Direct3D 10.1: Incompatible?

Ad

With its new range of GPUs, the Radeon HD 3000, AMD is the first to support the next version of Direct3D: Direct3D 10.1. But what does this new revision of Microsoft’s API has in store for us?

Incompatible?

When the first pieces of information on Direct3D 10.1 first leaked this summer, some websites echoed a troubling rumor; this new version would be incompatible with the previous one! Immediately, angry reactions were expressed throughout the web. As a matter of fact, Microsoft was reaping what it sowed with the buzz generated around Direct 3D. Indeed, gamers had had to accept that this version wouldn’t be compatible with the previous ones and that it would specifically be linked to Redmond’s latest OS: Vista. Microsoft had nevertheless promised that it was inevitable in order to guaranty a new future-proof API. And yet, a couple of months later, here are talks about a revision that dared be, once more, incompatible. For many, enough was enough.

Radeon HD 3800

However, as is often the case on the web, it all came to nothing, as Direct3D 10.1 is fully compatible with its predecessor. But let’s dig deeper into what we mean when we talk about compatible versions of an API. Up until the ninth version, the various DirectX iterations followed one another and kept descending compatibility; when you installed a new DirectX version, you could play all of your older games that used previous versions. Similarly, it was possible for a game to create a DirectX 9 interface, but only use it as a DirectX 8 interface. Among other things, this allowed developers to only have to maintain one piece of code to support two kinds of cards; setting aside advanced features support for cards that truly handled DirectX 9. To do this, programmers had access to a structure that gave a detailed list of the card’s real abilities. Inversely, this compatibility no longer exists in Direct3D 10. To ensure older games ran on Vista, Microsoft integrated both APIs in its latest OS.

Radeon HD 3800

In a similar fashion, a Direct3D 10 interface doesn’t grant access to the ninth version APIs, as many were deleted. If a developer wishes a game to support Direct3D 9 and 10, it’s compelled to plan for two distinct version of a game, which isn’t really different from what he had to do if he had wanted to support OpenGL and Direct3D. We talk of incompatible APIs in this particular case.

Inversely, it’s quite possible to create a Direct3D 10.1 interface on a card that’s only Direct3D 10, the new API being a strict superset of the latter. Everything found in Direct3D 10 is also found in its big brother. The developer’s only duty is to ensure that he doesn’t call features only present in Direct3D 10.1 on a Direct3D 10 card, which was already a necessity with previous versions of the API.

Obviously, the already available Direct3D 10 GPUs (G8x, G9x and R6x0) don’t support the latest API’s add-ons, which seems to be a no brainer and yet this point has generated a lot of confusion. Actually, in regards to older GPU support, Microsoft had promised the death of Caps bits with Direct3D 10 and has kept its word... well, sort of; from now on, Caps bits no longer exist, but have been replaced by what Microsoft calls Feature Level. The main difference is that it’s no longer necessary to ensure that each feature is individually supported; one needs only check if the feature level is Direct3D 10 or Direct3D 10.1, which is enough to determine precisely what is supported by the GPU.


Talkback

darthpoik 15/11/2007 12:31
Hide
-0+
darthpoik
Are AMD/ATI ever going to produce a card that actually beats the geforce 8800gtx. It has been ages. I have a gtx and it is a bit of an anticlimax being able to turn everything upto full and play normally. I think I liked it better 'wishing' to be able to do so and overclocking to get closer.
LePhuronn 15/11/2007 02:37
Hide
-0+
LePhuronn
It's anti-climactic to be able to play any game at maximum quality? Um...OK.

Personally I'd be happy with that as it means my £400+ investment will last me a good number of years.

If you're disappointed that there's games you can't play I have a 6800 Ultra I'll happily swap for your 8800 GTX

:|
spoonboy 15/11/2007 05:28
Hide
-0+
spoonboy
512mb versions of the 3850 (yes there are some) look like a total bargain. Overclock to a 3870 with all features and video memory, for pretty small beans. Good job ATI.
spuddyt 15/11/2007 05:30
Hide
-0+
spuddyt
why did you buy an 8800 gtx if you didn't want to turn everything to full? anyway its interesting about the dx10.1 bit....
darthpoik 15/11/2007 06:31
Hide
-0+
darthpoik
Thank you LePhuronn for the offer, but I think I will pass. I like the card but just expected something more having never owned the top graphics card before. AMD/ATI still need to produce a gtx beater so that we can get a beafier nvidia card.
darkstar782 15/11/2007 08:22
Hide
-0+
darkstar782
actually 8800GTX cant run everything in max detail by any means.

I have an 8800GTX SLI system and I struggle with Crysis on medium settings @2560x1600.

I'm waiting for something faster... whether it is from ATI or nVidia.

ATI continue to disappoint.
sosrandom 15/11/2007 09:08
Hide
-0+
sosrandom
I get what hes saying, the GTX is a year old and can run UT3 at 1600x1200 with AA very comfortably
nicolasb 16/11/2007 04:58
Hide
-0+
nicolasb
"The Empire Strikes Back"? No: 8800GTX was the Empire striking back; we were hoping RV670 would be "Return of the Jedi", but it's turned out not to be. (Possibly because of a lack of ewoks).

On a more important note: where are the Crossfire and SLI scores? The great thing about these new cards (both the 8800GT and the 3850/3870) are the fact that you're getting what, just months ago, was enthusiast-level performance for mainstream-level pricing. This makes SLI and Crossfire immensely much more affordable than they have ever usefully been before.

Previously it was always the case that you got better price/performance from a single high-end card than you got from two mid-range ones. Now, for the first time, that may no longer be true: 3850s in Crossfire might even outperform 8800GTX some of the time, and they're actually *cheaper* than single GTX.

So, come on: where are the benchmarks?

Finally, your noise level measurements are obviously flawed: you've got a 43dB noise floor, resulting from components other than the graphics card, or possibly from stuff going on outside the case. So it doesn't matter how quiet the GPU fan goes, you'll always read ~43dB. The cooler on the 3850 is rated at just 31dB, which is *miles* below the noise level you get from an 8800GT. Your figures are misleading.
perzy 17/11/2007 03:08
Hide
-0+
perzy
What about the real important issues here...how well does it run folding@home? Huh, THG why dont you comment on that?
At least I want to know if it's as good as the 1900 at crunshing lifesaving data!
inthere 17/11/2007 04:53
Hide
-0+
inthere
you can't play Crysis with everything maximum with an 8800 gtx, not at any res 1600x1200 and over
BobWya 18/11/2007 01:01
Hide
-0+
BobWya
The whole reminds me of when I couldn't play Doom 3 @1600x1200 at Ultra quality. Now I can with an upgrade from to 128Mb 9800Pro to watercooled 512Mb OC X1950 Pro... and get 60FPS constantly.

With AMD/ATI going down the toilet Nvidia is not getting enough pressure to move on the next generation (1Gb+ cards with enough horsepower to handle HD gaming). Rebranding 2xxx cards as 3xxx is pretty desperate!! That is the bottom line... Even with VERY deep pockets you will still struggle to get high quality textures running @1920x1200 (native 1080p the true resolution of BD and HDDVD disks).

I have a feeling that AMD/ATI may not be around much longer. If a company isn't diversified (like Sun) then a failure in your core business means you are pretty screwed. If ATI didn't have products like the X1950Pro they would be in real trouble already...

nicolasb -> Previous comment about Crossfire. THG said the driver was unstable for the new 3xxx cards in the introduction. Perhaps you have problems reading??

Ah well, have to wait till 2009 for that monitor upgrade!!

Bob
RichUK 24/11/2007 06:09
Hide
-0+
RichUK
I don't suppose this card would perform better on an AMD 770 chipset? Seeing as they're marketing it as the whole "Spider" platform and whatnot. Just interested to know if there is anything in their marketing other than the scaling.

I look forward to seeing what kind of scaling these will produce, because that does seem to be their main selling point. As the previous guy said, you can get 2 of these cards for less than a GTX, and potentially equal perfomance, while still leaving room for another 2 cards =)

The HD 2900 XT's scaling results were actually pretty impressive, SLI showing a 50% boost at best, while crossfire showing as good as 90% in some games.
perzy 05/12/2007 07:30
Hide
-0+
perzy
Well what about folding@home ? Is the new cards as good at that as the 1900-series? Hello! Reality check THG!

Note You are going to post a comment as anonymous.



Google Ads