Which DirectX Version is used for that game?
snooops
Germany Join Date: 2008-12-08 Member: 65702Members, Reinforced - Shadow
Germany Join Date: 2008-12-08 Member: 65702Members, Reinforced - Shadow
Hi,
i read this thread <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=109160" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...howtopic=109160</a> and i realised that the game is using DirectX 9 is that true? I mean, we are at 11 now ...
Ok maybe not everything of 10 or 11 is usefull for NS2 but i think some stuff would be nice. Highe Res Textures, more shading power ...
What do you guys think?
i read this thread <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=109160" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...howtopic=109160</a> and i realised that the game is using DirectX 9 is that true? I mean, we are at 11 now ...
Ok maybe not everything of 10 or 11 is usefull for NS2 but i think some stuff would be nice. Highe Res Textures, more shading power ...
What do you guys think?
Comments
So no, bad idea.
In short more gamers have Dx 9 capable machines than Dx 11 , or even Dx 10.
In short more gamers have Dx 9 capable machines than Dx 11 , or even Dx 10.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
At this moment, it uses DX9 SM 2.0, not even 3.0 :( , and still the system requeriments are too high if we look at the engine test recently released.
We're not, it's been stated many many times already that the engine is still going through optimization.
Dx9 looks almost the same as 11 anyway, tesselation is a barely noticeable gimmick.
Same thing with the new avp, I don't see any higher res textures going from 9 to 11.
Differences that you can't see without a magnifying glass and patience aren't worth a massive performance hit.
My understanding was that tesselation *could* look amazing, if the engine/modeler/developer/somebody bothered to add enough supporting data to make it work. See for example the Unigine Heaven benchmark (screenshots halfway through this article at HardOCP: <a href="http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/11/06/unigine_heaven_benchmark_dx11_tessellation)" target="_blank">http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/11/06/...1_tessellation)</a>.
The problem seems to be that DX11 still isn't very widespread, so developers can't be bothered to do all that extra work for a visual effect that only a tiny portion of their audience will see. But since developers don't bother making use of tesselation, gamers don't bother buying cards that will support it, and the cycle continues.
Ordinarily DX11 would spread faster as people just bought new cards for speed's sake, except the first generation of DX11 cards is barely any faster than last gen's DX10 cards, so gamers aren't motivated there either. So I wouldn't expect to see much tesselation til the next round of DX11 cards can offer a significant speed upgrade that gets gamers to buy them; once gamers buy them, developers will spend time implementing the tesselation, making more gamers want to buy the cards, and it'll take off. It's just going to take awhile.
The problem seems to be that DX11 still isn't very widespread, so developers can't be bothered to do all that extra work for a visual effect that only a tiny portion of their audience will see. But since developers don't bother making use of tesselation, gamers don't bother buying cards that will support it, and the cycle continues.
Ordinarily DX11 would spread faster as people just bought new cards for speed's sake, except the first generation of DX11 cards is barely any faster than last gen's DX10 cards, so gamers aren't motivated there either. So I wouldn't expect to see much tesselation til the next round of DX11 cards can offer a significant speed upgrade that gets gamers to buy them; once gamers buy them, developers will spend time implementing the tesselation, making more gamers want to buy the cards, and it'll take off. It's just going to take awhile.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1) Tesselation requires huge GPU power, and thus isn't here yet (drop from 60 to 30 fps on my $500 card? no thank you!)
2) Not enough games use tesselation yet anyways
So.... yeah. No need for NS2.
Basically, everything beyond DX9.0c have been adding very GPU intensive gimmicks that don't always provide extra flavor. More shaders? Parallax? Meh. And since not everyone have made the jump to higher GPU cards nor beyond WindowsXP, you're cutting off your market by jumping to the higher DirectX.
And since NS2 doesn't seem to require any of these gimmicks (and is primarily a multi-player game, not an eye candy game), no need.
No, SOME of us are at 11. I recently upgraded to 11, but I don't expect everyone else to. There's nothing wrong with 9 and no reason to leave people out in the rain for minorities like us.
<!--quoteo(post=1768327:date=Apr 22 2010, 03:28 PM:name=Hashashin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Hashashin @ Apr 22 2010, 03:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1768327"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Dx9 looks almost the same as 11 anyway, tesselation is a barely noticeable gimmick.
Same thing with the new avp, I don't see any higher res textures going from 9 to 11.
Differences that you can't see without a magnifying glass and patience aren't worth a massive performance hit.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's true and also totally false. You're right about those games. I believe AVP only uses tessellation on the alien model. Look up the Heaven benchmark tool. That really shows off tessellation and it is <i>very</i> cool. There's no games that are currently using it as well as they could which is too bad.
That's true and also totally false. You're right about those games. I believe AVP only uses tessellation on the alien model. Look up the Heaven benchmark tool. That really shows off tessellation and it is <i>very</i> cool. There's no games that are currently using it as well as they could which is too bad.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, there are real points in adding dx11 to NS2.
"Multi-Threading – The ability to scale across multi-core CPUs will enable developers to take greater advantage of the power within multi-core CPUs. This results in faster framerates for games, while still supporting the increased visual detailing.
DirectCompute – Developers can utilize the power of discrete graphics cards to accelerate both gaming and non-gaming applications. This improves graphics, while also enabling players to accelerate everyday tasks, like video editing, on their Windows 7 PC." -from the <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/games/en-US/aboutGFW/pages/directx.aspx" target="_blank">microsoft page</a>
AvP runs noticeably better at times on dx11, with the same settings as it does on dx9, on my computer (I don't have tesselation).
So, although we may not all have cards that are dx11 ready, we can get something out of it.
Might be worth it considering a lot of us have dx10 ready cards.
Multi-core support and GPU computing are not, and never were, DX10/11-exclusive features. As was said a hundred times before, there is no notable improvement in translating the game to DX10/11 right now, and all but huge losses.
It might be a possibility in the future though.
Wait, you mean CUDA doesn't exist and doesn't require DX10/11????? I never knew that!!!!
Also, DX is a graphic driver. It has zero bearing on how many CPU's you get to use.
Draco's right, read up on your facts. Take a real programming/graphic architecture class.
The difference is tessellation constructs actual geometry based on what is already there, adding geometric (think wiremesh) complexity. It gives more load to the geometry engine and the texture engine (and consequently the entire graphic pipeline).
Parallax is something added to the texture. It basically alters how the texture looks depending on your viewing angle, which gives the illusion of depth on the surface. It gives more load to the texture engine, and typically only the texture engine.
Tessellation, since it adds more geometry and thus also maps more textures to cover that geometry, will put a greater load on your graphics card.
Both tessellation and parallax mapping create actual geometry, the same triangles the models are made out of. Tessellation is much faster, efficient, and more versatile, whereas parallax mapping is generally... Crap. In fact it can't be used as a method of geometry compression for most surfaces - like normal mapping or tessellation are - at all.
The way either of those are preferable to plain geometry is memory requirement (much lower), and performance hit associated with rapidly accessing it.
DirectX 11 does nothing lol. Oh great the shadows are just slightly smoother :( not much of a difference..
????
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax_mapping" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax_mapping</a>
Pretty sure Parallax is purely texture work, i.e. "virtual" displacements.
In short more gamers have Dx 9 capable machines than Dx 11 , or even Dx 10.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually... at least on steam, there are more DX10 capable machines than DX9 only ones:
<a href="http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/" target="_blank">http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/</a>
Suprised me too, but Win7 really helped to push DX10. Before that everybody had DX10 hardware but only DX9 OS because nobody liked Vista. Win 7 helped with that...
So computers able to run DX10 are not that rare anymore..
Also, DX is a graphic driver. It has zero bearing on how many CPU's you get to use.
Draco's right, read up on your facts. Take a real programming/graphic architecture class.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good idea, I'll go take a class in a field I'm not remotely interested in. Never said anything about cpus, maybe they mean gpu cores. I just know dx11 runs a lot better in avp then dx9 does. I'd check the difference in metro2033 too, but honestly I don't care enough and getting into an argument with a fanboy is always a bad idea.
I foresee a huge spike in Mac gaming forthcoming.
It'll be ported to OGL eventually, as part of Mac/Linus support, post-release. Otherwise, DirectX is the de-facto graphical platform to use.
<!--quoteo(post=1768700:date=Apr 26 2010, 12:36 AM:name=qwiggalo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (qwiggalo @ Apr 26 2010, 12:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1768700"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I foresee a huge spike in Mac gaming forthcoming.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
lulz.
Dirt 2 uses dx11 but not for everything(vista and 7 as stated above with compliant card), mostly for cloth (like flags and banners) and asthetics(crowds,trees,backdrops). I see no difference between the two when drifting through the water at 60MPH as a splash is a splash when your Sphincter is so tight you couldn't pull a pin out of it with a tractor because that wall is comming fast and you are only holding 1st by .001 seconds.
Anyways--- <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDFszGI3FwQ" target="_blank">watch DX11 Tesselation and crowd tesselated video</a>
And also a very ironic one. No single feature in Crysis is exclusive to DX10, and all locked ones can be enabled under WinXP with a simple config edit.
It's not that DX10/11 aren't better or don't offer more stuff to play with, it's just that it isn't used right now, it's simply not worth it to either developers or consumers: cutting support to least generously 60% user-base and investing a ton of work in either of them bears zero benefit and huge losses.
More to the point, NS2 has few uses for any such things.
<!--quoteo(post=1768789:date=Apr 27 2010, 01:14 AM:name=ssjyoda)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ssjyoda @ Apr 27 2010, 01:14 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1768789"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->...crysis... actually play it, dont look at screens or videos.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Also, lol.
Also, DX is a graphic driver. It has zero bearing on how many CPU's you get to use.
Draco's right, read up on your facts. Take a real programming/graphic architecture class.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
ACTUALLY, DirectX is not exactly a graphic driver, it's everything. Direct3D is the graphic driver of DirectX. DirectX actually does go into CPU calculations, as well as keyboard and mouse, hard drive, network, printers and more.
A collection of drivers presented by a corporate entity which can withhold technological advancements in order to sell more units of product and has no obligation to improve the overall system due to lack of competition.
Good god we're stupid.
I conqure. LoL....the ability to express arguments over techno sofware extacy just because my number is bigger than yours, hmmmm, sounds like a drunkin' argument at a uranal.
Just remember the good 'ol days when frogger was just a pixilated "X" after being run over by a truck, or am i that old that no one has heard of frogger?