Intel Core 2 Duo Pixel Shader 3.0 Support?.
by Surge · in Torque Game Engine Advanced · 01/12/2007 (4:50 am) · 23 replies
Good day folks,
My 1.7 GHZ P4 that i'd been doing all my work on forever bit the dust.
I have replaced it now.
-------------
Intel DG965WH Mother Board
1.86GHz Core 2 Duo Processor.
2 Gigs Of Ram.
It has on board Graphics(1st time for me actually)
Intel G965 Express Chipset
-------------
When I go to the Intel site and look up this board.
It seems to me that its on board graphics should support
Pixel Shader 2.0 - 3.0.
I have installed the Latest Direct X 9.0c.
First was the June 2006 version, and now the December 2006 Update
I went to the 'contol Panel' and Double clicked the Direct X Icon
and ran the test.It ran through Direct X 7,8,9 and all passed.
So I didnt think it was the Direct X.
Beyond the CD that came with my mother board, I searched the
Intel site, and found one update to the Video driver, so I Installed it.
When ever I boot my TGEA(TSE) Build's, it now says.
Failed to Intialize Direct3D! Make sure you have the Direct 9 Installed,
and are running a card that supports Pixel Shader 1.1.
Can I get some advice.
Would anyone be able to say if it was the On board graphics card?
Or would you say that I have something wrong with my Direct X Install?
Is it necessary to purcase a New video card?
Or Should my new Intel Mother board be able to handle the TGEA(TSE) Builds?
Just to add to this, even the TGE builds seem a little choppy?
I switch from OPEN GL to D3D and It still makes the screen choppy?
Graphics Card?..... Drivers?
I miss my TSE!
-Surge
My 1.7 GHZ P4 that i'd been doing all my work on forever bit the dust.
I have replaced it now.
-------------
Intel DG965WH Mother Board
1.86GHz Core 2 Duo Processor.
2 Gigs Of Ram.
It has on board Graphics(1st time for me actually)
Intel G965 Express Chipset
-------------
When I go to the Intel site and look up this board.
It seems to me that its on board graphics should support
Pixel Shader 2.0 - 3.0.
I have installed the Latest Direct X 9.0c.
First was the June 2006 version, and now the December 2006 Update
I went to the 'contol Panel' and Double clicked the Direct X Icon
and ran the test.It ran through Direct X 7,8,9 and all passed.
So I didnt think it was the Direct X.
Beyond the CD that came with my mother board, I searched the
Intel site, and found one update to the Video driver, so I Installed it.
When ever I boot my TGEA(TSE) Build's, it now says.
Failed to Intialize Direct3D! Make sure you have the Direct 9 Installed,
and are running a card that supports Pixel Shader 1.1.
Can I get some advice.
Would anyone be able to say if it was the On board graphics card?
Or would you say that I have something wrong with my Direct X Install?
Is it necessary to purcase a New video card?
Or Should my new Intel Mother board be able to handle the TGEA(TSE) Builds?
Just to add to this, even the TGE builds seem a little choppy?
I switch from OPEN GL to D3D and It still makes the screen choppy?
Graphics Card?..... Drivers?
I miss my TSE!
-Surge
About the author
Love 3d Game Design -
#22
03/15/2007 (7:43 am)
I use a old Mobility Radeon 9600 in PS 2.2 mode and I have not seen any issues at all actually. That card is way below any of the GeForce 7 Go cards. 
#23
And the "way below" is very relativ.
7600Go = 7300GT, while yours might be far older, it is still a 600 series chip.
And until you use Shader 3 or heavy usage of shader 2, yours will most likely outperform mine (you have at least the same amount of pixel shader units as I have right now if not even more. I've 8 PSUs with 2 shader ops per cycle)
Newer major series does not make much of impact here.
But one thing that seems to have a fair impact seems that I have an NVidia ... there have been others mentioning that TGEA has a fair amount of performance problems on NVidia, compared to ATI. But I am too unexperienced in the GPU maker specific stuff (yet) to be able to tell more on that topic.
03/16/2007 (4:48 am)
You mean PS 2.0a / bAnd the "way below" is very relativ.
7600Go = 7300GT, while yours might be far older, it is still a 600 series chip.
And until you use Shader 3 or heavy usage of shader 2, yours will most likely outperform mine (you have at least the same amount of pixel shader units as I have right now if not even more. I've 8 PSUs with 2 shader ops per cycle)
Newer major series does not make much of impact here.
But one thing that seems to have a fair impact seems that I have an NVidia ... there have been others mentioning that TGEA has a fair amount of performance problems on NVidia, compared to ATI. But I am too unexperienced in the GPU maker specific stuff (yet) to be able to tell more on that topic.
Torque 3D Owner Marc Dreamora Schaerer
Gayasoft
You are right on the self shadowing as well. I actually have it normally turned off as it does not make a difference when viewed from distance. Same for DLR ... I have ASUS PW201 screen with quite vibrant colors and DLR and bloom effect just make sure I can only work half as long on it as I would like.
Water thought needs to be active, as it is part of the current idea, even a that large part that I have to burn 50% performance for "nothing" (this nothing is having foliage rendered through water which TGEA does not by default).
It was mainly meant to show that with such a weak card, the game actually could not be tested in a "real environment" with all its effects.
For prototyping and core logic, where I (I assume others as well) actually don't need eye candy but seeing if the game logic works etc, this is no problem. Thats why I have the time to wait on Intels Q6400 CPU launch in Q2.
I will first have to understand quite some parts of TGEAs rendering and handling code anyway before I start using the eye candy parts as I want to know what influences what and how large the impact is.