Sign in to follow this  
TheSeb

when WGF 1.0 will arrive ?

Recommended Posts

TheSeb    144
Hi ! I heard that it will be released before longhorn, is it true ? And other question : is it useful of learning direct 3d 9.0c if WGF 1.0 arrive soon ? [Edited by - TheSeb on August 5, 2005 3:39:00 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
reltham    642
WGF 1.0 is just DirectX 9.L which is basically just Dx9c modified to work with the Longhorn driver model. I doubt it will be out before longhorn (vista now).

Also, WGF 2.0 is now being called D3D 10, so I think the WGF name is going away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulble    349
Quote:
Original post by reltham
WGF 1.0 is just DirectX 9.L which is basically just Dx9c modified to work with the Longhorn driver model. I doubt it will be out before longhorn (vista now).

Also, WGF 2.0 is now being called D3D 10, so I think the WGF name is going away.


This is correct. "WGF" was used internally to refer to "the graphics stack on Longhorn". WGF 1.0 was D3D9 on Longhorn, WGF 2.0 was D3D10 on Longhorn. Both of which will be available when Windows Vista ships.

Paul


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
circlesoft    1178
Quote:
Original post by paulble
This is correct. "WGF" was used internally to refer to "the graphics stack on Longhorn". WGF 1.0 was D3D9 on Longhorn, WGF 2.0 was D3D10 on Longhorn. Both of which will be available when Windows Vista ships.

wo0t! That sounds a lot better than the "some period of time after Longhorn ships" [smile]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
circlesoft    1178
Quote:
Original post by Moe
Will it run on 32 bit chips?

Yep, it will run on a 32-bit architecture. I have installed all of the betas so far on my 32-bit machine, and they work fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
twanvl    512
There will be both a 32 bit and a 64 bit version of Vista.

And to answer the OP's question:
Quote:

is it useful of learning direct 3d 9.0c if WGF 1.0 arrive soon ?

Yes, it is usefull to learn d3d 9, new versions of DirectX will be based on the older version and will have a similair structure and interface. Even then, the underlying techniques and theories are the same no matter what API you use, so it's never a waste of time to learn one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moe    1256
Quote:
Original post by circlesoft
Quote:
Original post by Moe
Will it run on 32 bit chips?

Yep, it will run on a 32-bit architecture. I have installed all of the betas so far on my 32-bit machine, and they work fine.

Excellent. That is a bit of a relief. I bought a new machine back in December, and I would hate for it to be severely outdated within a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saruman    4339
Quote:
Original post by twanvl
Yes, it is usefull to learn d3d 9, new versions of DirectX will be based on the older version and will have a similair structure and interface. Even then, the underlying techniques and theories are the same no matter what API you use, so it's never a waste of time to learn one.

Actually DirectX 10 is a complete rewrite of the API without the FFP, TnL, etc and changes how some things work. Although that being said I 100% agree with you, because you need to know the theory, techniques, and implementation no matter what API you are using.

Learning the graphics API is quite simple, the problem solving, design, and engineering are the hard parts and those are only learned with practice and adapt to any API you are using. I would definately go ahead with learning DX9 right now and than move on later. Quite honestly learning 10 from scratch will be a lot harder than knowing 9 and upgrading to 10 imo... as now you must use shaders and there is no FFP so you need to build everything yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AvengerDr    751
Quote:
Original post by Saruman
Quite honestly learning 10 from scratch will be a lot harder than knowing 9 and upgrading to 10 imo... as now you must use shaders and there is no FFP so you need to build everything yourself.


Wait a moment! What do you mean by "you must use shaders"? So that you keep pace with modern technology? Will D3D10 offer some default shaders?
Where can I find some other information on D3D10?
Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
d000hg    1199
Yeah, having to write everything with shaders is surely a bit like making us write a pixel filler for a SW 3D engine - a lot of work when you used to just do DrawPrimitive(...) and that was it... I can only assume there is some default functionality, inbuilt/customisable shaders as part of D3D10?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jollyjeffers    1570
Quote:
Original post by Saruman
DirectX 10 will ship with Vista beta 2.

Just out of curiousity - do you have a source for that? I've been keeping an eye on the "next" technologies and haven't seen this mentioned.

Quote:
Original post by AvengerDr
Wait a moment! What do you mean by "you must use shaders"? So that you keep pace with modern technology? Will D3D10 offer some default shaders?

The direction of real-time graphics is undeniably going down the "programmable" route.

Bare in mind that if you have some big problem with this, WinXP and D3D9 aren't likely to vanish overnight ([oh]) so you'd still have a development platform for a while.

Quote:
Original post by AvengerDr
Where can I find some other information on D3D10?

Maybe someone will correct me, but there isn't any publicly available information on the D3D10 spec yet. There was an article over at Beyond3D that claimed they had a fairly accurate overview of D3D10.

From what I've seen, that's about as good as you can get right now [smile]

As a final comment though... until there are some firm, public, specs available it's probably not worth second-guessing and predicting stuff. Anyone that does know something will be under NDA and thus can't reveal useful information, everyone else is probably interpretting bits-n-pieces of information they find on the net (which isn't always reliable). I would be surprised if the DX Developers hadn't at least considered the possible "problems" people might have by eliminating a FFP.

hth
Jack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AvengerDr    751
Quote:
Original post by jollyjeffers
Bare in mind that if you have some big problem with this, WinXP and D3D9 aren't likely to vanish overnight ([oh]) so you'd still have a development platform for a while.


I'm "shader-compliant", thanks! I wonder if using a vertex shader to address billboarding (the one from nvidia) is "too much" :)
I'm very glad of having taken the shaders route.. they are extremely useful. The only drawback is there is not yet enough literature on the web about them. It feels strange having to write lighting equations, but at least you can learn much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
reltham    642
Well the reason they have both Dx9.l and Dx10 (imho) is because Dx10 being "cap-less" means that Dx10 hardware will support all the features of Dx10 and thus no existing hardware today will be Dx10 complient.

This means that it's pretty likely that Dx10 cards with be shader only without any FFP in hardware (especially likely given that a number of the Dx9 cards out now don't have any FFP hardware and just emulate it via shaders).

I'd expect Dx10 to not have any FFP API at all, and that there will be some default shaders for doing effectively FFP rendering via the shader API.

If you are going to support FPP cards on Vista then you need to write a Dx9.L version of your engine.

BTW, I believe there is some Dx10 info that can be gleaned from the Meltdown 2005 slides that are publically available. They did have a lot more Dx10 info at Meltdown 2005, but those slides are not public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jollyjeffers    1570
Quote:
Original post by reltham
Well the reason they have both Dx9.l and Dx10 (imho) is because Dx10 being "cap-less" means that Dx10 hardware will support all the features of Dx10

It also seems to fit the WinVista idea of having a tiered GUI - the basic WinXP L&F upto this fancy new AERO layer. Your "9.L" release handles the low-end stuff thats primarily for older hardware, whilst your DX10/AERO stuff is for those who can.

Quote:
Original post by reltham
thus no existing hardware today will be Dx10 complient.

I don't think this is the case, I spend a bit of time on the MSDN forums (since being asked) and spotted an official "MSFT" person quoting that they demoed the 'AERO Glass' GUI at PDC (or WinHEC?) on current mid-range ATI/NVidia cards.

There are specifications for AERO Glass online, I can't find the link right now (not on my own machine) but they essentially map to a decent SM2 capable part from what I could see.

Then again, I could be being thrown off by the various terms - it gets too confusing when they have 3 or 4 similar but different technologies on the go at the same time [grin]

Quote:
Original post by reltham
I'd expect Dx10 to not have any FFP API at all, and that there will be some default shaders for doing effectively FFP rendering via the shader API.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's pushed more into the developers hands, as you've been saying, but I've read quite a bit of stuff about ATI/NV implementing (internally) the FFP as a set of PP shaders so as to allow the actual hardware to think of everything as a type of shader...

Quote:
Original post by reltham
If you are going to support FPP cards on Vista then you need to write a Dx9.L version of your engine.

I ran across this sample on the ATI developer site the other day: FixedFuncShader. Not sure how good it is, but it may not be that hard to "emulate" FFP using shaders on D3D10...

Quote:
Original post by reltham
BTW, I believe there is some Dx10 info that can be gleaned from the Meltdown 2005 slides that are publically available. They did have a lot more Dx10 info at Meltdown 2005, but those slides are not public.

I heard about that as well, I want those slides [smile] Usually they put them up at some point in the future. Or maybe I can bug someone to give them to me ([rolleyes]).

Cheers,
Jack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
reltham    642
The slides for Meltdown 2005 (the public ones) are up already. Check the DirectX Developer Center Downloads.

From my understanding of reading the various public stuff (WinHEC slides from 2004/2005 are up on the MS site if you stumble around), Aero Glass runs on Dx9.L (WGF 1.0).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saruman    4339
There are current cards that are able to take advantage of DX10. The unified shader architecture does not mean that it needs to be implemented that way in the hardware and is able to use cards with seperate VS/PS, just that you get full functionality in a single shader (codewise).

Also sure the FFP is going away.. but I highly doubt that some default shaders are not going to ship with the SDK that emulate the basic functionality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nypyren    12063
Writing shaders that duplicate the result you get from the FFP is pretty easy... and I wouldn't be surprised if there's already a site that has a detailed explanation of how to write parts of a shader that perform the same things as each FFP option.

For the transition between FFP and writing your own shaders, basically the learning curve just involves figuring out what you need to do to get any shader working in the first place. From then on, it's cake until you want to do advanced special effects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
reltham    642
I don't know of any current cards that could do the Dx10 Geometry Shaders. Since they are between the VS and Triangle Setup Stage. Also, I don't think any of the current cards could do state objects or the context save/switch/interrupt stuff.

So, I'm pretty certain that all the cards currently out including the latest and greatest will fall short of being Dx10 compliant.

Maybe they'll be able to do some sort of driver level emulation that gives you partial hardware acceleration of the Dx10 API on some of the Dx9 level cards. However, that would be vender specific and would depend on the internal capabilities of the chipset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this