and >turned it into trashy gossip by publicly ridiculing a fellow >simmer thru your righteous and pompous stance concerning his >post to inform us of his results. Please show me one word of a personal attack on Dan, even Just one.There is none, because I did not personally attack him. On the contraire, you as well as Dan have made the only personal remarks; "Bite me" "maybe you are NOT as intelligent as I had imagined" etc. I am a humorous fellow, not an attack artist, but some may take offense at the humor, Should I apologies? If it makes you feel better sure:Here:Dan and vjcarlo I am truly sorry that you felt insulted by my (you guys are Idiots!) by my poking fun at the (out of this world, stupid) exaggerated results that (overly sensitive) Dan posted regarding using the DX9 Beta (DX9 Beta for an DX9 vidio card!!!), please except my apology. :)You say: "THIS IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC TESTING GROUND FOR COMPUTER NERDS, LIKE YOU----- WE ARE HOBBYIST ENJOYING THE LOVE OF FLIGHT SIMULATION AND TRYING TO HELP EACH OTHER IMPROVE OUR ENJOYMENT ANY WAY WE CAN.I've seen enough "help" cause quiet a bit of PC damage for the users of this forum and have personally spent considerable time >actually:) You guys take hair.

[Guest PaulL01]

>>The Radeon cards are the only cards that I'm aware of which >take advantage of the new DirectX 9 features and >interfaces. However, the older DirectX interfaces are still >supported. It is not out of line nor unreasonable to expect >a general improvement to the core subsystem which is used by >all DirectX interfaces. >>90% of DirectX 9 is DirectX 8 and earlier - the >'stuff' your games all presently run on ;-) Just because a >game isn't designed to take advantage of a new interfaces >does not mean it can't be optimised. >>I am not seeing the performance increase of the magnitude >Dan reported. However, FS does appear to get a much needed >shot in the arm from DX9. A consistent 20-30% increase is >still a very significant "perceptual boost" when you're used >to operating in the 15-20 fps domain. >>JThere are NO Optimizations of any DX8 code in the DX9 RC 0 release. Nothing newer than DX8.1b with the exception being DirectPlayDX8.2 and to add even on the ATI R9700 (DX9 card) there have been actually FPS decreases in DX8 games by running with the latest DX9 beta and ATI's latest DX9 beta drivers much less a non DX9 Nvidia card with no DX9 supporting drivers, it is a fact >.< If you are getting any "performance" increases, look some where else for the "cause/problem".Take care.

[Guest]

Jase:Okay, sorry you take exception but the fact remains. You are claiming a 6 fps gain and frankly until I see proof I don't agree.I have been running DX9 and I haven't seen any noticable increase in FPS much less a 30% increase!I stand steadfastly behind what I said. Regards,Mike T.

[Guest PaulL01]

There are NO Optimizations of any DX8 code in the DX9 RC 0 release. Nothing newer than DX8.1b with the exception being DirectPlayDX8.2 and ....even on the ATI R9700 (a DX9 card) there have been actually FPS >decreases< in DX8 games by running with the latest DX9 beta and ATI's latest DX9 beta drivers much less a non DX9 Nvidia card with no DX9 supporting drivers. :-rollIf some think that they are getting any actual "performance" increases, look some where else for the "cause/problem".Take care.

[Guest]

Paul I hate to let you down but there is appreciable frame-rate, fluidity and color enhancement on fs2k2 with dx9.0 beta. It is immediately noticeable as soon as you install it. Now what I consider mis-information is what you write in your post-I would like to know from you where MS has said that there is no optimization for dx8 code or that 8.1b and 9.0 are same except the directplay engine. Santanu

[Cruachan 705]

I must say I'm with Paul on this one.Installing a beta 'release' of DirectX is just plain daft and asking for trouble. For heaven's sake, if you have spent countless hours setting up and achieving a stable system why on earth would you want to risk it all by installing something that could easily scupper all that hard work.Whatever the merits of the original post I would strongly advise leaving DirectX 9 alone until Microsoft releases it officially. Beta releases are just that and are let loose in order that the willing end user can continue the testing on behalf of the developer in the hope that as yet undetected bugs can be brought to light. For the rest of us there should be a health warning attached!!Mike :-wave

[Guest PaulL01]

>Paul I hate to let you down but there is appreciable >frame-rate, fluidity and color enhancement on fs2k2 with >dx9.0 beta. It is immediately noticeable as soon as you >install it. Now what I consider mis-information is what you >write in your post-I would like to know from you where MS >has said that there is no optimization for dx8 code or that >8.1b and 9.0 are same except the directplay engine. >>Santanu Don't worry you cant let me down. :)Its written in the DX9 White papers that are available to developers, as I already stated, and this is not my opinion, just the way it is but because some want to believe what they want to believe the truth becomes unpopular.As stated before:"If you see any actual performance gains" or color enhancments etc it is do to other factors such as driver default re-settings or pure imagination whatever...I never said "8.1b and 9.0 are same except the directplay engine" as respect of the whole DX9 beta, I said "8.1b and 9.0 are same..." as respects DX8 code as they are. :)

[Guest jase439]

Paul,I don't follow this whole "DX8 Code"..."DX9 Code" business. DX9 is a superset of DX8, which is a superset of DX7. These modules do not exist in total isolation. Granted, there have been substantial changes in the programmatic interfaces with each successive revision - and these have been kept separate in their own DLL, but to say that DX9 lives in its own little bubble completely independent of any service of a prior revision is not accurate. Binary backwards compatibility does not necessitate binary independence. The concept of binary component reuse is not a new one in software development and is the very basis of COM upon which DirectX is based.Yes, there is functionality in DX9 that exists separately from DX8 but DX9 is built on (and extends) DX8 and offers additional features and interfaces accessible only to DX9 compliant hardware/drivers. Changes to the core subsystems of Direct3D - those components that are reused internally by the DX9, 8, and 7 interfaces - are shared changes. To say that such changes have no effect (good or bad) across the board makes no sense. Do you have some whitepaper that states nothing in DX has changed with regard to performance at all in DirectX 9? I'm looking at a page on Microsoft's developer website that would contradict that assertion. Even the download link for RC0 states, "DirectX 9 includes security and performance enhancements". What is the basis for your claim? I'm not trying to be piggish here (really :-) - if you have a whitepaper or MSDN article that backs up your claim with regard to performance, I am very interested in reading it.I am not advocating any position of, "If you install DX9 you will see a performance boost." As I mentioned earlier, I saw a slight decrease in 3D mark scores but a general improvement in FS (with ~20% increase in performance). I would expect different applications might yield varying results - perhaps many with worse results. I would expect there would be low-level overhead that would also need to be added to support some of the newer DX9 interfaces. Either way, for better or worse, performance is affected. JPS. I would point out that D3D8.DLL is *not* a binary match on my system with the one installed previously (8.2). This further supports the fact that SOMETHING has changed in DirectX 8 land - contrary to your suggestion that it hasn't changed at all.

[Guest jase439]

> Its written in the DX9 White papers that are available to > developers:Please post a link - I really want to read this because we are obviously not reading from the same book.

[Guest PaulL01]

DX9 RC 0 does not "extend" on DX8.1bEach version of DirectDraw has been "subsumed" into the latest version of Direct3D. In General terms what you have stated is true, however in regard to the Direct Draw or D3D API there is no "performance optimization" that is not included in DX8.1b, Tis part of the reason that there are No "Performance" gains in DX8 games as a result of using DX9 RC 0 just as there where none also with DX8.1a/b only some obscure performance of the z-buffer which was a very slite visual "performance" improvement in a limited number of games not an actual improvement in perormance of any kind that most anyone on this board apreciates ;-) as real DX8 feature optimization concluded more than a year ago.So if you are looking for "performance inhancments" to exsisting game titles look long and hard as they will be very, very hard to find.Think about it, since when has any DX release of a new feature set like Dx9>DX8 as in DX8 over DX7 improved performance for Hardware & programs that could not take advantage of it? Never has hapened.Dont you think there would be a great "buz" through out the gaming world that DX9 was somehow going to improve our current games & hardware since its been available since spring? Didn't/not going to happen.I am not an MS D3D or DX engineer (not even close), but I do have many sources in the industry and am able to "view" a lot (Too Much!) of info, If you want to get really familear with DX and D3D you might want to start here:http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default....tentid=28000410 and here:http://clootie.narod.ru/articles.htmlAs far as passing along access to "white papers" and such Most of that info can be found through channels if you can't get it from MS yourself However I do not have authorization for even my own personal access to the information that you seek so I cannot share it with you, but you can easily verify everything by even just visiting some of the major D3D or video card or hardware/gaming sites and posting your questions in the D3D forums there.The DX demos and SDK's are very cool!

[Guest]

:-lol DOH! Who reads the fine print! :-lol :-lol

[Guest]

Thinking that DX9 will enhance your DX7/8 card is like saying just because your neighbor just bought a Ferarri your Ford has gained a 30% increase in speed! :-lolSorry, it just ain't so. We're not talking DX8.0 to DX8.2 here. We are talking a DX upgrade that requires a WHOLE NEW video card GPU compatibility specification and as of now there is 1 (ONE) card that complies.Again. DX8 games + DX8 drivers + DX8 videocards = 0 increase in a DX9 environment!

[Guest]

DX9 contains performance enhancements for DX9 cards. This is the reason MS didn't call it DX8.3 and is requiring a whole new generation of GPUs.If the current cards realize performance games then why aren't any of the Geforce models being upgraded to DX9?But fine. Tomorrow I will post pics of DX8 vs DX9 performance in FS2002 and that will end this debacle.Mike T.

[Guest jase439]

Mike,None of what has been said here really qualifies as "scientific method" :) There could be half a dozen factors that could contribute to my observations and those of others. There are people who claim worse performance. Which is correct??? So when you say, "I don't agree with your observations," *lol* I'm not sure what that means. I benchmark before at some known configuration. I benchmark after with the same configuration, changing 1 variable - namely DirectX. I draw a line between A and B and take a measurement. I repeat a few times. I correlate. I'm not offering specific reasons WHY...I'm just reporting the observation and suggesting that there appears - initially - to be a correlation between performance and DX9 and that observation appears to be consistent with those made by others. I don't know how you can qualify an observation as "right" or "wrong" - observations simply are...observations. Such observations hardly constitute empirical evidence of anything - just singular data points among many. Let people draw their own conclusions.I don't recall citing FPS gains, btw (where are you coming up with the magic number of 6???). In fact, I recall specifically NOT citing frame rates ;-) If even said as much in my original post because its meaningless to do comparisons and draw conclusions without some constant baseline - one which we all agree upon to represent some known "standard" against which FS performance is measured. I don't think anyone has ever set that benchmark. I don't think 3D Mark is it. FS performance seems to vary quite independently from 3D Mark scores. If someone wants to take a stab at some 'quantifiable' standard, I'm all ears (although, frankly, I'm not sure people are really all that interested ;-)This debate is no more conclusive than the endless duel of "this driver is faster than that driver". Even the 3D mags online which do have some "standardized benchmarks" can't seem to agree on their results. Is DX9 the magic 'pixie dust' for flight simulator? Hardly. But if you're not white knuckled about trying something new with your system - why not try it? If you are...let sleeping dogs lie, and wait.Anyway...let me *really* generalize what I said earlier, "While I did not observe the same level of performance gains as reported by the original author of this thread, I did observe a "favorable" improvement on performance after installing DirectX 9. NB: I make no definitive assertion that DX9 will, in any other case, yield a similar result on any other system. I assert only the possibility of a correlation exists and that others may wish to try it for themselves...or, as you have chosen - may not wish to try it all (which is OK too - either way, I still sleep at night :^)"J