Directx 9 and 3D-Mark 2001SE

[lindberg]

What is wrong with this equation?
I installed DX9 (the redistribute vers.) and thought that now was a good time take a new 3D-Mark benchmark with 2001SE.
But when I started 3D-Mark 2001SE didn't load, instead i complained that it needs DX8.1 in order to run, DOH!

I have never seen this behaviour before, also tried 3D-Mark 2000 but it started ok.

Anybody run 2001SE with DX9 or know how to solve this?

[Marshmallowman]

yes, get the latest build. , or get the patch to update to the latest build.....

[lindberg]

Yep, I'll try. Had already downloaded it. It will be exciting to see if I'll pass the whole 3D test without being thrown out to the desktop. Man, I like Ati-drivers...

I hate installing and driver updating, rebooting and testing. It all at some point crashes and the sum is that I use all my spare time waiting for windows to boot. I HATE YOU BILL!

[Guru]

Others have had the same prob have a look it the 3dmark forums for the fix!

[Gurm]

You know, you'd think that programmers would have worked around this sort of stupidity by now?

This has been going on FOREVER.

"You need DirectX 2 to run this software. You don't have DirectX 2, so we're installing it now..."

AAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!

- Gurm

[Novdid]

Hello Gurm.

[lindberg]

the newest build of 2002SE worked just fine.

[rubank]

Or you can just change the version number in the registry @
HKLM\software\microsoft\directx
to 4.08.01.0881.

rubank

[Gurm]

Rubank:

Problem is, that then you fail MS's internal DX9 diagnostics... and programs that require DX9 will try to install it (not that there ARE any yet, but hey)!

- Gurm

[Drizzt]

I've found this error a few times...

Simply, if for example the program need DX 7, the "skilled" programmer write a code like this:
IF DXVersion = 7 then
EverythingIsFine
else
MissingDirectX



Now, imagine what the above code does when you have a versione above the required?

[rubank]

Originally posted by Gurm
Rubank:

Problem is, that then you fail MS's internal DX9 diagnostics...

- Gurm

Well, I haven´t noticed anything of that. When I run dxdiag.exe everything is the same, save for the version number.

By the time there´ll be dx9 games, I suppose there will also be a new version of 3DMark, and it´s just as easy to reverse

rubank

[Technoid]

Originally posted by Drizzt
I've found this error a few times...

Simply, if for example the program need DX 7, the "skilled" programmer write a code like this:
IF DXVersion = 7 then
EverythingIsFine
else
MissingDirectX



Now, imagine what the above code does when you have a versione above the required?

Also come upon that geniality in lazy programming!

I'ts irritating as ****

[knirfie]

Originally posted by Gurm
You know, you'd think that programmers would have worked around this sort of stupidity by now?

This has been going on FOREVER.

"You need DirectX 2 to run this software. You don't have DirectX 2, so we're installing it now..."

AAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!

- Gurm

DirectX 2? did that exist? The first time I updated as far as I can remember was to version 4.1 or something like that. though i still wish i had never heard of it.

[Byock]

No, IIRC Diablo Installed Direct X 3.0.

[Wombat]

DirectX sucked major ass, and DX2 wasn't much better. DX3 was the first time programmers could say, "This still makes me want to vomit, but I can swallow and use it." DX4 was never released. DX5 might have been called "decent" by some.