Sign in to follow this  

DX11 DirectX 10 or 11 for DX9 programmers

This topic is 2833 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I've made quite a few "demo" style programs for directx9/c++ and know it reasonable well, and like it. But I know that DX9 is now old so perhaps I ought to move to directx10 or 11 for a slightly bigger project I want to do for myself. So I have a few questions :- 1) Is there any reason to use DX10 still, or should I skip that now and just learn and use DX11? Are vista machines likely to have DX11 installed by now? 2) From what I've seen of DX11 it looks ugly to code and harder to use than DX9, but I'm willing to admit that's probably just that I'm not so familiar with it. What are other people's opinions? 3) Are there any resources for learning DX11 for someone who knows DX9 well? Online, or books would be fine. I'm mostly just finding reference material at the moment which isn't very good for learning the basics, or tutorials which assume you are learning it with no previous knowledge. I'd like something which is aimed at someone who knows DX9 reasonable well already. 4) Or should I just stick to DX9? It does everything I think I need for my project and has the advantage that i can still targeted XP if needed. I just sort of feel it's time to move on... I know a lot of this is subjective but would welcome any opinions :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd say there's not much need for DX10 these days, but you'll find more programs and tutorials, so you might want to start there. Once you're familiar with DX10, moving to 11 shouldn't prove difficult. Start with the SDK's tutorials, which should give you an idea how to do things in DX10. Try converting a small project of yours. I think that'd be a good start.

For serious projects, if DX9 is enough for you, and you're familiar with it, I think sticking to it is safe. However, DX11 does have a lot going for it, and I'm sure it'd be fun for you to try the new stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd directly go for DX11. DX10 is 100% obsolete since the release of DX11 and XP machines are also decreasing rather rapidly. According to the latest Steam Hardware Survey already 60% of the gaming PCs got Win Vista or Win7 (and thus support for DX11).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Hazard_X
I'd directly go for DX11. DX10 is 100% obsolete since the release of DX11 and XP machines are also decreasing rather rapidly. According to the latest Steam Hardware Survey already 60% of the gaming PCs got Win Vista or Win7 (and thus support for DX11).


Most video cards active this day are nvidia 8000 and 9000 series, and don't support it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Dunge
Quote:
Original post by Hazard_X
I'd directly go for DX11. DX10 is 100% obsolete since the release of DX11 and XP machines are also decreasing rather rapidly. According to the latest Steam Hardware Survey already 60% of the gaming PCs got Win Vista or Win7 (and thus support for DX11).


Most video cards active this day are nvidia 8000 and 9000 series, and don't support it.


They support it via. feature levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks all, I think it's time to learn DX11 then based on what people said.

Yes, I'm familer with shaders in DX9 so I suppose it's just a case of learning a new API and one or two concepts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you are interested in learning DX11, the API structure is very similar to DX10, so even resources for DX10 can be helpful. There is a link in my signature to a DX10 online book that should be able to get you up and running quickly with a great many details.

Also, if you are looking for some code for DX11 to get you started, I have uploaded my entire DX11 engine to codeplex (link is also available below). There are quite a few samples in there now, so you should be able to see how to do most of the new features for DX11. And of course, if you get stuck you can always post here too [grin].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 2833 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

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  

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      628740
    • Total Posts
      2984472
  • Similar Content

    • By GreenGodDiary
      Having some issues with a geometry shader in a very basic DX app.
      We have an assignment where we are supposed to render a rotating textured quad, and in the geometry shader duplicate this quad and offset it by its normal. Very basic stuff essentially.
      My issue is that the duplicated quad, when rendered in front of the original quad, seems to fail the Z test and thus the original quad is rendered on top of it.
      Whats even weirder is that this only happens for one of the triangles in the duplicated quad, against one of the original quads triangles.

      Here's a video to show you what happens: Video (ignore the stretched textures)

      Here's my GS: (VS is simple passthrough shader and PS is just as basic)
      struct VS_OUT { float4 Pos : SV_POSITION; float2 UV : TEXCOORD; }; struct VS_IN { float4 Pos : POSITION; float2 UV : TEXCOORD; }; cbuffer cbPerObject : register(b0) { float4x4 WVP; }; [maxvertexcount(6)] void main( triangle VS_IN input[3], inout TriangleStream< VS_OUT > output ) { //Calculate normal float4 faceEdgeA = input[1].Pos - input[0].Pos; float4 faceEdgeB = input[2].Pos - input[0].Pos; float3 faceNormal = normalize(cross(faceEdgeA.xyz, faceEdgeB.xyz)); //Input triangle, transformed for (uint i = 0; i < 3; i++) { VS_OUT element; VS_IN vert = input[i]; element.Pos = mul(vert.Pos, WVP); element.UV = vert.UV; output.Append(element); } output.RestartStrip(); for (uint j = 0; j < 3; j++) { VS_OUT element; VS_IN vert = input[j]; element.Pos = mul(vert.Pos + float4(faceNormal, 0.0f), WVP); element.Pos.xyz; element.UV = vert.UV; output.Append(element); } }  
      I havent used geometry shaders much so im not 100% on what happens behind the scenes.
      Any tips appreciated! 
    • By mister345
      Hi, I'm building a game engine using DirectX11 in c++.
      I need a basic physics engine to handle collisions and motion, and no time to write my own.
      What is the easiest solution for this? Bullet and PhysX both seem too complicated and would still require writing my own wrapper classes, it seems. 
      I found this thing called PAL - physics abstraction layer that can support bullet, physx, etc, but it's so old and no info on how to download or install it.
      The simpler the better. Please let me know, thanks!
    • By Hexaa
      I try to draw lines with different thicknesses using the geometry shader approach from here:
      https://forum.libcinder.org/topic/smooth-thick-lines-using-geometry-shader
      It seems to work great on my development machine (some Intel HD). However, if I try it on my target (Nvidia NVS 300, yes it's old) I get different results. See the attached images. There
      seem to be gaps in my sine signal that the NVS 300 device creates, the intel does what I want and expect in the other picture.
      It's a shame, because I just can't figure out why. I expect it to be the same. I get no Error in the debug output, with enabled native debugging. I disabled culling with CullMode.None. Could it be some z-fighting? I have little clue about it but I tested to play around with the RasterizerStateDescription and DepthBias properties with no success, no change at all. Maybe I miss something there?
      I develop the application with SharpDX btw.
      Any clues or help is very welcome
       


    • By Beny Benz
      Hi,
      I'm currently trying to write a shader which shoud compute a fast fourier transform of some data, manipulating the transformed data, do an inverse FFT an then displaying the result as vertex offset and color. I use Unity3d and HLSL as shader language. One of the main problems is that the data should not be passed from CPU to GPU for every frame if possible. My original plan was to use a vertex shader and do the fft there, but I fail to find out how to store changing data betwen shader calls/passes. I found a technique called ping-ponging which seems to be based on writing and exchangeing render targets, but I couldn't find an example for HLSL as a vertex shader yet.
      I found https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/c79a3701-d028-41d9-ad74-a2b3b3958383/how-to-render-to-multiple-render-targets-in-hlsl?forum=xnaframework
      which seem to use COLOR0 and COLOR1 as such render targets.
      Is it even possible to do such calculations on the gpu only? (/in this shader stage?, because I need the result of the calculation to modify the vertex offsets there)
      I also saw the use of compute shaders in simmilar projects (ocean wave simulation), do they realy copy data between CPU / GPU for every frame?
      How does this ping-ponging / rendertarget switching technique work in HLSL?
      Have you seen an example of usage?
      Any answer would be helpfull.
      Thank you
      appswert
    • By ADDMX
      Hi
      Just a simple question about compute shaders (CS5, DX11).
      Do the atomic operations (InterlockedAdd in my case) should work without any issues on RWByteAddressBuffer and be globaly coherent ?
      I'v come back from CUDA world and commited fairly simple kernel that does some job, the pseudo-code is as follows:
      (both kernels use that same RWByteAddressBuffer)
      first kernel does some job and sets Result[0] = 0;
      (using Result.Store(0, 0))
      I'v checked with debugger, and indeed the value stored at dword 0 is 0
      now my second kernel
      RWByteAddressBuffer Result;  [numthreads(8, 8, 8)] void main() {     for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)     {         uint4 v0 = DoSomeCalculations1();         uint4 v1 = DoSomeCalculations2();         uint4 v2 = DoSomeCalculations3();                  if (v0.w == 0 && v1.w == 0 && v2.w)             continue;         //    increment counter by 3, and get it previous value         // this should basically allocate space for 3 uint4 values in buffer         uint prev;         Result.InterlockedAdd(0, 3, prev);                  // this fills the buffer with 3 uint4 values (+1 is here as the first 16 bytes is occupied by DrawInstancedIndirect data)         Result.Store4((prev+0+1)*16, v0);         Result.Store4((prev+1+1)*16, v1);         Result.Store4((prev+2+1)*16, v2);     } } Now I invoke it with Dispatch(4,4,4)
      Now I use DrawInstancedIndirect to draw the buffer, but ocassionaly there is missed triangle here and there for a frame, as if the atomic counter does not work as expected
      do I need any additional synchronization there ?
      I'v tried 'AllMemoryBarrierWithGroupSync' at the end of kernel, but without effect.
      If I do not use atomic counter, and istead just output empty vertices (that will transform into degenerated triangles) the all is OK - as if I'm missing some form of synchronization, but I do not see such a thing in DX11.
      I'v tested on both old and new nvidia hardware (680M and 1080, the behaviour is that same).
       
  • Popular Now