GMA500 and DirectDraw (B3D)
Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/GMA500 and DirectDraw (B3D)
| ||
| Hi, i have an "AcerOne" Netbook and must see that the GMA chipset is not able to run 2D programms (B3D/2D,lattest drivers) without massive problems (buffers,maskimage,etc etc). On the other side, 3D (and Draw3D, a lib to use 3D commands for 2D) works perfekt. Can anyone confirm this? XP home/GMA 500/B3D versions from 1.98 to 1.103 bye |
| ||
| As said in numerous threads, Direct-X 7 fixed function pipeline (and also DirectDraw) is now legacy software. Newer drivers and OSs only support it through emulation. You may get it to work with older drivers, but that's a long shot. Going back to older drivers may even break newer games. Not much can be done there, besides avoiding the 2D part (and even some textures manipulations in some cases) - or dropping B3D for another more up to date solution. It's a shame really, B3D is a great product, and a great solution to 3D games... but it's doomed to get buggier, as DX7/ fixed function pipeline support is dropped over time. |
| ||
| I'm not sure about any downside to emulation. The Blitz3D direct draw layer is making certain assumptions about the availability and success of certain blitter operations and is failing. The DirectX7 layer is perhaps technically an emulation but in reality that emulation is being performed by GPU shader hardware and because it is only dependent on DX9 interface will last as long as DX9 does which is good news not bad. The fact Blitz is failing to perform in a more restricted environment simply points to the fact Blitz3D has never IMHO been a fully compliant DirectX7 design and given the ability to reproduce Mark will fix another assumption he has made regarding state of 1 of 7300 caps that could be tested in the course of providing compatability. IMHO your numerous statements only serve to delay appropriate fixes being made to Blitz3D and Blitz3DSDK in order that it continue as always to maintain compatability (with appropriate delay of 6-12 weeks during which time driver updates magically appear fixing said problem with no change required) with as many generations of drivers as humanly possible. DiretX7 emulation is a very good thing in this respect as the inability for DX7 vendors to maintain compliance with the spec has alway been a problem. If anything DX7 compliance has been heaps better in recent years from all parties, Blitz3D, Drivers and OS. |
| ||
| Thanks for the infos. I will only work with the 3D part of blitz3D. And...if it works on my little machine, i think it works everywhere. ^^ |
| ||
| I agree with skidracer. Anyway at the moment, all things considered, after the initial hurdle of writing 2D in 3D libraries you get only advantages in using quads for everything instead of pure 2D. |
| ||
| I'm not sure about any downside to emulation. Being an emulator author (RedMSX and WiiMSX - both not cutting edge emulators, but good enough for me) and user, I know there is. There isn't perfect emulation... and DX7 emulation is far from perfect. The Blitz3D direct draw layer is making certain assumptions about the availability and success of certain blitter operations and is failing. The problem isn't just assumptions made. Several drivers just lie about their capabilities, and that basicly screw anything that relies on hardware queries. The DirectX7 layer is perhaps technically an emulation but in reality that emulation is being performed by GPU shader hardware and because it is only dependent on DX9 interface will last as long as DX9 does which is good news not bad. DX7 emulation has nothing to do with shaders. It's a layer made by Microsoft, which translates DX7 calls to DX9 (or higher). Just by doing that, it's slower than regular DX7 enabled systems. The fact Blitz is failing to perform in a more restricted environment simply points to the fact Blitz3D has never IMHO been a fully compliant DirectX7 design and given the ability to reproduce Mark will fix another assumption he has made regarding state of 1 of 7300 caps that could be tested in the course of providing compatability. If DX7 emulation was precise, it would work. Fact is, less and less work will be put into it in newer versions, if a newer version will be developed at all. So both performance and stability will decrease, no matter how compliant software is or isn't. Just compare DX6 games. Can you run any nowadays? IMHO your numerous statements only serve to delay appropriate fixes being made to Blitz3D and Blitz3DSDK in order that it continue as always to maintain compatability (with appropriate delay of 6-12 weeks during which time driver updates magically appear fixing said problem with no change required) with as many generations of drivers as humanly possible. Right, my 2 or 3 paragraphs/replies mentioning that an API update is necessary is delaying new B3D updates? I'm sorry, but I wouldn't even purchase B3D if I thought any suggestion or complaint (something fairly normal when selling products and running a business) would "delay" further development. Fact is, I love B3D, and it is a solid 3D engine. Much better than any other I've tested so far. But DX7 is showing it's age, and by consequence, so it's B3D. Probably when Windows 8 is released, DX7 support will be even less compatible, and then, the "stability" factor would go away. Really, if you can't (or don't want to) see that DX7 is old (it's older than XP, just barely newer than Windows 98!) and it's being put aside both from Microsoft and GPU vendors, I don't know what more to say. :/ |
| ||
| Just for info. I found a solution. I use now this inoff. driver for the GMA500 on XP. http://rapidshare.de/files/48426428/GMA500_XP_Build1309.7z.html The driver is stable (XP),faster,DX7 works perfekt and openGL Hardware is enabled. The driver is based on the original one for Poulsbo, the core of the GMA500. :) bye |
| ||
| >and DX7 emulation is far from perfect. but working >which translates DX7 calls to DX9 (or higher). Just by doing that, it's slower than regular DX7 enabled systems true, but the slowdown is hard to tell on most cases >Just compare DX6 games. Can you run any nowadays? I've test many oooooold games written with DX2/3/5/6 working perfect, however some old games use tricky Windows API calls or weird memory management that render it stop working on newer version Windows. >Probably when Windows 8 is released, DX7 support will be even less compatible, and then, the "stability" factor would go away. gotta wait till Windows 8 out and say that, it's not too late As long as BRL is alive, Mark can do something with these case if such issues happens. |
| ||
| As long as BRL is alive, Mark can do something with these case if such issues happens. Something IS happening, for more than a month, and nothing so far... The only workaround is to completely avoid sprites with parent or entityorder - so I'm practically having to re-write all my games, which will take time I don't have, and money I can't spend. And it's just one sign of how things are going to be... |