View Full Version : DX9.0c (Rip for XP only)
05-20-04, 02:49 PM
I'm hoping there's someone out there with a 6800u that will test this and let us know if there's any performance or even visual changes when running FarCry and UT2004 with latest patch (and ini edited for DX9 renderer).
I can do that tonight. I have both games.
What EXACTLY do you want to know?
general performance comparison, image quality, and stability
You should know, this is not the final version of DX9.0c runtimes. MS only recently hit beta3 with the DX9.0c SDK. Testing now would be a waste of time with these beta versions. Wait for SP2 final which should ship with the final DX9.0c.
Before anyone asks, I know in dxdiag, it says Final Retail, but this is not the final version.
i dont think any of us plan to pass judgement on nv40 based on this beta, i would just like to know to satisfy my own curiosity since hes offering.
05-20-04, 03:39 PM
Is this Far Cry 1.1 patch enough to support the nv40 properly along with this dx9c beta?
i dont think so, 1.2 will do that if i am correct
I doubt you'll get any of the advanced effects we saw at E3 with the current version of FarCry.
the 1.2 patch won't add SM3.0 support, this patch comes separately at a later date... most probably when the RTM build of DX9.0c is available.
Yes I believe CryTek said they would release the Mod in June... Strange thing though, the demo I played on at E3 was a completely different level than any in the game. Maybe they are shipping new levels as well?
Earlier that day I saw someone playing FarCry on the "Boat" level with SM3.0 though....
05-21-04, 05:47 AM
I didn't realise that FarCry didn't have SM 3 support yet.
With the latest UT2004 patch there would seem to be SM 3 support, looking at the driver code there's vs_3_sw vs_3_0 vs_2_x vs_2_sw vs_2_0 vs_1_1 vs_1_0 vs.3.sw vs.3.0 vs.2.x vs.2.sw vs.2.0 vs.1.1 vs.1.0 vs tx_1_0 tx ps_3_sw ps_3_0 ps_2_x ps_2_sw ps_2_0 ps_1_4 ps_1_3 ps_1_2 ps_1_1 ps_1_0 ps.3.sw ps.3.0 ps.2.x ps.2.sw ps.2.0 ps.1.4 ps.1.3 ps.1.2 ps.1.1 ps.1.0.
I'm using a 9800Pro just now and changing from D3D to D3D9 renderer has absolutely no difference whatsoever (I believe ppl who claim otherwise probably didnt duplicate the ini settings).
I appreciate that both D3D9 renderer and Dx9.0c are betas so it may not come to anything but you never know eh!
well, actually FarCry 1.1 has SM3.0 support but those shaders have not yet been implemented in any level so the game even with the 1.1 patch, DX9.0c and a GF6800 will not offer anything new. You have to wait for CryTek actually releasing some SM3.0 content before seeing SM3.0 in action.
As for UT2004, till now no SM3.0 support has been announced at all so I wouldn't expect it any time soon.
05-22-04, 09:52 AM
I have 9.0c installed - sadly dont have the 6800 to go with it yet.
still the good news is I have no issues at all with image quailty in FarCry using the new 60.85 WHQL drivers on a 5900 on DX 9.0c. all fog bugs are gone and performance is on par with what I'd expect (Benches @ 44.83FPS using benchemall @ maximum settings).
I installed it yesterday..no effect on 3dMark2k3 w/the 6800. Haven't tried Far Cry, though.
05-24-04, 06:27 AM
I read on B3D that 3Dmark03 won't be supporting SM 3 (shame if true) so that just leaves UT2004 right now.
Provided you have installed the latest patch Just edit the unreal.ini from this:
(and make sure your ini renderer settings are the same)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.