DirectX 9: from R300 to NV30

[alexsok]

Taken from Reactor Critical:

7 August - DirectX 9: from R300 to NV30

We are not allowed to talk about NV30 anymore as NVidia seems not to like it, but we think that we still can tell you something interesting about graphics. About NV40, for instance ;-)

Well, this time we will not touch the thing that is still about one and a half years to go, but talk about how NVidia is going to bring all the features NV30 can offer to the real life.

As we have noted several times already, Microsoft used RADEON 9700 as a target platform for the DirectX 9. However, when they have seen what we have seen, the specifications and capabilities of the NV30, they were impressed not less than we were. After that, the software giant decided to implement som additional features in the DirectX 9 so that developers were able to use them without being limited to their target platform.

DirectX 9 will also support branching in static and dynamic forms, long pixel and vertex shaders "beyond DirectX 9", 128-bit color precision and maybe also loops and calls & returns. As a result, when the NV30 will be available, developers will have an API that is able to utilise its features and capabilities. Keeping in mind that NV30 and DirectX 9 schedules are now aligned according to NVidia, we can expect them to appear in the very close timeframe.

Waiting for the DirectX 9.1 and ATI with their R350.

P.S
I think they have a mistype there, they probably mean the DirectX 9.1, not DirectX 9.

Or I'm wrong and Microsoft decided to delay DirectX 9 to incorporate the new features NV30 supports, that would explain why NV30 will be launched together with DirectX 9!

 

[Ichneumon]

Heh, so MS manages to *yet again* completely arse up the whole point of DirectX, which is essentially to provide a single target platform for developers to code to. We'll be looking at another Dx8/8.1 issue if there really is going to be a Dx9 and Dx9.1 again as well.

If that turns out to be true, it kinda defeats the purpose of the whole thing... and doesn't really make it any different than needing to support seperate vendor extensions in OpenGL to expose each cards capabilities.

 

[McElvis]

Seems to align with ATI's plans - R350 being a DX9.1 part.

 

[Ty]

If the report is true, it shouldn't be that much of a surprise as the Direct X iterations are so far apart that it makes sense for MS to address them with a .1 patch, much the same with Windows imo.

 

[John Reynolds]

And after watching a lot of Nvidia supporters downplay the 8500's slightly more advanced pixel shaders, it's going to be humorous watching those very same people clamor to the rafters how almighty important 9.1 support will be next year.

Hmm, kinda like how a lot of 3dfx fans went from the 'speed' angle to the 'image quality' angle during the halcyon 32-bit/FSAA generations. 8)

 

[Ichneumon]

And after watching a lot of Nvidia supporters downplay the 8500's slightly more advanced pixel shaders, it's going to be humorous watching those very same people clamor to the rafters how almighty important 9.1 support will be next year.

Hmm, kinda like how a lot of 3dfx fans went from the 'speed' angle to the 'image quality' angle during the halcyon 32-bit/FSAA generations. 8)

hehe... perfectly put.

 

[Hellbinder]

*sigh*....

At any rate im still singing... "I want my , I want my, I want my FSAA+Aniso"

and wont be cancelling my 9700 pro preorder any time soon... I buy a new card every 6 months anyway.

 

[Bjorn]

And after watching a lot of Nvidia supporters downplay the 8500's slightly more advanced pixel shaders, it's going to be humorous watching those very same people clamor to the rafters how almighty important 9.1 support will be next year.

Just as it's going to be fun to see (and already are) ATi supporters complain about the breaking of standards, The same people that claimed the Radeon 8500's superiority because it supported DX 8.4 vs DX 8.1 for the GeForce 3.

 

[multigl2]

actually, the Radeon8500 is DX8.1 and the Geforce3 is DX8.

 

[jvd]

i think the question is if the nv30 will be dx9.1 or will the r350 will be dx 9.1 and the nv30 will be the bastard child that fits somewhere in between

 

[Bjorn]

actually, the Radeon8500 is DX8.1 and the Geforce3 is DX8.

Hmm, maybe i should have said pixel shaders 8.4 vs 8.1.

 

[MDolenc]

But you still don't know where will these features fit into. Will it be DirectX 9.0 or DirectX 9.1 .

Hmm, maybe i should have said pixel shaders 8.4 vs 8.1.

No you should say pixel shaders 1.1 vs 1.4...

 

[jvd]

actually, the Radeon8500 is DX8.1 and the Geforce3 is DX8.

Hmm, maybe i should have said pixel shaders 8.4 vs 8.1.

pst you should try pixel shader 1.4 vs 1.3

well i got beat but i thought the geforce 4 did 1.3 ... although its through software or something like that right ?

 

[Bjorn]

But you still don't know where will these features fit into. Will it be DirectX 9.0 or DirectX 9.1 .

Hmm, maybe i should have said pixel shaders 8.4 vs 8.1.

No you should say pixel shaders 1.1 vs 1.4...

Damn, well i think (hope) most people knew what i meant anyway

 

[Bjorn]

actually, the Radeon8500 is DX8.1 and the Geforce3 is DX8.

Hmm, maybe i should have said pixel shaders 8.4 vs 8.1.

pst you should try pixel shader 1.4 vs 1.3

Isn't 1.3 for the GF4 ?

 

[jvd]

ack posting while editing while posting hehe we are all making a mess of things

 

[multigl2]

i think people got it .

BTW, am I the only person who thinks RC isn't telling the whole truth here? I mean, if NVIDIA was going to tell them about the NV30, they'd most likely sign and NDA -- and if RC were to tell that information to anyone, they'd be breaking the NDA. Wouldn't there be steep fines and legal action, not just a "Hey don't talk about that stuff!" email from NVIDIA? Maybe I'm just cynical, but I see waaaaay to many websites trying to flex muscles they don't have, that just because you might get board's to review doesn't mean NVIDIA will be sharing specifications with you. Oh well, I wish more sites would behave like B3D, or more people who run sites behave like those here -- you sign the NDA, you get whatever info, you keep it to yourself.

 

[Hellbinder]

Just as it's going to be fun to see (and already are) ATi supporters complain about the breaking of standards, The same people that claimed the Radeon 8500's superiority because it supported DX 8.4 vs DX 8.1 for the GeForce 3.

Excuse me, but PS 1.4 WAS THE STANDARD!!!!!!!!!!

I get so tired of this constant twisting of the truth........ Nvidia had a full product cyle with the Gf4 to go with Ps 1.4 and did not. on the flip side ATi has already stated R350 will be DX9.1

At any rate, At this point i have seen how silly all this shader talk is. No one uses them for anything but water and a shiny brick once in a while.. I dont think anyones card is going to be overly taxed in this area any time soon.

Even with the Nv30 I think it will be its FSAA+aniso performance that really matters. And it will most likely be an awesome site to behold!

 

[jvd]

i think its sorta goes like this , person a is told by a company whats going on , signs an nda . Person a then goes for a run with person b . while running person a talks to himself about what the company said. Person b then goes and posts on a website what he over heard from person a . hehe or something like that

seriously i'm sure he isn't telling the whole story or at least his whole story (i'm not saying he is lying or telling the truth btw) because once he does he is no longer important.

 

[jvd]

i thought the whole problem was the difficulty of programing the pixel shaders in the dx8.x and dx9.x is going to be more developer friendly and more powerfull.