The SDK docs say: MaxVolumeExtent Maximum value for any of the three dimensions (width, height, and depth) of a volume texture. Does this mean that width, height, depth <= MaxVolumeExtent? Or, does it mean at least one out of width, height, depth <= MaxVolumeExtent? The reason I ask is because this site: http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1487.htm says the GM965 has Max 3d texture 8092 x 8092 x 256, but at the bottom, the same page shows MaxVolumeExtent = 256 from the device caps viewer.

Quote:Original post by Quat
Does this mean that width, height, depth <= MaxVolumeExtent?

Yes.

Quote:Original post by Quat
says the GM965 has Max 3d texture 8092 x 8092 x 256, but at the bottom, the same page shows MaxVolumeExtent = 256 from the device caps viewer.

To me that sounds like a mistake in the document.
8092 x 8092 x 256 = 16 762 998 784
That's 16 GB (!!!) of memory assuming 1 byte per pixel.

Also, the same page sais these cards have up to 384 MB of video memory.

Another thing, 8092 is not power of 2, 8192 is - just one more suspicious thing here.

8092 is obviously a typo on Intel's page.

What I'd suggest you do is try to create a volume texture of, say, 1024x1024x256, and see if this works. It's just a few lines of code, so not a problem to check. Let us know. It's worth checking because it may be that vendors are using the caps differently than Microsoft intended, or the docs are wrong. (The card in the computer I'm using at this moment has a maximum extent of 8192, so I can't check this myself right now.)