Sign in to follow this  
mathacka

DX11 Which DirectX to Pick

Recommended Posts

Which DirectX API should I choose to use?

 

Is there an easier way to code in DX11 or DX10 even compared to 9?

 

Are there more things to check for before initialization of a DirectX interface?

 

Since they're all backwards compatible, why not even use DirectX 1, Microsoft still uses tutorials for this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DX 1? That would be pretty old, DX 1.0 appeared in 1995 (since about 18 years) it's not a good idea to use a very old version, a very old version will definitely not supported bunches of important features and a well noticed graphics improvement, plus it might be not compatible with recent versions of OS since it's very old and deprecated.

 

If you want to create something compatible with most machines, I would say DX 9 will be fine and can give you almost the same result you get from DX 10 and DX 11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're looking to learn, I'd say go with DX11. It's a cleaner API than DX9, and will be the most relevant going forward. I would only use DX9 if you're developing a game or app and targeting Windows XP is important to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I always found the DirectX 11 to be simpler to set up. But if the intent is to get something simple up and running, you have to write shader code. Which although is not a bad thing, just that you have to do some household work in the project.<br /><br />DirectX 9, although you are going to call more APIs, you will only be writing in C, not HLSL (if you are doing something simple, and not writing shaders).<br /><br />HLSL is pretty simple to learn but if you are against learning a slightly different programming paradigm, use DX9. So I think it boils down to whether you can or you want to write shaders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to chime in and say that Microsoft has been and continues to phase XP out of existence.  I would venture as far as to say that it's probably pretty safe to assume that NONE of your potential players will be on XP.  With that being said DX11 would be your better choice (also assuming that it will be a little while before you release), it should be safe to assume as long as your not using to much brand new tech or super advanced calls that only todays top level hardware can support that you'll have a nice wide audience when it's all said and done.  Also, you might want to look into the XNA Frameworks and .NET, they are Microsoft's managed API sets (all OOP too).  90+% of the time Microsoft will do the memory management and proper techniques better than an indie coder would.  Take advantage of the free framework that would already surpass what your likely to code yourself, it will expedite your development process exponentially and give you a more stable end result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I own "Introduction to 3D Game Programming with DirectX 10" by Frank D. Luna. I haven't really read it yet, would that be a good place to start. Also I heard "Game Coding Complete" uses DirectX 11 and is great for beginners?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I own "Introduction to 3D Game Programming with DirectX 10" by Frank D. Luna. I haven't really read it yet, would that be a good place to start. Also I heard "Game Coding Complete" uses DirectX 11 and is great for beginners?

It depends on how good at learning you are. The book covers also the basic stuff (setting up the Visual Studio, D3D inicialization, device creation etc), so you can learn everything you need from it. Of course one book is never enough, but as a starting point, I think you can try it.

Don't worry about the fact that it is for DX10 and not 11, the differences between those two are minor, compared to DX9 versus DX10.

 

Btw, I recommend you to read also the initial chapters about vector and matrix maths. Even if you think you remember that from the school ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool, I might consider doing xna stuff after all, it will be faster to deploy. Yeah, I'm sure I'll brush up on my linear algebra, that's all the graphics books talk about in the first 3 chapters it seems.

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  

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      627763
    • Total Posts
      2978974
  • Similar Content

    • By schneckerstein
      Hello,
      I manged so far to implement NVIDIA's NDF-Filtering at a basic level (the paper can be found here). Here is my code so far:
      //... // project the half vector on the normal (?) float3 hppWS = halfVector / dot(halfVector, geometricNormal) float2 hpp = float2(dot(hppWS, wTangent), dot(hppWS, wBitangent)); // compute the pixel footprint float2x2 dhduv = float2x2(ddx(hpp), ddy(hpp)); // compute the rectangular area of the pixel footprint float2 rectFp = min((abs(dhduv[0]) + abs(dhduv[1])) * 0.5, 0.3); // map the area to ggx roughness float2 covMx = rectFp * rectFp * 2; roughness = sqrt(roughness * roughness + covMx); //... Now I want combine this with LEAN mapping as state in Chapter 5.5 of the NDF paper.
      But I struggle to understand what theses sections actually means in Code: 
      I suppose the first-order moments are the B coefficent of the LEAN map, however things like
      float3 hppWS = halfVector / dot(halfVector, float3(lean_B, 0)); doesn't bring up anything usefull.
      Next theres:
      This simply means:
      // M and B are the coefficents from the LEAN map float2x2 sigma_mat = float2x2( M.x - B.x * B.x, M.z - B.x * B.y, M.z - B.x * B.y, M.y - B.y * B.y); does it?
      Finally:
      This is the part confuses me the most: how am I suppose to convolute two matrices? I know the concept of convolution in terms of functions, not matrices. Should I multiple them? That didn't make any usefully output.
      I hope someone can help with this maybe too specific question, I'm really despaired to make this work and i've spend too many hours of trial & error...
      Cheers,
      Julian
    • By Baemz
      Hello,
      I've been working on some culling-techniques for a project. We've built our own engine so pretty much everything is built from scratch. I've set up a frustum with the following code, assuming that the FOV is 90 degrees.
      float angle = CU::ToRadians(45.f); Plane<float> nearPlane(Vector3<float>(0, 0, aNear), Vector3<float>(0, 0, -1)); Plane<float> farPlane(Vector3<float>(0, 0, aFar), Vector3<float>(0, 0, 1)); Plane<float> right(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(angle, 0, -angle)); Plane<float> left(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(-angle, 0, -angle)); Plane<float> up(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(0, angle, -angle)); Plane<float> down(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(0, -angle, -angle)); myVolume.AddPlane(nearPlane); myVolume.AddPlane(farPlane); myVolume.AddPlane(right); myVolume.AddPlane(left); myVolume.AddPlane(up); myVolume.AddPlane(down); When checking the intersections I am using a BoundingSphere of my models, which is calculated by taking the average position of all vertices and then choosing the furthest distance to a vertex for radius. The actual intersection test looks like this, where the "myFrustum90" is the actual frustum described above.
      The orientationInverse is the viewMatrix in this case.
      bool CFrustum::Intersects(const SFrustumCollider& aCollider) { CU::Vector4<float> position = CU::Vector4<float>(aCollider.myCenter.x, aCollider.myCenter.y, aCollider.myCenter.z, 1.f) * myOrientationInverse; return myFrustum90.Inside({ position.x, position.y, position.z }, aCollider.myRadius); } The Inside() function looks like this.
      template <typename T> bool PlaneVolume<T>::Inside(Vector3<T> aPosition, T aRadius) const { for (unsigned short i = 0; i < myPlaneList.size(); ++i) { if (myPlaneList[i].ClassifySpherePlane(aPosition, aRadius) > 0) { return false; } } return true; } And this is the ClassifySpherePlane() function. (The plane is defined as a Vector4 called myABCD, where ABC is the normal)
      template <typename T> inline int Plane<T>::ClassifySpherePlane(Vector3<T> aSpherePosition, float aSphereRadius) const { float distance = (aSpherePosition.Dot(myNormal)) - myABCD.w; // completely on the front side if (distance >= aSphereRadius) { return 1; } // completely on the backside (aka "inside") if (distance <= -aSphereRadius) { return -1; } //sphere intersects the plane return 0; }  
      Please bare in mind that this code is not optimized nor well-written by any means. I am just looking to get it working.
      The result of this culling is that the models seem to be culled a bit "too early", so that the culling is visible and the models pops away.
      How do I get the culling to work properly?
      I have tried different techniques but haven't gotten any of them to work.
      If you need more code or explanations feel free to ask for it.

      Thanks.
       
    • By evelyn4you
      hi,
      i have read very much about the binding of a constantbuffer to a shader but something is still unclear to me.
      e.g. when performing :   vertexshader.setConstantbuffer ( buffer,  slot )
       is the buffer bound
      a.  to the VertexShaderStage
      or
      b. to the VertexShader that is currently set as the active VertexShader
      Is it possible to bind a constantBuffer to a VertexShader e.g. VS_A and keep this binding even after the active VertexShader has changed ?
      I mean i want to bind constantbuffer_A  to VS_A, an Constantbuffer_B to VS_B  and  only use updateSubresource without using setConstantBuffer command every time.

      Look at this example:
      SetVertexShader ( VS_A )
      updateSubresource(buffer_A)
      vertexshader.setConstantbuffer ( buffer_A,  slot_A )
      perform drawcall       ( buffer_A is used )

      SetVertexShader ( VS_B )
      updateSubresource(buffer_B)
      vertexshader.setConstantbuffer ( buffer_B,  slot_A )
      perform drawcall   ( buffer_B is used )
      SetVertexShader ( VS_A )
      perform drawcall   (now which buffer is used ??? )
       
      I ask this question because i have made a custom render engine an want to optimize to
      the minimum  updateSubresource, and setConstantbuffer  calls
       
       
       
       
       
    • By noodleBowl
      I got a quick question about buffers when it comes to DirectX 11. If I bind a buffer using a command like:
      IASetVertexBuffers IASetIndexBuffer VSSetConstantBuffers PSSetConstantBuffers  and then later on I update that bound buffer's data using commands like Map/Unmap or any of the other update commands.
      Do I need to rebind the buffer again in order for my update to take effect? If I dont rebind is that really bad as in I get a performance hit? My thought process behind this is that if the buffer is already bound why do I need to rebind it? I'm using that same buffer it is just different data
       
    • By Rockmover
      I am really stuck with something that should be very simple in DirectX 11. 
      1. I can draw lines using a PC (position, colored) vertices and a simple shader just fine.
      2. I can draw 3D triangles using PCN (position, colored, normal) vertices just fine (even transparency and SpecularBlinnPhong shaders).
       
      However, if I'm using my 3D shader, and I want to draw my PC lines in the same scene how can I do that?
       
      If I change my lines to PCN and pass them to the 3D shader with my triangles, then the lighting screws them all up.  I only want the lighting for the 3D triangles, but no SpecularBlinnPhong/Lighting for the lines (just PC). 
      I am sure this is because if I change the lines to PNC there is not really a correct "normal" for the lines.  
      I assume I somehow need to draw the 3D triangles using one shader, and then "switch" to another shader and draw the lines?  But I have no clue how to use two different shaders in the same scene.  And then are the lines just drawn on top of the triangles, or vice versa (maybe draw order dependent)?  
      I must be missing something really basic, so if anyone can just point me in the right direction (or link to an example showing the implementation of multiple shaders) that would be REALLY appreciated.
       
      I'm also more than happy to post my simple test code if that helps as well!
       
      THANKS SO MUCH IN ADVANCE!!!
  • Popular Now