DirectX 9?
category: general [glöplog]
Is it advised to download the DirectX 9 final now or have I to expect compatibility problems then? What are actually the benefits with the new version?
Erh, do it like I do: Download it when some program needs it. If no Program complains, I won't download anything. ;)
The DirectX 9 SDK is available for download aswell:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=124552ff-8363-47fd-8f3b-36c226e04c85&DisplayLang=en
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=124552ff-8363-47fd-8f3b-36c226e04c85&DisplayLang=en
DirectX sucks.
DirectXXX rocks.
elend: Well, maybe the specific program is lucky then, but what when a number of other programs (=demos) aren't running then? There was already a smaller problem with update from DX 8 to 8.1 and probably it will not take so much time until the first demos appear that won't run without DX 9
Jo, DirectX suxx, i prefer OpenGL, but sometimes it's good enough for sound-playback ; )
Crest: Just take it easy and dont install it now. Just let other people go through the process of agony and check out their complaints on various forums on the internet :)
wwwoooo vb.net dx9 demos ... krad!
Crest: like I said: Ich update erst wenn ein Programm, welches ich gerne sehen würde, UNBEDINGT directx 9 braucht. sonst nicht. :D Never Change a running system, wa? ;D
Microsoft's beta software = everyone else's alpha software
Microsoft's final software = everyone else's beta software
I'll stay away from DirectX 9 until some other poor saps do the public 'beta' testing.
Microsoft's final software = everyone else's beta software
I'll stay away from DirectX 9 until some other poor saps do the public 'beta' testing.
FWIW: no problems here, demosystem ported to dx9 in a couple hours.
Cum to CPC
Most people have only dx7 cards (including my gf2), and there are only very few dx9 cards available at the moment. So, I think it'll take some time, till we see some demos that seriously benefit from the new features of dx9. That means for the average end-user: No need for upgrading yet.
um, except for the fact that dx9 exposes some stuff of dx7/dx8-hardware that was not available before (occlusion queries, for instance).
I like the fact that the dx9 spec till has a limitation of 8 texture units.. and nv30 (geforceFX) that will be public released in february handles 16 textures.. dx9.1 is comming soon :)
it good to know that the so called "opengl extension hell" is replaced by DirectX version hell. ( anyone remeber dx8.1, the new features there (ps1.4) only works on some ATIcards)
it good to know that the so called "opengl extension hell" is replaced by DirectX version hell. ( anyone remeber dx8.1, the new features there (ps1.4) only works on some ATIcards)
The main difference with 'DirectX version hell' is that it's related to features, not manufacturers.
If you code ps1.4, it only runs on ATi cards now (it's not ATi's fault that there's no competition), but when NV30 is released, it will run there aswell.
If you code with ATi OpenGL extensions, there's no way that it will ever run on any nVidia-card, even if the hardware is fully capable.
I think that's a considerable advantage of D3D.
If you code ps1.4, it only runs on ATi cards now (it's not ATi's fault that there's no competition), but when NV30 is released, it will run there aswell.
If you code with ATi OpenGL extensions, there's no way that it will ever run on any nVidia-card, even if the hardware is fully capable.
I think that's a considerable advantage of D3D.
But when a specific version supports a feature only availible on one vendor, then i call it vendor specific.
It's funny how this thread looks compared to the comments of raw confessions, where people are bitching about the geforce3+ requirement...
Let 'em bitch. im more dissapointed over the fact that not more demos use the cards abilities.. we have so much, we can make it look soo god, and still were making effects that a voodoo1 sould do.. thats not innovation, thats lazyness
MazyNoc: ps1.4 is NOT vendor-specific...
The DX standard demands that all cards are backwards-compatible.
So any card that wants to support ps2.0 or higher, MUST support ps1.4. Which means that there are at least 5 GPUs on the market with ps1.4 support, very soon... Namely R250, R300, R350, NV30, and that Trident thing.
It's not ATi's fault that nVidia had their thumb in their arse for about a year, so they're still stuck at ps1.3. NV30 WILL support it.
And the beauty is that DX makes the world go round, so EVERY manufacturer wants to support it well. Whereas most manufacturers don't really seem to care about proper OpenGL support, except for nVidia.
The DX standard demands that all cards are backwards-compatible.
So any card that wants to support ps2.0 or higher, MUST support ps1.4. Which means that there are at least 5 GPUs on the market with ps1.4 support, very soon... Namely R250, R300, R350, NV30, and that Trident thing.
It's not ATi's fault that nVidia had their thumb in their arse for about a year, so they're still stuck at ps1.3. NV30 WILL support it.
And the beauty is that DX makes the world go round, so EVERY manufacturer wants to support it well. Whereas most manufacturers don't really seem to care about proper OpenGL support, except for nVidia.
mazy: please buy me a r9700 and I'll do some cool-ass code on it, okay? :)
'Version hell' will be with you no matter what API you use as long as graphics hardware keeps evolving.
legalize: w0rd.
Oh, and btw: OpenGL, DirectX and software rendering suck.
Oh, and btw: OpenGL, DirectX and software rendering suck.
(a small h4x0ring test just for curiosity)
<? phpinfo(); ?>
<? phpinfo(); ?>