DirectX 9.0C now available for download

[Shamrock]

the patch was recalled because ATI owners kept getting CTD's when AF is on. Hmm..."Adaptive Algorithm" come to mind? I have seen VERY few problems with NV owners and the new 1.2 patch

 

[RacerX]

Nitromullet,
I installed this version of Dx9c on my other computer (Win2kSp4) and checked it against my computer with WinXpSp2 and both versions are .0904

so to answer your question, no need to update, it's the same build

 

[rbV5]

the patch was recalled because ATI owners kept getting CTD's when AF is on. Hmm..."Adaptive Algorithm" come to mind? I have seen VERY few problems with NV owners and the new 1.2 patch

ATI x800/9600 owners...or ATI owners?

 

[BFG10K]

nVidia should be releasing SM 3.0 WHQL drivers pretty soon so keep an eye out for them.

the patch was recalled because ATI owners kept getting CTD's when AF is on.

What's a CTD?

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: nitromullet

But you want a hacked driver, and a patch thats been recalled? There is currently no offial release of anything that makes use of DX9.0c.

Now that DX9.0c is official, I would assume that we won't have to "hack" our dirvers anymore. nVidia stated that they would come out with drivers that support DX9.0c when DX9.0c was out.

from http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_61.76:

Release Highlights:

* Updated July 20, 2004 9:00 PM PDT: Windows XP / 2000 61.76 is WHQL certified using DirectX 9.0b. The WHQL tests for DirectX 9.0c were not available at this time. When DirectX 9.0c is available, NVIDIA will release drivers to support it.

I would think it will take a little bit to get the WHQL cert, but than the drivers will support DX9.0c out of the box.

I understand that, but as of right now, the only game that will benefit from it, is Farcry. The patch was recalled, but even if it was out, its only a tiny improvement. Not that Im saying more frames is bad, it certainly isnt, but some people get too excited about a new DX thinking it will make all their games faster.

ackmed, i just have to ask...are you an employee of ATI? if there is anything that can even be stretched to be negative about nvidia you are usually the first one there doing it.

my "tiny" increase in many areas is about 20% (or higher) it is enough of an increas ein performance to increase my res.

it is funny you have not mentioned the increase from to "sm2b" is actually smaller overall than the increase nvidia cards get going from sm2 to sm3...

you also always mention "Dont forget NV made the demos for the 1.2 patch, and Im sure they did in such an area where it benefits the most."

well wehere it benfits the most is where lots of shaders are used..so what is your point? you also do not mention nvidia results were independently reproduced as well

 

[Shinei]

BFG10k: CTDs are Crash To Desktop errors, usually accompanied by a "We're sorry, but (program) has caused an error and needs to close...". Though some programs just pfft and you're looking at your desktop without any clue what went wrong.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: nitromullet

But you want a hacked driver, and a patch thats been recalled? There is currently no offial release of anything that makes use of DX9.0c.

Now that DX9.0c is official, I would assume that we won't have to "hack" our dirvers anymore. nVidia stated that they would come out with drivers that support DX9.0c when DX9.0c was out.

from http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_61.76:

Release Highlights:

* Updated July 20, 2004 9:00 PM PDT: Windows XP / 2000 61.76 is WHQL certified using DirectX 9.0b. The WHQL tests for DirectX 9.0c were not available at this time. When DirectX 9.0c is available, NVIDIA will release drivers to support it.

I would think it will take a little bit to get the WHQL cert, but than the drivers will support DX9.0c out of the box.

I understand that, but as of right now, the only game that will benefit from it, is Farcry. The patch was recalled, but even if it was out, its only a tiny improvement. Not that Im saying more frames is bad, it certainly isnt, but some people get too excited about a new DX thinking it will make all their games faster.

ackmed, i just have to ask...are you an employee of ATI? if there is anything that can even be stretched to be negative about nvidia you are usually the first one there doing it.

my "tiny" increase in many areas is about 20% (or higher) it is enough of an increas ein performance to increase my res.

it is funny you have not mentioned the increase from to "sm2b" is actually smaller overall than the increase nvidia cards get going from sm2 to sm3...

you also always mention "Dont forget NV made the demos for the 1.2 patch, and Im sure they did in such an area where it benefits the most."

well wehere it benfits the most is where lots of shaders are used..so what is your point? you also do not mention nvidia results were independently reproduced as well

You need to read again, I didnt say one bad thing about nVidia. I already said the word tiny was the wrong word to use, and in some parts of the game, its pretty large. And in others, its next to zero. The 2.0b increase is about the same as the PS3.0 increase, no idea where you get your data from.

THe only reason I brought up that nVidia made the demos, is because they did them in the best location to benefit from PS3.0. Which also happens to benefit 2.0b. The performance gains from the timedemos, is not the overall percentage increase thru the whole game. As I said, some parts of the game get next to zero faster frames, in other areas it gets more.

The only point I was trying to get at, (which I didnt do very well) was that too many people get too excited about a new DX. Its not going to magically make your system faster, especially with cards that dont support the new features. Too often people post about speed and IQ increases, which most times are not there. Its happened as long as I can remember, I was just trying to say it doesnt work like that.

As usual, Shamrock is in the dark.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: Megatomic
Excellent, thanks man. I was waiting for this. I didn't want to do a hacked install.

But you want a hacked driver, and a patch thats been recalled? There is currently no offial release of anything that makes use of DX9.0c.

Ackmed, this would be a false assumption. Everything that uses DX9 will use DX9c. You are assuming that there are new API calls that make things faster. MS has rolled in fixes, patches, and improvements that will increase performance without anyone releasing a patch or code change.

 

[nitromullet]

The only point I was trying to get at, (which I didnt do very well) was that too many people get too excited about a new DX. Its not going to magically make your system faster, especially with cards that dont support the new features.

Well, I would hope that the only people interested in DX9.0c would be those with NV40 cards. Since your hardware doesn't support the latest features, I can see why you would feel this way... What I don't understand is why someone running hardware that won't even support DX9.0c feels the need to try to diminish it's usefulness to those of us that can benefit from it. It doesn't affect you, why do you care what shader path FarCry runs with on my rig?

Personally, I've been impressed with how FarCry runs on the SM30 beta path. The only real issue I've had has been the inability to load some of my save points. I've finished the game so it's not that big of a deal, I just run FC in devmode under a new profile and load up whatever level I feel like playing.

 

[nitromullet]

The drivers no longer need to be "hacked" to support DX9.0c.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_61.77

Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0c and OpenGL® 1.5 support

 

[Andvari]

"Now that DX9.0c is official, I would assume that we won't have to "hack" our dirvers anymore. nVidia stated that they would come out with drivers that support DX9.0c when DX9.0c was out."

What about ATI's 4.7 Catalyst? Do I have to wait for them to release a 4.8, or will 4.7 support DX9.0c?

 

[nitromullet]

See the post above your's in regards to nVidia drivers. ATi hardware doesn't support DX9.0c, so none of their Cats in the near future will support it.

 

[Andvari]

Ah, appreciate it. I can still install DX9.0c, but it would be pointless then?

 

[nitromullet]

Well, not necessarily. It is quite possible that there are bug fixes and improvements to features that are also supported by DX9.0b. However, you will not be able to use the features that are unique to DX9.0c, such as PS3.0. So, it might not be as big of a deal to you.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
Well, I would hope that the only people interested in DX9.0c would be those with NV40 cards.

Actually, the X800 ATi cards take advantage of DX9.0c as well. It seems as though people think that the R420 is just an "R300 on steroids" and that it has no new features. This is not the case; it supports SM2.0b along with 3DC. SM2.0b on R420 runs pretty much as fast as SM3 does on NV40 in Far Cry from the benchmarks on two websites that I've seen. SM2.0b alows a much higher instruction count for shaders than SM2 does; it's something like ~1500 instructions for R420 and only 96 for R300. NV40 basically has an unlimited instruction count under SM3, but this will never been taken advantage of during its useful lifetime.

To make a long story short, anyone with an X800 or 6800 card can take advantage of DX9.0c, and even the 9700/9800 cards will benefit from Geometry Instancing.

 

[dawks]

Might this help with my Far Cry Problems with my Radeon 7500?

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: DaZ
Might this help with my Far Cry Problems with my Radeon 7500?

Those errors look like they could be caused by overclocking to me.

Another possibility is that you're using a warez version of the game and you're missing texture files.

I have heard of Far Cry texture problems, but only using the 1.2 patch.

The 7500 doesn't take advantage of DX9, let alone DX9.0c.

Why don't you at least try running with Cat4.7? They're the latest.

 

[jrphoenix]

I downloaded the directx 9.0c from Microsoft and installed that with the 61.77 (ps 3.0 supported drivers) from Nvidia (I use 6800 GT).

Far Cry crawled to a hault almost... tried old drivers (61.76) and far cry was still slow.... Directx 9.0c slows down far cry on my system????

Anyone else?

p.s. I used driver cleaner, et... When I installed old direct x (system restore).. everything was quick again???

 

[Marsumane]

Originally posted by: DaZ
Might this help with my Far Cry Problems with my Radeon 7500?

Nice mipmap texture levels on the floor
No, but seriously, is this card overclocked?

 

[dawks]

Originally posted by: Marsumane

Originally posted by: DaZ
Might this help with my Far Cry Problems with my Radeon 7500?

Nice mipmap texture levels on the floor
No, but seriously, is this card overclocked?

Not unless it stays overclocked even after powerstrip is removed and system is rebooted several times.

Just tried with Cat 4.7 and still have the same problem.

Return To Castle Wolfenstein:ET (OpenGL) works fine.
Simcity 4 (DirectX 8) works fine.
FarCry (DirectX 8/9) does not.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: DaZ
Not unless it stays overclocked even after powerstrip is removed and system is rebooted several times.

AFAIK you have to reset the adapter to default clockspeeds BEFORE you uninstall powerstrip and all that or else your clockspeeds will remain overclocked to whatever you had them set to. I'm not 100% sure on that though.

Maybe it's teh warez? The other thing would be that maybe you're trying to enable advanced DX9 features on a DX8 card. I tried running Far Cry on my R8500 and the water looked...well...interesting to say the least. Try running with everything set to minimum and see if that helps.

I'm surprised you can even run Far Cry on a 7500 to be honest; it crawls on my 9700PRO.

 

[dawks]

Could be teh warez, but I got it from some where that severals have, and use it with out issue.

These shots are from the lowest quality settings. I've tried on high quality settings and an assortment of others.

As for the overclock, even if it did not reset (Im sure i put it back) it was only like 5-10mhz overclock. still very safe.