PDA

View Full Version : Rice's Daedalus plugin 4.1.0 beta 1



Rice
February 12th, 2003, 21:42
Hello, guys

I would like to release a new beta version 4.1.0 beta 1 as the conclusion of my working on DirectX part of this plugin.

After these DirectX combiner fixes, I hope this plugin should work much better for most video cards, not just for Geforce2 anymore.

DirectX: (Correction, you need DirectX 8.1)
- DirectX combiner is largely rewritten/enhanced. Now we have three DirectX combiners to choose.
Low end video cards - Onboard / RivaTNT / Intel 740i / G200
Middle end video cards - TNT / TNT2 / Rage128 / Voodoo
Higher end video cards - Geforce/Radeon
- DirectX combiner can be automatically selected, or manual selected
- Not using manual prepared DirectX combiner data anymore, all combiners data are generated dynamically by DirectX combiner compiler
- Tested with Rage128, Onboard, Geforce2, Geforce2Pro

OpenGL:
- Some combiner fixes
- Implemented sprite2D functions, still not finished

Other changes:
- Bug fixes regarding texture loading and texture flags
- Faster speed



This is beta testing version, bug reports are welcomed.

Know problems:
1. zbuffer may not work on some Radeon cards with DirectX (I have no clue why zbuffer can not work as it works fine with Rage128)
2. OpenGL 1.2 and 1.3 Render engine/combiner does not work very well, need further debug
3. Texture losing problem with OpenGL, As far I know, OpenGL 1.1 works still fine.
4. Almost not working for Voodoo3 because voodoo3 only supports 16bit buffer.
5. Does not seem to work with DirectX9 because no one has evern tested with DirectX9. I don't see much reasons why someone wants to install DirectX9.


Rice

I have also posted the same DLL but built for DirectX 8.0a. If you only have DirectX 8.0 not 8.1, use this link instead of the file below.
.File for DirectX 8.0a, If you have DirectX 8.1, use the file below (http://www.emutalk.net/showthread.php?s=&postid=119705#post119705)


===================
The attachment is for DirectX 8.1, it has been updated with a fix for low end video card combiner. It crashed for some low end video cards before

Plisco
February 12th, 2003, 22:23
Just downloading now keep it up Rice :)

Martin
February 12th, 2003, 22:29
Great job Rice, I'm going to post this! :)

pj64er
February 13th, 2003, 00:20
I have a Radeon 7000, how do I know if zbuffer is not working?

[edit] umm..forgot to say thx! :)

Rice
February 13th, 2003, 00:40
If it works fine for you, then you just don't have the problem.

If depth buffer / zbuffer does not work, you will see objects will overlapping each other.

Rice

CoDeX
February 13th, 2003, 02:13
not work to me :/

Rice
February 13th, 2003, 02:47
Originally posted by CoDeX
not work to me :/

If you keep pressing the latest OS/drivers into your almost slowest PC, and never tell what's exact your problems, I don't think any new plugins will ever work for you.

Doomulation
February 13th, 2003, 08:38
Originally posted by Rice
I don't see much reasons why someone wants to install DirectX9.
For Bra64 of course! :n64:
And those who wants the dx9 dsk, of course.

MADrigal
February 13th, 2003, 09:46
Very nice to see you at work again, Rice! :) ...and I especially like the way you introduce all new features: it looks so "professional" heh!

One question: do you noticed more compatibility if compered to the previous versions? What should I expect to see working better than before? Or is it "just" a code clean-up release?

milen
February 13th, 2003, 13:13
Any chance that you will make the plugin to support 16bit depth precision. I have voodoo3 and hope it's not a hard work to be implemented.
Thanks!

Rice
February 13th, 2003, 16:34
Originally posted by MADrigal
Very nice to see you at work again, Rice! :) ...and I especially like the way you introduce all new features: it looks so "professional" heh!

One question: do you noticed more compatibility if compered to the previous versions? What should I expect to see working better than before? Or is it "just" a code clean-up release?

I can say "YES", compatibility is much improved, not regarding game compatibility, but regarding with different video cards.

Rice
February 13th, 2003, 16:36
Originally posted by Doomulation
For Bra64 of course! :n64:
And those who wants the dx9 dsk, of course.

If I were author of Bra64, I will do it with DirectX 6 to make it more compatible with low end video cards which are targeted by Bra64.

Clements
February 13th, 2003, 16:55
Tried the Plugin with Mystical Ninja to see how well the plugin would cope (i.e. the "slow" issue) and still slows down, but not as much as Jabos. A seriously good plugin- Respectable with Mortal Kombat Trilogy as well.

How do you change the resolution? Its 'ghosted' when I use the config menu.

ScottJC
February 15th, 2003, 21:02
I'm only going to be testing 1 game at a time here, to start with, I choose Banjo-Tooie, one of the more complex and one of my more favourites:P

I've got 5 pics of bugs to show off here;

Heres the first:

White Sprites it looks like, this game uses lots of them, so they are rather important;

ScottJC
February 15th, 2003, 21:04
Second Issue, although the shadow is there, the big square box is there too, weird :P

ScottJC
February 15th, 2003, 21:05
The shoot-em-up area;

Some textures decide to change randomly it seems, sometimes it looks great others you get this horrid green thing on the wall :P

ScottJC
February 15th, 2003, 21:07
Weird, when I read this signpost in the shoot-em-up area the textures on the wall go nuts, could be to do with the same thing as the last pic:

ScottJC
February 15th, 2003, 21:08
more texture issues: as soon as you leave this building in world 1 this happens, after that they revert to normal, weird;

Apart from these issues, the game is emulated rather well if I do say so myself.

ScottJC
February 15th, 2003, 21:10
at the time i used these settings: switching to middle level did nothing;

Doomulation
February 15th, 2003, 21:19
Originally posted by Rice
If I were author of Bra64, I will do it with DirectX 6 to make it more compatible with low end video cards which are targeted by Bra64.
It's targeted for low processor speed i suppose, but done is done.
And you'll probably need it for the future as well.

Rice
February 15th, 2003, 21:24
Thanks for the feedback from Sayargh.

The texture randomness is the most serious problem, will be addressed in the next beta, I have already figured out the reason. The white texture is regarding with combiner, it is video card dependent. The black block under banjo is related to N64 frame buffer emulation, as I remebered, you can get rid of it if using different N64 frame buffer emulation type. (I fixed it long time ago, can not remember which option to use anymore.)


Regarding to the combiner problems, there are always some conflicts. Some video cards are better, others are not as good as high end ones. Of course I can use simpiler way to emulate complex N64 combiners, we will lose the quality for best video cards, but will make happy for most people with regular video cards. Most other video plugins are using quite simple combiner setting to emulate complex N64 combiners. You will feel not bad as you get some reasonable textures, even though they are not correct or not the best (of course you don't know what's the best and the correct effect.) - I am trying to confuse everyone.

Rice
February 15th, 2003, 21:27
Originally posted by Doomulation
It's targeted for low processor speed i suppose, but done is done.
And you'll probably need it for the future as well.

Of course it is targeting low speed processor, and low speed processor usually never comes with high end video cards.

ScottJC
February 15th, 2003, 21:53
hmm, so even a geforce 4 isn't good enough to display the sprites properly :P

I thought gf4 would be high end because gf2 is :)

Rice
February 15th, 2003, 22:09
Originally posted by Sayargh
hmm, so even a geforce 4 isn't good enough to display the sprites properly :P

I thought gf4 would be high end because gf2 is :)

Of course gf4 should be better. Nvidia driver drives me mad. I can not understand why gf4 is doing differently from gf2, or it should be just better as there is nothing in gf2 which is not in gf4.

I just can not find a gf4 to test with.

Again, thanks for your feedback, and let me know when you got some problems.

ScottJC
February 15th, 2003, 23:13
No problem;

Just to give you extra info i use the latest nvidia detonator drivers.

next time i'll post in the proper post, the feedback one that is, lol :)

Cyberman
February 15th, 2003, 23:32
Each revision is a new API, once you learn one API you have to learn another. Thank goodness GL doesn't change that much, although the extensions are equally convoluted (Nvidia and ATI are to blame for this).

What's the deal with inconsistant extensions? Ok I'll stop whining ;)

The GF4 is only different than the GF2 in a few things, the GF3 is actually a more advanced chipset than the GF4. The GF4 is a low end product as Anandtec decribed it "Why don't they call this a GF2.5?" I believe it's NVidia's idea for a GF2 replacement. They are probably no longer producing the GF2 and are selling out there stocks of the parts so that the GF4 will be the mainstay.

That's there strategy. :)

Cyb

noctrun
February 16th, 2003, 01:03
Originally posted by Cyberman
The GF4 is only different than the GF2 in a few things, the GF3 is actually a more advanced chipset than the GF4. The GF4 is a low end product as Anandtec decribed it "Why don't they call this a GF2.5?" I believe it's NVidia's idea for a GF2 replacement.

I totally agree but the gf2.5 are only the gf4 mx, the gf4 ti beats any gf3 and should be considered the only 'real' gf4

petronius79
February 16th, 2003, 02:06
I tried it only in WWF NoMercy and All Star Tennis 99. Has some display problems, so I'll stick to version 3 which is the most stable.

it seems the new plug-in isnt for my system


oh...I use DirectX9 but I guess even with v8.1 things would be the same.

but you really made a good effort

loleoc
February 16th, 2003, 05:53
Later, i will buy a new video card for my computer ( a geforce 4 mx) mainly for nintendo 64 emulation. But you say that gf2 is better than gf4?. What do i buy? a gf2 or a gf4? (I just have money for them). In Argentina (where i live) the gf2 and gf4 are the only cheap video cards.

Rice
February 16th, 2003, 07:03
No one said gf2 is better than gf4. I will go the gf4 if I were you because it is newer and should be better.

ScottJC
February 16th, 2003, 14:56
The Geforce 4MX is definatly better than a Geforce 2MX, for example, my geforce 4mx can render at about 31 Million triangles a second according to my box, where-as my geforce2MX can render about 21 million triangles (can't really remember the exact amount) anyway...

my geforce 4mx also has twice the memory and is capable of more stuff, for example: 4x AntiAliasing is impossible with my geforce 2mx.

Yep, i've got em both, a geforce 4mx is well worth it if you as me.

noctrun
February 16th, 2003, 16:40
Originally posted by loleoc
Later, i will buy a new video card for my computer ( a geforce 4 mx) mainly for nintendo 64 emulation. But you say that gf2 is better than gf4?. What do i buy? a gf2 or a gf4? (I just have money for them). In Argentina (where i live) the gf2 and gf4 are the only cheap video cards.

I just said this: the gf3 and gf4ti are both way better than any gf4mx (thats why cyp said the gf4mx should be called gf2.5)

loleoc
February 17th, 2003, 05:54
Is there too many differences between a gf4mx agp and a geforce 4mx pci and also with gf2 mx agp and gf2 mx pci?. Or the speed in the games is the same with the agp or pci?. Because i have got a Voodoo 5 agp and i want to conserve it and to continue using it in my computer.

Doomulation
February 17th, 2003, 13:20
Pci has lower bandwidth than agp. It's just that i'd advice to use agp if you can, and if you can't, then use pci. And at the next upgrade (even if it's a thousand years from that point), go for agp.

loleoc
February 21st, 2003, 04:25
What differences are there between "MSI" Geforce 4 mx 440 and "PINE" Geforce 4 mx 440?

Doomulation
February 21st, 2003, 12:43
Read the technical info about them. See their homepages if for that if the site you're looking at doesn't show it.

Cyberman
February 21st, 2003, 21:32
Please keep on topic.. (poor Rice). As for if the GF4 is faster and better than the GF2 yes it is? :)

the Ti series has incremental improvements in terms of geometry of the chips (die shrink) and speed let alone it has improved pipelines etc. The original GF4 was essentially an improved GF2 .. nothing as good as the GF3. The newer GF4's are better than the GF3's SEE the price to note the difference (seriously).

As for Rice's plugin I'm going bonkers over why it sometimes doesn't detect Nvidia's DRIVERS hehehe :) I think it's something to do with Win2K oh well.

Cyb