PDA

View Full Version : "DX10 and DX9" vs "DX9 and DX8"


Pages : [1] 2

ViN86
11-14-07, 11:39 AM
here's a comparison of the two versions of DX.

this is from half-life 2. only 3 years ago. notice the percentage hit the performance takes for DX9 vs DX8.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2281&p=3

notice it's as much as 25% slower at 1280x1024.

here is a comparison of now.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3029&p=6

as you can see, the situation is very spread, and is highly game dependent. with a performance increase being seen in Lost Planet and a huge performance hit in Company of Heroes.

i am not going to give any conclusions of my own. i just want people to see that DX8 to DX9 is similar in a sense to the movement from DX9 to DX10. couple this with a fully functional XP SP2 and no need for Vista, and i think we can see why people are anti-Vista/DX10.

six_storm
11-14-07, 11:46 AM
Nice find. Hopefully Crysis will bring some decent DX10 offerings to the table; enough for people to really wanna use it even though they get penalized FPS wise.

jeffmd
11-14-07, 11:57 AM
The problem with dx10 is it is getting harmed 2 fold. First you have the performance drop from the new data path. Then you get another performance drop because its vista. XP was allready a solid OS when dx9 rolled around. Vista is far from solid, and every game has called for a beta driver to be released by nvidia.

Tr1cK
11-14-07, 11:58 AM
Well to me, it's that developers are doing crap like not actually improving visuals in the DX10 code path or only allowing you to do AA thru DX10. All the while you are incurring a performance penalty.

I also think it's lame that Microsoft uses DX10 as a tool to sell Vista. I can't blame them, as it is in their best interest to make money and sell the new product. It would be very nice of them to give support for DX10 to XP, at least until it's support ends in 2009. It's just as shady as them forcing Live on Windows and the whole Games for Windows deal, when they are really for Vista and not just all active versions of Windows.

poullos
11-14-07, 12:04 PM
Moreover, they advertised DX10 as the way DX should work the best and that we would see performance increase. Something like the driver communication of the card with lesser delay time, etc.

ASUSEN7900GTX
11-14-07, 12:15 PM
DX10+Vista=failure,disaster,no good

well XP+DX10=sucess superduper but thatīs not gonna happen so if ya want DX10 you gotta get the crap vista is and thus making DX10 also crap

well over time sure but before that happens we are at DX12 or so still games running crap and XP being forgotten as the superior OS wich must be a big thorn in MSīs side as they canīt seem to get vista or DX10 to work as "promised" well promises promises


the thing is DX9 is way better and os is XP no news there but why not realese a newer DX9 F or so to give Xp gaming some more i candy how hard could it be?

Fats_43
11-14-07, 12:27 PM
If DX10 were implemented into XP it would still give crappy performance when the games are coded for DX9. :wtf:

ASUSEN7900GTX
11-14-07, 12:28 PM
well if DX 10 came For Xp and you have Crysis for both DX9 and 10 then would it run better in DX10 on XP than vista?

NaitoSan
11-14-07, 12:34 PM
"." is your friend...

anyway, that's pretty interesting find. i'm not complaining about dx10. soon or later we'll start to see better performance with dx10. i'm all up for that.

Fats_43
11-14-07, 12:41 PM
well if DX 10 came For Xp and you have Crysis for both DX9 and 10 then would it run better in DX10 on XP than vista?


Probably exactly the same crysis uses a DX9 engine. Actually it's a great example of developers just slapping extra features on DX9 developed games and listing it as a DX10 app.
It's honestly NOT a DX10 app, it's DX9 from the ground up. Until we see a game fully developed with ONLY DX10 in mind we won't see anything great (especially performance wise) from DX10.

LordJuanlo
11-14-07, 12:56 PM
Very interesting read, I didn't remember the performance hit from DX8 to DX9 was so big. Anyway DX10 has always promised a faster speed when using the same features, and Lost Planet is the only game that has delivered this so far.

So the conclusion is that nobody but Capcom knows how to code DX10 properly?. Why the huge performance hit at Gears of War at DX10, even without using AA?.

SwedX
11-14-07, 01:06 PM
True and they are Console devleper and they seems to get it LOL
But hey give it some time and we will surely see what the fuss is all about.

It will get better as the devs are starting from get go DX10 and they know how to do it right, it all take some time thats how things work.

jolle
11-14-07, 01:40 PM
well if DX 10 came For Xp and you have Crysis for both DX9 and 10 then would it run better in DX10 on XP than vista?
Not really.
For DX10 to work on XP they would have to port the WDDM architecture since DX10 is tied into the functionallity of the vista driver model.
And the problem would remain, or atleast the large parts of the problem which are driver performance.
They would still have to work on XPDM and WDDM and DX9 and DX10 drivers.

I think the Vista situation, which is much improved of late, is pretty much down to drivers, which are starting to catch up to XPs performance (which has had years to mature).
Ofcource some of it may be contributed to the OS, but that stuff will be hammered out over time, there has already been a few hotfixes to take care of some glaring issues that has improved things alot.
Newer benchmarks show very little difference between XP and Vista in performance.

From February
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/windows_vista_nvidia_forceware_performance/page14.asp
Clearly NVIDIA’s Windows Vista drivers still need a lot of work. Features are missing, and end users running into bugs and other issues with games and other software applications. Then there’s the performance problem.

And from September
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_nvidia_windows_vista_driver_performance_update/page9.asp
Looking over the performance results, it’s clear to see that both AMD and NVIDIA’s Windows Vista drivers have come a long way in the past seven months. NVIDIA in particular has made tremendous strides with their latest Vista driver, SLI support is fully functional for all GeForce card owners and it scales well in most cases.

And on a side note, there is alot of work associated with the move to Vista from the driver perspective.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/20070412224213.html
“On a high level, we had to prioritise. In our case, we have DX9, DX10, multiple APIs, Vista and XP – the driver models are completely different, and the DX9 and 10 drivers are completely different. Then you have single- and multi-card SLI - there are many variables to consider.
To some degree, I think that we may have underestimated how many resources were necessary to have a stable Vista driver off the bat. I can assure you and your readers that our first priority right now is not performance, not anything else; it is stability and all the features supported on Vista,”
That was from April, and since then they got SLI working for one, and have started to improve perfomance aswell.

ASUSEN7900GTX
11-14-07, 01:47 PM
well hopefully NVidia can realese a good Vista set, and SP1 do wonders then maybe it is possible to go Vista. As it is now i run XP as long as i can although i want DX10 gaming.

ViN86
11-14-07, 01:58 PM
"." is your friend...

anyway, that's pretty interesting find. i'm not complaining about dx10. soon or later we'll start to see better performance with dx10. i'm all up for that.
yea, but they were all graphs and i didnt feel like moving them to imageshack, and i especially didnt want to leech their bandwidth.

Very interesting read, I didn't remember the performance hit from DX8 to DX9 was so big. Anyway DX10 has always promised a faster speed when using the same features, and Lost Planet is the only game that has delivered this so far.

So the conclusion is that nobody but Capcom knows how to code DX10 properly?. Why the huge performance hit at Gears of War at DX10, even without using AA?.
tbh, it seems that the Unreal Engine 3 (UE3) is really not written with DX10 in mind. it seems to be more geared towards DX9. so, is it any wonder when DX10 doesnt perform as well as it should on it?

history, as brief as it is, has shown that implementing the API on top of another just creates overhead that inherently decreases performance. it seems Lost Planet is one of the few games that was actually coded for DX10, hence the negligible performance difference.

jeffmd
11-14-07, 02:16 PM
Oh shoot..the stupidity meter topped out again. crysis is a dx9 game..lol..

Heres a clue..by that logic... crysis is also a dx8, 7, 6, 5, frosted butts err damn, anyways dx shares features. You can't make a game that is only dx10 features.. it would prolly look like an old voxel(sp) game. ^^

Now back to reality, crysis also has some dx10 features, namely better shaders for dx10.

BTW if you guys really want a comparison between dx10 and dx9, compare dx10 and dx9 video cards. There was abit more to dx10 then some more eye candy.

ASUSEN7900GTX
11-14-07, 02:44 PM
so there is really no "pure" DX10 game out yet or is it impossible to make them DX10 only?

ViN86
11-14-07, 02:45 PM
so there is really no "pure" DX10 game out yet or is it impossible to make them DX10 only?
idk, mr vague (aka jeff) gave no reasoning, references, or clue to what or who he was referring to.

Redeemed
11-14-07, 03:16 PM
Not really.
For DX10 to work on XP they would have to port the WDDM architecture since DX10 is tied into the functionallity of the vista driver model.
And the problem would remain, or atleast the large parts of the problem which are driver performance.
They would still have to work on XPDM and WDDM and DX9 and DX10 drivers.

I think the Vista situation, which is much improved of late, is pretty much down to drivers, which are starting to catch up to XPs performance (which has had years to mature).
Ofcource some of it may be contributed to the OS, but that stuff will be hammered out over time, there has already been a few hotfixes to take care of some glaring issues that has improved things alot.
Newer benchmarks show very little difference between XP and Vista in performance.

From February
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/windows_vista_nvidia_forceware_performance/page14.asp


And from September
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_nvidia_windows_vista_driver_performance_update/page9.asp


And on a side note, there is alot of work associated with the move to Vista from the driver perspective.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/20070412224213.html


That was from April, and since then they got SLI working for one, and have started to improve perfomance aswell.

I bet 99% of members on this board over-look this post. Ignorance really must be bliss. :rolleyes:

To clarify, great post jolle, I agree 100%. :D

jolle
11-14-07, 03:24 PM
so there is really no "pure" DX10 game out yet or is it impossible to make them DX10 only?
All games out now were started using DX9.
Later on in the dev cycle they got access to DX10 SDK, early DX10 hardware samples and early drivers.
This gave them a chance to tinker with it, and what we see now are the first attempts, but the games are still based on DX9.

Since any time you spend on anything in the dev cycle costs money(1 employee salary x amount of employees assigned to the task) and this is money you have to pry from the publisher, spending time on DX10 features will cost a certain amount of money, but wont give a very large return since the percentage of the market running Vista AND having DX10 hardware is relatively small, adding fallbacks for older hardware is more profitable I would guess.

The next generation of games using DX10 will be developers second attempt, these are the games started towards the end of the devcycle on their first game featuring DX10 (projects usually overlap to maximize the utilization of staff, towards the end the bulk of programmers stay on the first project, while the bulk of the graphics people are moved to the next project)
By how they got the feel of the API and can start building some features into the engine from the start.
But these will still prolly not be "DX10 games" as such.

Weīve pretty recently started seing games that are "DX9", ie they were built ground up for DX9 and most of them were given DX8 fallbacks, to maximize the potential marketplatform by including everyone who is still not on DX9 (or in some cases SM3.0) hardware.

games built DX10 from the start, and then given DX9 fallbacks arent going to be around for a while, or so I would guess, you never know.

I bet 99% of members on this board over-look this post. Ignorance really must be bliss. :rolleyes:

To clarify, great post jolle, I agree 100%. :D
Thanks.

nutcrackr
11-14-07, 03:26 PM
Doesn't this overlook one fact? Dx9 is a much bigger leap over Dx8 than Dx10 is over Dx9?

SH64
11-14-07, 03:32 PM
DX9 brought some features that DX8 couldnt do so the performance hit is justified.

Redeemed
11-14-07, 03:36 PM
DX9 brought some features that DX8 couldnt do so the performance hit is justified.

So you can make use of ATi's tesselator on the HD2k series, and the geometry shader found on the GF 8 series and HD2k series, using the DX9 path? That's news to me...

But in a round about way you are correct. DX10 was never about feature that improved visuals drasticaly, it was more about eliminating over head. And when we see a "from the ground up" DX10 title we'll see more of the benefits from that eliminated overhead.

ASUSEN7900GTX
11-14-07, 03:42 PM
ok so Crysis might or might not take the full advantage of DX10?

or do we need to see the next Crytek project before we see what DX10 really do i have seen some screens of DX10 and sometimes it looks like more than DX9 but not that wow effect as i understood, it isnīt what DX10 is about so DX9 vs DX10 isnīt that big?

jolle
11-14-07, 03:57 PM
Doesn't this overlook one fact? Dx9 is a much bigger leap over Dx8 than Dx10 is over Dx9?
You can compare the different Shader models here on this table:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shader_Model_4
Then there are some other changes and improvement next to that aswell.