Gaming DirectX 11 performance first look: Dirt 2

I was alittle surprised that the reviewer was abit shocked at the lower frame rate. Dx 11 is pushing more features than Dx 9, were you really expecting it to be giving higher frame rates than the pervious Direct X version which was doing less??

When has there ever been a Direct X version that was pushing out more frames per second than the previous version while doing more on screen?

 

You hit that nail right on the head.

The refresh cards are always better when it comes to new gen cards. That is why I always stick to buy the refresh cards so I pay the same price for the first gen card at release but get better performance. Its a win win for me and my wallet when it comes to price performance ratios.

 

you will notice the shadows on the back of the car are a bit more complex, and of course the obvious ones highlighted in the videos.

The Heaven Benchmark seems to give far greater difference between DX9/10 and DX11 than Dirt2 which looks like DX10 afaik. Batman looks better than this but that is because it uses PhysX, but still it might just be Dirt2.

Bit-Tech why not comment on the heaven benchmark? Clearly that is a good showcase of DX11.

 

Plus, not everyone has a 5870. In fact, barely anyone does. I wouldn't be surprised if the drop took the game to near-unplayable levels on a 5770.

 

Summer maybe but definitely by Christmas of 2010 we will see Directx 11 pushed. It always takes a year and a half for the next big thing to really get pushed. We should sit back and enjoy Directx 10.1 being pushed in the upcoming games being released.

Or like Window Xp Directx 9 is just too darn good to let go.

I plan on buying an ATI 5000 series card for the simple fact they use less electricity and produce less heat all the while murdering all the Directx 9 and 10.1 cards in performance. But then again SLI and Crossfire are looking even better with the fallen prices. I'm so confused.

Just like that once in a rotation great game Directx 11 one day will pop out of nowhere and make us say " #$@#%$$% I got to get that"!! So be patient and game on!

 

every time they release a new DX patch people always complain about the performance hit and minimal gains.

In fact I remember during Hl2 days when SM2.0 came out and HDR came out and people complained.

another hint

It takes awhile for engine designers and artists to learn how to fully exploit the new programs and for hardware to catch up.

in the article both frame rates were completely playable in dx9 and dx11 does 88 fps give you anything 60 doesn't?

 

My comment was for the 5870, you do bring up a good point for the lower tier cards.

 

That's right, isn't half the fun with a rally game watching the replays of your run?

 

Wait, have you been reading Randal Munroe's mind?

 

I understand what you are saying but there are always exceptions to rules. DX10 cards never really got to grips with DX10 for whatever reason. However, even the first gen of DX10 based GPUs had amazing performance against DX9 based games. If games developers follow the path already laid before them, the fact that next gen consoles won't be out for at least a couple more years they will continue to not develope games to utilise DX10 or DX11 properly. Therefore any revision of DX11 GPUs will be insignificant with regards to DX11 technology. For the last year or even two, the GPU development has not generally increased performance in relation to better details and more advanced graphics, only the ability of running games based on older (DX9 or DX10-mode) technology at much higher resolutions which only give the impression of better details.

 

Nvidia's FX5900 springs to mind.... My brother splashed out on one, yet HL2 would only run in DX8.1 where as my ATI 9700 used to show DX9!!

 

If the demo was tested on Nvidia DX10 or DX9 hardware, what would the differences in image quality be?

I am asking this question due to the possible fact that some image enhancements might still be enabled on the ATi cards even when running DX9 forced?

Just being objective towards DX11 and ATi, I am a proud owner of an 8800GTX and GTX 280 so no bias in my question

 

Shhhh!!! We are not supposed to talk about the FX5xxx series. They are listening to us, they always listen.

 

Personally I have no idea, but as this is just a demo I think we will have to wait until the final release to get an honest result.

 

One interesting thing that no one has mentioned is that the bandwidth requirement differences between the DX9 version and the DX11. The DX9 version uses R8G8B8A8 render targets meaning, 32 bits per pixel. The DX11 uses R16G16B16A16 meaning 64 bits per pixel, that's double the amount of bandwidth required PER rendering surface. Rendering surfaces are generally uncompressed as well. I bet if you ran the game through Microsoft's PIX utility, you'll find many rendering targets (shadow maps, reflections, etc, come to mind), and when each one is twice as expensive, the benefits of the new API many be biased. Also, when doing post processing effects in DX9, downsampling by 4x (reduce the width and height by a factor 2) reduces the bandwidth by 4x. So, in essence the DX11 version requires 8x as much bandwidth as the DX9 version so I'm not that surprised there may be a frame rate dip.

 

Will you guys be able to test the game with DX11 and the Catalyst 9.11 hotfix and share any results?

 

Great info!

 

there is a list:

http://planetbattlefield.gamespy.com/fullstory.php?id=160728

 

There is no restriction on the render target DXGI format in DX10/11, so I don't really get why you'd move to a 64bit color space, what benefits are there. Also how do you know that DIRT uses a 64bit color space for the render targets?

Also for post processing in DX10/11, you are also able to downsample, so I dont really get why this would be an issues unless the developers weren't comfortable with the API or just did a lazy port. I dont get how one game can exists a near 40% perf increase and another almost the size size decrease

The frame cap is also extremely puzzling for the dx11 version?

 

Framecap IS puzzling. I wonder why they did that? maybe they wanted reviewers to emphasize on minimum frame rates. If they knew that there would be no visible image quality difference, codemasters should have simply made the game for dx10 or dx9 and focussed on from-scratch dx11 development for their upcoming F1 game. Instead they are developing the F1 game for the wii(which is quite puzzling) and technologically their games are a generation old(because of consolification!), not to forget delayed as well. I really like their games but ,unlike Crytek and other developers, they are not making a technologically good contribution to the gaming industry.