DirectX 8 optimized drivers - when?

[Surfwienix]

when does matrox release new drivers, optimized for directx 8 ?

and do you think there will be a performance gain for a good old g400 ???

------------------
>> Surfwienix <<

My System:

AMD K6-2/400 non-o/c
Epox MVP3C-M Super7 (VIA 4.24)
128MB SDRAM(PC100), CAS2
Matrox Millennium G400 MAX
(Driver Package 6.10.013 + DX 8) AGP2x/256MB @IRQ11(not sharing) non-o/c
Terratec DMX Sound-System
20,4GB Maxtor HDD (UDMA33)
6,4GB Maxtor HDD (UDMA33)
ASUS 50x-CDROM (UDMA33)
Realtek 8019 Ethernet (ISA)
Creatix HAM V.90 Modem
19" Monitor CTX-VL950T (95khz)
21" HP A4033A (2nd Display)
Windows 98SE (IE 5.5)

[DGhost]

not being one of the beta boyz i can't say anything for sure... as far as the performance gains go, its possible, but i dunno. under windows 2000 i would bet definatly, to some extent, but thats cause DX7 for W2k really really sucked. under Win9x, i would not hold expectations too high, but its still possible.

[PR-man]

Well DX8 final fixed ALOT of win2ks AGP problems hence now my 3dmark2000 score in Win2k pro is EXACTLY what it was in Win98

------------------
Celeron II 566@ 952 on a Abit BE6 Rev 1, 128 Pc100, Matrox G450 32 DH, SBlive Value, Supra Express 56i ISA, all running on Win98FE with other odds and ends

[Greebe]

Isn't that odd PR? If it benches the same in either OS, why do all games run slower in Win2K compared to Win98?

[Gurm]

Greebe,

Games don't run noticeably slower for me in Win2k. Of course, that might have something to do with setting ALL my non-game processes to affinity 1, while the game runs affinity 0. *shrug*

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[DentyCracker]

I use a customized .mpr file for both winme and win2k. In win2k I don't get certain display modes to work with DX apps as win2k has determined that my monitor can't do these modes. However I_know_that_my_monitor_can_do_these_modes as it does them in win9x. How can I get win2k to acknowledge that my monitor can do these modes (refresh rates and fitting the picture to the screen so that when I change modes the screen does not shift sort of thing). I have to choose a windows monitor type that sucks or 3DMark as well as games tell me I cannot run the default benchmarks and all I can choose from are 320x200 and 1280x1024.
DX8 has not changed this behaviour. Perhaps this post belongs in the PowerDesk forum but .....

[Rags]

Hi Denty,

Simple question deserves a simple answer:

Select a windows monitor in display properties, make sure dualhead is disabled, exit display properties, go back to display properties/advanced/monitor settings. Now, click on adjust a different display mode, and adjust each display mode that you wish to play in games, and save it to your windows settings each time it asks. Works like a charm for me.

Rags

[atko]

Surfwienix: answer for your question: I don't think that it is necessary to release any kind of DX8 compatible driver for good old G400... Why? One of my friend is programming DX and OGL. Last week he downloaded the software development kit for DX8 and he said to me, that this DX8 is very interesting, because it is a DX7 which is extended by some (he means: a lot) new functions. I think it is not a surprise for you, but the way they (M$) included these new cunctions is interesting: there are a DX7 compatible .h file and there are a differnet file which conatins the DX8 functions... It is not so easy but the main point of this DX8 thing is that... So good old DX7 comaptible drivers must to be totaly compatible with DX8.


There is an interesting thing (for me): Matrox chips have got a very good and porgrammable core. I don't know whether the pixel shader is porgrammable or not, but if it is programmable, then DX8 compatible drivers will give us a lot of new visual effects... Is there anybody who knows anything about the pixel shader of G400???

[Nuno]

Yep. Next G400 drivers will be Dx8 compliant and will enable pixel shaders, T&L, Vertex skinning, cube environnement mapping and dot product bump mapping, along with a 250% boost in speed.

C´mon, get real. Even the touted Nvidia pixel shader stuff is done in software, just like anti-aliasing. You just need a huge fillrate to do it, and the G-fart2 has it.

[Surfwienix]

you're right. this is obviously a fill rate problem.

the g400 is 99% at its limit, there won't be any speed gains.

time for g800 (often said but true)

[PR-man]

Yeah Greebe that is true, guess thats why we shouldnt consider 3dmark2000 a real world gaming benchmark

------------------
Celeron II 566@ 952 on a Abit BE6 Rev 1, 128 Pc100, Matrox G450 32 DH, SBlive Value, Supra Express 56i ISA, all running on Win98FE with other odds and ends