Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Are the D3DX Functions Faster ?


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
9 replies to this topic

#1 Endemoniada   Members   -  Reputation: 312

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 09 July 2013 - 07:27 PM

Hi guys,

 

I thought I once read that you should always use the D3DX functions (like D3DXMatrixMultiply, D3DXMatrixRotationQuaternion, etc.) instead of your own because they are, or could be, faster. Is that true ?

 

Thanks.

 



Sponsor:

#2 Promit   Moderators   -  Reputation: 7182

Like
4Likes
Like

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:20 PM

Depends on how your functions are written, I guess. They're not doing anything magical; you could easily replicate the code yourself. However, to write math code that is both fast and correct is a colossal pain and takes some care. I've corrected core math routines in a variety of code bases before because they had subtle or not so subtle mistakes in functions that were not properly tested.

 

D3DX is guaranteed to be correct, and reasonably fast. That counts for a lot.

 

P.S. A lot of the D3DX functions are coded in the header, if you look in the right places.


Edited by Promit, 09 July 2013 - 11:21 PM.


#3 MJP   Moderators   -  Reputation: 11311

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 10 July 2013 - 01:13 AM

If you're not experienced at writing a math library, then don't expect to write one that's going to be better than D3DX. It's more likely you'll end up with something slower and buggier.

I'll also point out that there's a newer replacement for D3DX math, called DirectXMath.



#4 Orangeatang   Members   -  Reputation: 1499

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 10 July 2013 - 01:14 AM

Probably worth noting that the D3DX library has been deprecated; fine if you want to continue using the older SDK, but it'd be better to switch over earlier if you ever plan on updating. The newer SDK still has the most of the same functionality, just a few bits and pieces here and there that work slightly differently e.g. XMMatrixMultiply instead of D3DXMatrixMultiply.



#5 Tom KQT   Members   -  Reputation: 1588

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 10 July 2013 - 01:51 AM

I once tried to make my own small matrix math library, because I needed just few basic operations and didn't want to include the whole D3DX for it. When I implemented matrix multiplication I was quite surprised that it indeed was slower (I don't remember how much, but it was quite noticable).

And multiplication is a very simple algorithm, there really isn't much room for mistakes.

 

The reason is that functions like D3DXMatrixMultiply are written directly in asm and are using SSE.

 

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/430741-d3dxmatrixmultiply-implimentation/


Edited by Tom KQT, 10 July 2013 - 01:52 AM.


#6 NightCreature83   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2824

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 10 July 2013 - 03:31 AM

Probably worth noting that the D3DX library has been deprecated; fine if you want to continue using the older SDK, but it'd be better to switch over earlier if you ever plan on updating. The newer SDK still has the most of the same functionality, just a few bits and pieces here and there that work slightly differently e.g. XMMatrixMultiply instead of D3DXMatrixMultiply.

Also the newer one is using intrinsics in the back end to make use of SSE2 which is in 99% of the CPU's nowadays. Btw if you turn SSE2 code generation on in the compiler settings your own matrix code will also be converted to make use of SSE2, however the XM versions will most likely be faster.

 

I once tried to make my own small matrix math library, because I needed just few basic operations and didn't want to include the whole D3DX for it. When I implemented matrix multiplication I was quite surprised that it indeed was slower (I don't remember how much, but it was quite noticable).

And multiplication is a very simple algorithm, there really isn't much room for mistakes.

 

The reason is that functions like D3DXMatrixMultiply are written directly in asm and are using SSE.

 

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/430741-d3dxmatrixmultiply-implimentation/

The D3DX ones actually aren't using SSE, that's why XNAmath and the later rename to DirectxMath library is created as that is using SSE2 intrinsics to do most of it's operations. As the D3DX and XNAmath definitions of the primitive types are substantially different when you actually look at the headers that implement it. The XNA one is doing all kinds of stuff to figure out whether or not SSE is support or not and if it is it switches to __m128 members in most structures.

 


Worked on titles: CMR:DiRT2, DiRT 3, DiRT: Showdown, GRID 2, Mad Max

#7 Endemoniada   Members   -  Reputation: 312

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 10 July 2013 - 10:17 AM

Those are some very nice anwsers guys, especially concerning SSE. I wrote a bunch of functions I needed, really to learn the math, it took an hour or two; then I realized DirectX handles it's matrices differently than the norm so before I rewrote my function I thought I'd ask this question. I also didn't know D3DX was depricated. I definitely want to use the new library.

 

I'm using C++ and D3D9 (VS2012 with the June2010 DirectX SDK), can I use DirectXMath with that or do I have to use XNA or D3D10 or 11 ?

 

Thanks a lot.

 



#8 NightCreature83   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2824

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:05 AM

DirectxMath and XNAmath are the same library and should be included with the June SDK, could be you have to include the xnamath.h as the header for it as the rename happened more or less arround the time that DirectX SDK was changed to be a component of the Windows SDK.

 

If you just transpose the matrices you wrote yourself before you feed them to D3D they should just work as that is how you switch from column major to row major which D3D9 likes.


Worked on titles: CMR:DiRT2, DiRT 3, DiRT: Showdown, GRID 2, Mad Max

#9 Ravyne   GDNet+   -  Reputation: 7330

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 10 July 2013 - 12:21 PM

You could also look into the DirectX Tool Kit, which provides a lot of functionality similar to XNA, but for C++. This includes their "SimpleMath" library, which is a thin wrapper over DXMath/XMath that provides a simpler interface that might be more to your liking. It also provides useful things like sprite fonts, sprite batching, a shader effects framework with common effects, and more.



#10 NightCreature83   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2824

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 10 July 2013 - 12:24 PM

You could also look into the DirectX Tool Kit, which provides a lot of functionality similar to XNA, but for C++. This includes their "SimpleMath" library, which is a thin wrapper over DXMath/XMath that provides a simpler interface that might be more to your liking. It also provides useful things like sprite fonts, sprite batching, a shader effects framework with common effects, and more.

The effect system is already in the SDK you just have to compile it yourself, this was done so you could tweak it to your own likings instead of being stuck with a massive lib that you had to link in. You can find this in the Samples directory under C++ and then Effects11.


Worked on titles: CMR:DiRT2, DiRT 3, DiRT: Showdown, GRID 2, Mad Max




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS