Simviation Forum - FSX-SP2(DX10): 3rd public post

	Search the archive:

Simviation Main Site | Site Search | Upload Images

Simviation Forum › Current Flight Simulator Series › Flight Simulator X › FSX-SP2(DX10): 3rd public post

(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2

Send Topic

Print

FSX-SP2(DX10): 3rd public post (Read 3580 times)

Aug 8^th, 2007 at 8:22pm

PhilTaylor Offline
Colonel
I Fly FSX!
Redmond, WA

Gender:
Posts: 60

I just posted another of my periodic updates on FSX progress with the DX10 update, here. http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007/08/08/fsx-dx10-3rd-progress-report-ju...

I think you will find the progress interesting, and the results of the "DX10 looking like DX9" screenshots very interesting. At least I hope so

.

http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor&&Lead PM, Core Platform&&Aces Studio, MGS

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 12:15am

Nick N Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

Links are working now!

DX10 http://blogs.msdn.com/photos/phil_taylor/images/4303235/original.aspx

DX9 http://blogs.msdn.com/photos/phil_taylor/images/4298280/original.aspx

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 12:17am

Nick N Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

macca22au wrote on Aug 8^th, 2007 at 9:00pm:

Thanks to both Phil and NickN for this update thread - and with its very exciting news of developments soon to come.

I am one of those, using Matrox triplehead 2 go, in Vista, with 4 gigs of RAM who just can't seem to get the out of memory problem fixed even applying the solution posted by Phil. So if Windows is going to start the curative process soon then it will be a great blessing - or at least it will stop much cussing.

I look forward to your post-vacation report on the evolution of the SP2 DX 10 patch. And it is good news that you are fixing a number of other features as well.

PS way downunder in Australia the same two links in your blog are broken.

I think you wont have much longer to wait macca

Phil suggested OS updates are coming the end of this month which should help fix your problem and SP2 will address the rest

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 12:25am

Nick N Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

PhilTaylor wrote on Aug 8^th, 2007 at 8:22pm:

I just posted another of my periodic updates on FSX progress with the DX10 update, here. http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007/08/08/fsx-dx10-3rd-progress-report-ju...

I think you will find the progress interesting, and the results of the "DX10 looking like DX9" screenshots very interesting. At least I hope so

.

Great news on the perf Phil, especially since that is without any optimizations

4 frames in FSX under the same scenery/conditions is actually a good boost and once opt’s are implemented, it would appear the big scare about DX10 being worse than DX9 on perf may be put to rest.

Just dont load somewhere else down because you have more to work with! Grin

Grin

just kidding!

I look forward to hearing the features report!

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 8:17am

|Alex| Ex Member

Sorry if I'm being stupid.

But I see NO difference in the two pictures.

So much for the Artists impressions of DX10, with wave crests and more realistic everything, or was that a spoof?

I was hoping that I might upgrade my rig and move the FSX after the DX10 patch had been made, but I was pinning the idea of that on the basis that it would look even slightly better than FSX does at the moment.

If the only differences between the two is a performance increase. I hardly think that is work the money it would take to buy a DX10 card.

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 12:11pm

PhilTaylor Offline
Colonel
I Fly FSX!
Redmond, WA

Gender:
Posts: 60

Quote:

Sorry if I'm being stupid.

But I see NO difference in the two pictures.

So much for the Artists impressions of DX10, with wave crests and more realistic everything, or was that a spoof?

I was hoping that I might upgrade my rig and move the FSX after the DX10 patch had been made, but I was pinning the idea of that on the basis that it would look even slightly better than FSX does at the moment.

If the only differences between the two is a performance increase. I hardly think that is work the money it would take to buy a DX10 card.

Alex, did you take the time to read the post and think about it?

Read this again

That is the only difference you should see! Being done with the 3rd milestone, "DX10 looking like DX9", means all DX9 rendering features are now operational in the DX10 pipeline and look identical. That means the engine is fully flyable in DX10, but no new features are enabled.

there is supposed to be no difference in those shots, as they mark the completion of the "get all DX9 features working" phase. I even mentioned all 4 phases of the project to set context. In this post and the previous one. The 4th and final phase is "DX10 features" and I clearly say we are not done with that yet.

Is it clear now?

http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor&&Lead PM, Core Platform&&Aces Studio, MGS

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 12:28pm

Nick N Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

I think many people are expecting to see some type of miracle visual improvement during a development phase.

The artist rendition images for FSX posted last year and other titles currently being developed in DX10 will tend to raise the bar on what is expected.

As Phil stated, this is a work in progress.

What is being shown is an accomplishment in the production schedule.

Because the team now has DX9 and DX10 looking exactly the same, and, the fact people are complaining about how much the images look the same, proves that milestone has been achieved.

Given the performance has increased in equal rendered environments without any optimizations in place also makes a statement to the rumors floating around that DX10 is worse than DX9 when it comes to performance.

There is still much to do, all the way up through DX10.1, for which you will need DX10.1 hardware to access, and I am assuming those features will also be coded into FSX as well.

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 12:44pm

Fly2e Offline
Global Moderator
It's 5 O'clock Somewhere!
KFRG

Gender:
Posts: 199132

Quote:

Posted by: Nick N Posted on: Today at 12:28pm

I think many people are expecting to see some type of miracle visual improvement during a development phase.

The artist rendition images for FSX posted last year and other titles currently being developed in DX10 will tend to raise the bar on what is expected.

As Phil stated, this is a work in progress.

What is being shown is an accomplishment in the production schedule.

Because the team now has DX9 and DX10 looking exactly the same, and, the fact people are complaining about how much the images look the same, proves that milestone has been achieved.

Agreed Nick.
I think like you said people were expecting to see a side by side comparison that showed us the difference between DX9 and DX10 and what they are seeing is the same thing...... which is what Phil is saying.
This is a great accomplishment and as Phil said,
Quote:

That is the only difference you should see! Being done with the 3rd milestone, "DX10 looking like DX9", means all DX9 rendering features are now operational in the DX10 pipeline and look identical. That means the engine is fully flyable in DX10, but no new features are enabled.

Great to see all this happening and your updates are very much appreciated Phil!
Thanks again!

Dave

Intel Core i7 Extreme Processor 965, 4.2GHz/8MB L3 Cache, Asus P6T Deluxe V2 Intel X58 Chipset Cross
Fire & SLI Supported, Mushkin Redline 6GB (3X2GB) Memory, eVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285, Vista 64.

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 1:43pm

|Alex| Ex Member

PhilTaylor wrote on Aug 9^th, 2007 at 12:11pm:

Quote:

Sorry if I'm being stupid.

But I see NO difference in the two pictures.

So much for the Artists impressions of DX10, with wave crests and more realistic everything, or was that a spoof?

I was hoping that I might upgrade my rig and move the FSX after the DX10 patch had been made, but I was pinning the idea of that on the basis that it would look even slightly better than FSX does at the moment.

If the only differences between the two is a performance increase. I hardly think that is work the money it would take to buy a DX10 card.

Alex, did you take the time to read the post and think about it?

Read this again

That is the only difference you should see! Being done with the 3rd milestone, "DX10 looking like DX9", means all DX9 rendering features are now operational in the DX10 pipeline and look identical. That means the engine is fully flyable in DX10, but no new features are enabled.

there is supposed to be no difference in those shots, as they mark the completion of the "get all DX9 features working" phase. I even mentioned all 4 phases of the project to set context. In this post and the previous one. The 4th and final phase is "DX10 features" and I clearly say we are not done with that yet.

Is it clear now?

Ahh, now I get you...

Sorry! Embarrassed

Embarrassed

IP Logged

Reply #9 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 1:57pm

MOUSY Offline
Colonel
The artist formerly known
as: Mouse Ace
Commonwealth of Dominica

Gender:
Posts: 2117

I found one difference. The DX9 render has more trees than the DX10. Does this mean anything and might there be any reason for that? Is it just because they're randomly generated that one may have more than the other? I was just scrutinizing the pics when I noticed this. I know autogen is just that - automatically generated - but might that slight difference contribute to part of the 4fps difference? (I know, certainly not all of it.)

So far, things are looking mighty good for the SP2. Everybody could use (and love) an FPS gain. Cool

Cool

Thanks for the update Phil.

Check out my PAYWARE quality, FREEWARE release of DominicaX.

HP HDX 16 | Centrino2 2.26Ghz | 4GB DDR2 | Nvidia GT130 1GB DDR2 | 500GB HDD

IP Logged

Reply #10 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 2:16pm

Nick N Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

Quote:

I found one difference. The DX9 render has more trees than the DX10. Does this mean anything and might there be any reason for that? Is it just because they're randomly generated that one may have more than the other? I was just scrutinizing the pics when I noticed this. I know autogen is just that - automatically generated - but might that slight difference contribute to part of the 4fps difference? (I know, certainly not all of it.)

So far, things are looking mighty good for the SP2. Everybody could use (and love) an FPS gain. Cool

Cool

Thanks for the update Phil.

I am at a loss to understand how you can count trees in those images and make any type of assessment that the amount of trees is reduced enough to even make a difference.

4 frames in FSX is like 6-10 in FS9 as far as I have seen in the way this title works.

Removal of all the trees in FSX SP1 gives me about 3-5 so the assumption that perhaps a few trees may be missing is making a 4 frame difference in the two images presented makes no sense.

Even if they are reduced in number, which again, I cant count a tree number even enlarging those images up 150%+. As far as I can see they are the same or close enough in count to where there could not be any skew of the results.

Let’s not forget, the DX10 optimizers still to come -are not present at all- in this presentation and that the milestone which has now been crossed is in the fact that FSX now runs flyable with the same visuals DX9 produces in DX10 now.

The next step is to go beyond what has been accomplished and to address features which will be discussed in September as they are better defined.

IP Logged

Reply #11 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 4:07pm

Ravang Ex Member

Gender:

So does this mean I'll need to buy a DXT10 card or can I still use my DXT9 card with the update Huh

Huh

IP Logged

Reply #12 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 4:25pm

Nick N Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

Ravang wrote on Aug 9^th, 2007 at 4:07pm:

So does this mean I'll need to buy a DXT10 card or can I still use my DXT9 card with the update Huh

Huh

Phil is better suited to answer this and can correct me if I am wrong, however in order to use DX10 and have its advantages you must have the following:

1. Windows Vista, which comes with DX10-10.1
2. A DX10 video card. Current cards are DX10, newer card cores will have DX10.1 ability

If you have a DX9 card you will still be flying fine but will not see or have any of the advantages DX10.x provides.

Unless I am mistaken, that’s how it works. I do not think installing SP2 when you have a DX9 card will make any difference. As I recall, with a DX9 card under VISTA you will be using DX9L. Again, I may be wrong as it has been some time since I looked into it.

Since there is a shift to this update being SP2 and not just DX10, there will be elements which will address more than just upgrading the graphics engine and those, I believe, you will be able to take advantage of in both rendering formats.

IP Logged

Reply #13 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 4:28pm

JBaymore Offline
Global Moderator
Under the curse of the
hombuilt cockpit!

Gender:
Posts: 10261

PhilTaylor wrote on Aug 9^th, 2007 at 12:11pm:

Alex, did you take the time to read the post and think about it?

Read this again

Phil,

Thanks for taking the time to clarify that for folks.

I think the real issue is that while a lot of folks spend a lot of time USING computers...... they really don't understand what goes into the PROGRAMMING of computers ... and the complicated series of events, both technical as well as planning and scheduling, it takes to bring an app to completion. Particularly at the OS type level.

I think a lot of people just seem to think this stuff somehow magically appears out of some "development tool" that does 99 percent of the real work. Wink

Wink

Sort of like using "EZScenery". Grin

Grin

(Aren't you guys just using EazyDX 2.0?)

And reading these days is a skill that often is overlooked.

Thanks again,

.................john

Intel i7 960 quad 3.2G LGA 1366, Asus P6X58D Premium, 750W Corsair, 6 gig 1600 DDR3, Spinpoint 1TB 7200 HD, Caviar 500G 7200 HD, GTX275 1280M, Logitec Z640, Win7 Pro 64b, CH Products yoke, pedals + throttle quad, simpit

IP Logged

Reply #14 - Aug 9^th, 2007 at 4:53pm

MOUSY Offline
Colonel
The artist formerly known
as: Mouse Ace
Commonwealth of Dominica

Gender:
Posts: 2117

Nick N wrote on Aug 9^th, 2007 at 2:16pm:

I am at a loss to understand how you can count trees in those images and make any type of assessment that the amount of trees is reduced enough to even make a difference.

4 frames in FSX is like 6-10 in FS9 as far as I have seen in the way this title works.

Removal of all the trees in FSX SP1 gives me about 3-5 so the assumption that perhaps a few trees may be missing is making a 4 frame difference in the two images presented makes no sense.

Even if they are reduced in number, which again, I cant count a tree number even enlarging those images up 150%+. As far as I can see they are the same or close enough in count to where there could not be any skew of the results.

Let’s not forget, the DX10 optimizers still to come -are not present at all- in this presentation and that the milestone which has now been crossed is in the fact that FSX now runs flyable with the same visuals DX9 produces in DX10 now.

The next step is to go beyond what has been accomplished and to address features which will be discussed in September as they are better defined.

I was comparing the pics side by side and i just noticed that the shots are identical except for the autogen. They're not only positioned a bit different but (in my perception) just a bit less in the DX10 one - not by counting, but by an overview of sections. I had no idea how autogen affects frames in the sim so I thought to ask if my observation could possibly be reason for a fraction of the 4 frame gain, not for all of it.

But after you explanation on the effects of trees on your sim, I do agree that the loss of a few trees (present in those pics or not) would be fairly insignificant. Thanks for that clarification. Cool

Cool

I sure am looking forward to what DX10 will add to the sim. The fact already that DX10 is doing everything that 9 does and faster is reason enough to jump for it. Wink

Wink

Check out my PAYWARE quality, FREEWARE release of DominicaX.

HP HDX 16 | Centrino2 2.26Ghz | 4GB DDR2 | Nvidia GT130 1GB DDR2 | 500GB HDD

IP Logged

Pages: 1 2

Send Topic

Print

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Top of this page

Simviation Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5 AE!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge