"Bringing DirectX 10 to Xbox 360"

[Hardknock]

http://centracomm.cachefly.net/majornelson/GamefestKeynote-8-14-06-wma.wma

Gamefest Keynote by Chris Satchell. Do I hear a DX10 confirmation for 360 in there at 12min 37sec??

Almost as if Xbox 360 could be "updated" in a sense? Is that even possible or what is it that he's refering to?

 

[LightHeaven]

I noticed that too... Maybe Ms is going to implement some of Dx10 feats in Xbox360's Api?

 

[expletive]

Its exactly what he says, not sure what he means by it though...

 

[Tap In]

well he sure did day that... "Tools... PIX ... new tools, XNA Build... make it simpler to help you solve your problems... bringing technologies like Direct X10 to xbox 360".

 

[Hardknock]

I've just always been under the impression that once a GPU is DirectX9(or whatever) it stays that way forever?

 

[zed]

well in the past new drivers have unlocked new functionability (word?) though of course the hardware has to support it first though. another option is certain features would be emulated in software (plausible with vertice/geometry stuff, not plausible for fragment stuff)

 

[Tap In]

functionability (word?)

functionality (I'm assuming 2nd language and if so, you do VERY well). :smile:

 

[akira888]

If indeed that is what he said then what he probably means is bringing a more D3D10-ish look to the Xbox360 graphics API rather than "unlocking" any significant new features. (which would have been exposed from day one had they existed)

 

[Graham]

Maybe he simply means api differences and advantages like the lower draw call overhead.

In the context of XNA it would make sense. Keep the apis between the systems as close as possible.

 

[zed]

functionality (I'm assuming 2nd language and if so, you do VERY well). :smile:

well a kiwi ( a bit dyslexic though).
to use an example of what i mean, eg glsl now the nvidia gffx could only do it (not all of glsl say ~80%) when a capable driver was released (does it through cg though) most of the functionality was available though in hardware from day 1.
another example gf3 + shadowmapping (depthtextures) with the initial drivers for the gf3 this wasnt exposed.

 

[Titanio]

I've just always been under the impression that once a GPU is DirectX9(or whatever) it stays that way forever?

I think he's talking about updating the API to unify the developer experience with DX10 as much as is possible, and make porting easier (i.e. not pushing a DX10 GPU down the internet to every machine ).

 

[assen]

Maybe he simply means api differences and advantages like the lower draw call overhead.

The high call overhead of DX9 on Windows is an artefact of the driver model, and has nothing to do with the DX9-ness of the API. Any 360 API, be it DX9 or DX10-like, should have much, much lower call overheads.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I've just always been under the impression that once a GPU is DirectX9(or whatever) it stays that way forever?

I've got DX9 on my PC without a DX9 compliant GPU, but DX9 games still run. DX is an API, not a feature-set, although it's often used to determine a feature set where a GPU has hardware support of DXn features.

I think it's more a case of bringing DX10 interfacing to the XB360, and you'd drop off some features that aren't supported, like running SM2.0 games on SM1.3 GPUs - the same executable runs but you miss some features.

 

[Demirug]

As the XBox APIs are always only similar to their PC opposite it wouldn’t be that hard to build a API that looks like Direct3D 10 for the X-Box. This is even possible for the PC. You build a layer over Direct3D 9 that makes it look and feel like Direct3D 10 with reduced quartet features. With such a layer I have used the same source code to run on the Direct3D 10 reference device and a Shadermodel 3 hardware. The only significant difference is the selection of a different shader model. It uses SM4 for the D3D10 refrast and SM3 for the D3D9 hardware.

 

[expletive]

As the XBox APIs are always only similar to their PC opposite it wouldn’t be that hard to build a API that looks like Direct3D 10 for the X-Box. This is even possible for the PC. You build a layer over Direct3D 9 that makes it look and feel like Direct3D 10 with reduced quartet features. With such a layer I have used the same source code to run on the Direct3D 10 reference device and a Shadermodel 3 hardware. The only significant difference is the selection of a different shader model. It uses SM4 for the D3D10 refrast and SM3 for the D3D9 hardware.

SO for DX10 feaures that the 360 supports in hardware those would go 'straight through' but those that it does not are converted via the layer to compatible features?

 

[Demirug]

SO for DX10 feaures that the 360 supports in hardware those would go 'straight through' but those that it does not are converted via the layer to compatible features?

I don’t know as I haven’t seen the D3D10 XBox version. But I am expecting that this version simply have a different set of minimal requirements than the PC Version. As long as they use the same interfaces porting would still be easy.

 

[Rolf N]

I've got DX9 on my PC without a DX9 compliant GPU, but DX9 games still run. DX is an API, not a feature-set, although it's often used to determine a feature set where a GPU has hardware support of DXn features.

Thank you for pointing that out. No, really.
With Microsoft version numbers so deeply inserted into everyone's brains it sometimes feels like drifting on an ocean of insanity.

 

[Acert93]

Thank you for pointing that out. No, really.
With Microsoft version numbers so deeply inserted into everyone's brains it sometimes feels like drifting on an ocean of insanity.

It really isn't that difficult.

Q4 2002 - DX9 (SM2.0)
Q3 2004 - DX9c (SM3.0)
Q1 2007 - D3D10 (SM4.0)

There are some minor variances in there, but those are the major steps. Considering there has been 1 major update to DX9 since it eas launched in 2002, I would say that is pretty good for a platform that offers consumers consistant updates to performance and features.

But it may be confusing to console gamers

 

[Colourless]

I imagine all they would be doing is adding in a limited D3D10 interface so devs could code for the XBox 360 using D3D10 and the code will work in Vista with minor modifications. Unlike the current system where the 360 version of D3D9 has additions for extra functionality that Xenos provides above D3D9 and if you use any of those features you are SOL trying to run it in Windows without big modifications.

 

[darkblu]

It really isn't that difficult.

Q4 2002 - DX9 (SM2.0)
Q3 2004 - DX9c (SM3.0)
Q1 2007 - D3D10 (SM4.0)

There are some minor variances in there, but those are the major steps. Considering there has been 1 major update to DX9 since it eas launched in 2002, I would say that is pretty good for a platform that offers consumers consistant updates to performance and features.

But it may be confusing to console gamers

a wize man once said:

b3d forums - the place where sarcasm flies way above people's heads.


but anyhow, i'm more than sure [size=+2]<sarcasm>[/size]zeck would appreciate the above dx lore[size=+2]</>[/size]