D3D - DX9 - Confusion

[Jhahn2k4]

I was wondering, is Direct3D the same as DX9 graphics? Like, if I select D3D in a game's video options, would the DX9 stuff work?

Thx :rolling:

 

[Maxi]

Depends if that game is Dx9 or 8 or 7.

 

[Jhahn2k4]

DX9 lets say..

 

[mrchimp]

D3D is part of the DX API. D3D is backcompatiple so a DX7 game will work with the DX9 version of D3D, however you won't notice any difference.

 

[The Mullinator]

Direct X is like a software suite that includes things like Direct 3d, direct draw, and other things of that sort. So when you are turning on Direct 3d you are telling the game to use the direct X software suite kind of thing for its rendering purposes.

So whatever version your Direct X is, that will be the version of Direct 3d that the game will run.

So yes if you have Direct X9 then turning on Direct 3d will always cause the game to utilize any direct x9 features (as long as the game supports them).

 

[Jhahn2k4]

Okay, thanks guys

 

[oD1Nz]

So yes if you have Direct X9 then turning on Direct 3d will always cause the game to utilize any direct x9 features (as long as the game supports them).

What happens if it's the other way around? I mean, if I tried force Halo to use Pixel Shader 2 on a Ti4200 (supports only 1.1 and 1.4)? Would the card just use the latest version it could, or would it render the effects, but without the "optimisation" that a card supporting PS 2 would have?

 

[OCybrManO]

What happens if it's the other way around?

You couldn't run the game unless the developers specifically made it so that you have an alternative to using 2.0 (either make 1.4 or 1.1 versions of the same shaders or just leave them out completely).

I mean, if I tried force Halo to use Pixel Shader 2 on a Ti4200 (supports only 1.1 and 1.4)? Would the card just use the latest version it could, or would it render the effects, but without the "optimisation" that a card supporting PS 2 would have?

Halo was made to allow you to use 2.0, 1.4, 1.1, and even cards that only support fixed-function shaders.

 

[psyno]

If it didn't fail loading (and it would, as described above), then you would either end up with massive artifacts, black textures, or the like.

 

[oD1Nz]

So basically, without Direct X 9 or PS 2.0 support, the graphics card would not/could not render the PS 2.0 effects?

 

[dawdler]

So basically, without Direct X 9 or PS 2.0 support, the graphics card would not/could not render the PS 2.0 effects?

That's the point with hardware support
You can *always* emulate it on the CPU of course. But I prefer to play my games at 30+ fps, not 0.200 fps. And yes you would use all those figures, just imagine the difference between 0.200 and 0.240 fps!!! Amazing, 20% faster!

 

[psyno]

Yes...basically...

A responsible developer will provide something to fall back on. Most people don't upgrade their hardware for every new generation; it wouldn't make sense to make a program that only worked on a relatively small fraction of systems.

 

[oD1Nz]

Thanks for clearing that up for me guys .

 

[dawdler]

Yes...basically...

A responsible developer will provide something to fall back on. Most people don't upgrade their hardware for every new generation; it wouldn't make sense to make a program that only worked on a relatively small fraction of systems.

Naw, you do the perfect game: Morrowind.
Equally bad on a Geforce 256 as a 9800 Pro, both can run its pixel shaders, and both of course crash equally much