42 replies to this topic

### #21.oisyn

DevMaster Staff

• Moderators
• 1842 posts

Posted 08 April 2008 - 11:29 AM

Which was already reduced because many so called Vista-Ready PC's were actually only capable of running Vista Home Basic without Aero
-
Currently working on: the 3D engine for Tomb Raider.

### #22davepermen

Senior Member

• Members
• 1306 posts

Posted 08 April 2008 - 12:42 PM

that is another topic...
davepermen.net
-Loving a Person is having the wish to see this Person happy, no matter what that means to yourself.
-No matter what it means to myself....

### #23Micron

New Member

• Validating
• 5 posts

Posted 08 April 2008 - 08:57 PM

Now that Swiftshader has pixel shader 2, why not go for TnL? Im sure it will improve compatibility for many games. Intel did it with there new x3xxx IGP's. And i don't think SM 3 will be that important, because many games out today only mostly require sm 2.

With swiftshader 2.0, i now can play battlefield 2, i have a Intel P4 2.5ghz, 504mb ram, and Intel extreme graphics (845g). Its still very slow, but i can run it now. Swiftshader 2.0 is useless with the battlefield 1942 series, maybe because battlefield 1942 only uses directx 8?

Also the demos that come with swiftshader, i ran without swiftshader and it was faster than with it. Why is that? Is Intel extreme graphics better? Swiftshader 2.0 runs dolphin at 40+fps, while my IGP runs it around 122fps. Similar results goes the same with the other demos.

### #24TheNut

Senior Member

• Moderators
• 1696 posts
• LocationThornhill, ON

Posted 08 April 2008 - 10:40 PM

http://www.nutty.ca - Being a nut has its advantages.

### #25Micron

New Member

• Validating
• 5 posts

Posted 08 April 2008 - 11:49 PM

If its taking you awhile, use another email, and try filling the form out. It did the same for me, i used my second email, and it came instantly. But never came on the first email i send...

### #26Nick

Senior Member

• Members
• 1227 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 09:27 AM

Micron said:

Now that Swiftshader has pixel shader 2, why not go for TnL?
It already supports T&L and vertex shaders up to version 2.x (including branching and such). :happy:

Quote

With swiftshader 2.0, i now can play battlefield 2, i have a Intel P4 2.5ghz, 504mb ram, and Intel extreme graphics (845g). Its still very slow, but i can run it now.
Great to hear that!

Quote

Swiftshader 2.0 is useless with the battlefield 1942 series, maybe because battlefield 1942 only uses directx 8?
There's also a d3d8.dll in the demo package. I haven't tried Battlefield 1942 myself yet though...

Quote

Also the demos that come with swiftshader, i ran without swiftshader and it was faster than with it. Why is that? Is Intel extreme graphics better?
If your hardware runs it, it is practically always faster. SwiftShader runs entirely on the CPU, which is never as specialized for graphics as the GPU.

Quote

Swiftshader 2.0 runs dolphin at 40+fps, while my IGP runs it around 122fps. Similar results goes the same with the other demos.
For what it's worth, my Core 2 Quad runs it at over 250 FPS. :lol:

Could you do me a favor and run 3DMark2001 SE at standard settings on your 845G?

### #27juhana

New Member

• Members
• 2 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 04:51 PM

Nick said:

You might also want to know that during the three years that swShader was open-source nobody contributed any code.

I'd love to know your motivation though. What would you use it for and why open-source?

By the way, assuming you're an existing member, you don't have to register as a new member today just to tell everyone about swShader. I personally don't mind at all talking about it and spreading the LGPL source code.

I just thought your thread was a good place to let people know
myself and now I wish somebody would improve it.

SwiftShader: I would need Linux version, cabable of running latest
vertex, geometry, and fragment programs. It does not need to be
fast. That way I'm able to implement the latest GPU tricks and
possibly move them to open source engines (Crystal Space,
Ogre3D, OSG, etc). Non-free renderer would do fine for me.

it would need to be open source and freely available. It is too
large step to buy either latest hardware or non-free $$software renderer. I too have noticed the lack of interest when it comes to open source software development. Due lack of skills, I cannot improve swshader myself but I'm writing software renderer in which v/g/f programs are coded in C and compiled for speed. It is simpler because I don't follow OpenGL or DirectX standards. But most probably it is for my use only. http://www.uta.fi/~majuko/wp2a.jpg Juhana ### #28Micron New Member • Validating • 5 posts Posted 09 April 2008 - 08:25 PM juhana said: I just thought your thread was a good place to let people know about the old open source version. I found swshader just recently myself and now I wish somebody would improve it. SwiftShader: I would need Linux version, cabable of running latest vertex, geometry, and fragment programs. It does not need to be fast. That way I'm able to implement the latest GPU tricks and possibly move them to open source engines (Crystal Space, Ogre3D, OSG, etc). Non-free renderer would do fine for me. But to get more open source advocates to shader development, it would need to be open source and freely available. It is too large step to buy either latest hardware or non-free$$$software renderer. I too have noticed the lack of interest when it comes to open source software development. Due lack of skills, I cannot improve swshader myself but I'm writing software renderer in which v/g/f programs are coded in C and compiled for speed. It is simpler because I don't follow OpenGL or DirectX standards. But most probably it is for my use only. http://www.uta.fi/~majuko/wp2a.jpg Juhana There IS a Swiftshader for Linux. It's Cedega 6.0, it costs$60, and \$5 per month if you want the new versions of it, and updates. And it is a popular choice, and it is better than Wine from what i hear.

And is there a way to get rid of the Swiftshader logo when using Swiftshader? I know its a demo , but regular users can't buy it, so what is the point of adding the logo? Swiftshader is very useful to me, and i want to keep using it, and the logo bothers me.

### #29Micron

New Member

• Validating
• 5 posts

Posted 09 April 2008 - 09:06 PM

Nick said:

Could you do me a favor and run 3DMark2001 SE at standard settings on your 845G?

Okay, i tried 3DMark2001 SE on default 1024x768 settings. And i received a score of 1416. It ran everything somewhat smoothly, except the pixel shading, bump mapping, and butterfly test, it was good.

I tried running it with Swiftshader 2.0, but it didn't even recognize the d3d9.dll file. But i tried running it with the d3d8.dll file, and it was super slow (around ~5 fps). So i didn't even continued the tests. But on my laptop, the 3Dmark2001 SE recognized the d3d9.dll file, but why didn't my computer?

In the future, maybe you should try making Swiftshader work with the IGP/GPU? Instead of total reliant on the CPU, i think it could put less stress on the CPU as well.

And is there a way i could improve gameplay of Battlefield 2 using Swiftshader 2.0? Right now i testing, and trying out different Swiftshader settings, but is there a good one i could use?

### #30Nick

Senior Member

• Members
• 1227 posts

Posted 10 April 2008 - 06:41 PM

Micron said:

Okay, i tried 3DMark2001 SE on default 1024x768 settings. And i received a score of 1416.
Thanks a lot for testing!

With SwiftShader 2.0 I reach a score of 1662 on my Core 2 Quad 2.4 GHz! So it's official, software rendering can beat hardware rendering. :cool2:

Ok, ok, that's a six year old IGP against a one year old CPU. But still, it means that for every game of that generation you no longer strictly need dedicated hardware. Max Payne, to name one, runs quite smoothly on my system and in my opinion it's still great fun.

Quote

I tried running it with Swiftshader 2.0, but it didn't even recognize the d3d9.dll file. But i tried running it with the d3d8.dll file, and it was super slow (around ~5 fps). So i didn't even continued the tests. But on my laptop, the 3Dmark2001 SE recognized the d3d9.dll file, but why didn't my computer?
3DMark2001 SE is entirely Direct3D 8 based, so you need the d3d8.dll file. I doubt that on your laptop it uses the d3d9.dll file. Maybe you copied both DLLs?

Quote

In the future, maybe you should try making Swiftshader work with the IGP/GPU? Instead of total reliant on the CPU, i think it could put less stress on the CPU as well.
This has been suggested before and although it's an interesting concept there are several issues. First of all round-trip communication to the GPU is very slow. Secondly you would only be able to support the texture formats the GPU supports (assuming that at least texture sampling is done on the GPU). And thirdly the synchronization with multiple CPU cores would be horrible.

Personally I believe that the ideal way forward for software rendering is to have CPUs with instructions that accelerate texture sampling. To keep things general-purpose (read: useful for more than just graphics) I think that a 'gather' instruction makes most sense. By reading multiple memory locations in parallel the texture sampling bottleneck could be significantly reduced, and such instruction would also be very useful to do table lookups for implementing transcendental functions. Plus I'm sure it would have a use for things like physics, ray-tracing, etc...

Quote

And is there a way i could improve gameplay of Battlefield 2 using Swiftshader 2.0? Right now i testing, and trying out different Swiftshader settings, but is there a good one i could use?
Every setting is a tradeoff between quality and performance, so the best thing you can do is try them out and see what you like best. The easiest way to do that is to have the game in windowed mode (there's also a SwiftShader.ini setting to force that), and use the web interface at http://localhost:8080/swiftconfig. Most settings are interactive so you can try different things and test it instantly. Hover the mouse over a control to get some extra information. If something isn't clear don't hesitate to ask!

### #31.oisyn

DevMaster Staff

• Moderators
• 1842 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 09:29 AM

Nick said:

So it's official, software rendering can beat hardware rendering. :cool2:
And yet it still doesn't do SM3.0
-
Currently working on: the 3D engine for Tomb Raider.

### #32Micron

New Member

• Validating
• 5 posts

Posted 11 April 2008 - 09:52 PM

I did some more testing.

Battlefield 1942 doesn't work with the Swiftshader d3d8.dll. Dosen't even start it. But i tried d3d9.dll, and i don't know if it is using Swiftshader or not, because the logo doesn't even come up. And Battlefield 1942 uses direct x 8.1. If when i'm playing, if its actually using Swiftshader 2.0 d3d9.dll, then it's getting really good solid playable frame rates(at medium settings and high). But i don't know if it is using it. Because it's getting almost the exact fps if i don't use it.

Halo doesn't even run with Swiftshader, (it dose not detect it to be Direct x 9b) and it keeps telling me to install it.

### #33genious k

New Member

• Members
• 3 posts

Posted 13 April 2008 - 09:37 PM

Hey Nick.........

i just tried Swift shader demo...its awesome........with it i could run Medal of Honor:Allied Assault,FSW,call of duty 2.0....etc

But i had to borrow all these from my friends.Coz my laptop is very low end....with an intel 945 gm AGP..

Still,i was surprised to find these game ruuning (though very slow) on a non pixel shader agp like mine..

nyway........

i must say..........this swift shader is an ingeneious creation.

But...i just want to know how can i modify its settings........so that i can run these games with good (playable) FPS.

### #34genious k

New Member

• Members
• 3 posts

Posted 13 April 2008 - 09:39 PM

i have used another soft , its #D analyze..its pretty goood.
coz i could play alot of games very smoothly..........
so...i guess soft shader should have some options for modification..

### #35Nick

Senior Member

• Members
• 1227 posts

Posted 15 April 2008 - 07:27 AM

Micron said:

Battlefield 1942 doesn't work with the Swiftshader d3d8.dll. Dosen't even start it.
The single player demo does start on my machine, but the text isn't rendered properly. I'll look into it. Thanks again for notifying me!

Quote

But i tried d3d9.dll, and i don't know if it is using Swiftshader or not, because the logo doesn't even come up.
It's definitely a Direct3D 8 game. And the logo is always supposed to be there when running with SwiftShader (except for a licensed version of course).

Quote

Halo doesn't even run with Swiftshader, (it dose not detect it to be Direct x 9b) and it keeps telling me to install it.
The Halo Trial runs fine for me. But I do remember getting warnings like that, and strangely it was solved by keeping the suggested install folder name. :blink:

### #36Nick

Senior Member

• Members
• 1227 posts

Posted 15 April 2008 - 07:36 AM

genious k said:

But...i just want to know how can i modify its settings........so that i can run these games with good (playable) FPS.
You can change the settings in the SwiftShader.ini file. Place it next to the DLL. To see all valid settings and some explanation use SwiftConfig when running in windowed mode.

Don't expect miracles though. Everything is done on the CPU and its raw processing power can be insufficient for many games. We're really targetting casual games right now.

Also note that this is an evaluation version, and no game is actually optimized for rendering in software. By better cooperation between a client's application and SwiftShader higher performance can be reached.

### #37genious k

New Member

• Members
• 3 posts

Posted 15 April 2008 - 07:57 AM

Thanx............... a lot.

i can play a a lot of games call of duty 2.0 easity with my intel 945gm and celeron laptop....

:D
you dd a great job with this software.

### #38Nick

Senior Member

• Members
• 1227 posts

Posted 22 April 2008 - 01:58 PM

New article at ExtremeTech:

SwiftShader 2.0 and the Future of CPU Rendering

### #39Kenneth Gorking

Senior Member

• Members
• 939 posts

Posted 22 April 2008 - 08:29 PM

They don't sound all that positive about it, and they seem to think it's a replacement for a regular GPU...
"Stupid bug! You go squish now!!" - Homer Simpson

### #40Nick

Senior Member

• Members
• 1227 posts

Posted 22 April 2008 - 08:57 PM

Kenneth Gorking said:

They don't sound all that positive about it, and they seem to think it's a replacement for a regular GPU...
I accidentally linked to the last page of the article, which may give that impression. Fixed that now. The entire article is really quite positive in my opinion. Given that the performance is bounded by the raw processing power of the CPU there's really only this much that can be done, and I see this being correctly reflected in the article. And although performance is only adequate for select casual games and other 3D applications they do see the full potention for the future. :happy:

#### 1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users