FSX-DX10:3rd progress report - just another Wednesday
It is time to update everyone on the progress we have made on the FSX-SP2(DX10) release.
First, we have a name change. We have a set of fixes that we want to widely deliver, and that means installing on XP and Vista, for DX9 and DX10. So with that being the case, the name FSX-DX10 isn’t accurate and we are now calling the release FSX-SP2(DX10) to indicate that while DX10 is the main feature, this is really SP2.
Second, I am not going to be able to talk to either the bug fixes in SP2 or the DX10 features until early September. I know, I know. I promised mid-August, what is up with that? Well, I am going on 3 weeks of vacation starting August 14th, and we will not be fully baked by then. So any feature discussion would be speculative and not authoritative. If I wait until I return, week of September 4th, the features will be done or cut and I can make an authoritative post.
So that’s when I will perform the analysis of the “magic screenies” to showcase what features we intended by those screenshots, what the real DX10 feature set is ( hint, it isn’t what was in the “magic screenies” in all cases ), and what DX9 improvements we are delivering.
With that said, on to the progress discussion. As I said in the last post, the phases of the project are:
1) Device and Infrastructure bring-up
2) Geometry Pipeline bring-up
3) Pixel Pipeline bring-up to "rough DX9-level comparability"
4) DX10-specific feature work.
The 1st post on FSX-SP2(DX10) here covered Phase 1 and 2. The 2nd post on FSX-SP2(DX10) here covered progress on phase 3, and this post will continue the coverage on Phase 3 progress.
One feature that was obviously not working in the previous posts was clouds. You did get to see the geometry we used to make the clouds effect, but now we have working clouds in DX10 as shown below. I include both an “in-town” shot here as well as an “in-air sunset” shot here because I really enjoy the sunrise and sunset effects in FSX. One thing that might not be obvious is clouds require alpha. In the previous post the trees had textures but no alpha, so the clouds work actually helped with the trees.
Next on the implementation bring-up was the emissive textures which meant the cities now look proper at dusk and dawn as shown here. At roughly the same time, we brought up bump map support which meant the aircraft models started looking right, as shown by the Bell here.
It’s not all about the world, though. Our in-game UI, known as XUI, is all rendered using shaders. So we had to convert that. For quite a while, there was no in-game UI. Now there is, as shown here. It is now no longer necessary to memorize the shortcuts for the feature you want to test, you can just use the menu. Nice, if not earthshaking. And solid progress.
Here is another shot with Water 1.x working. As well as fog in the distance. Those are two key features and they were a long time coming. It’s nice to have them done.
So where does that leave us in Phase 3? Well, we are done. Here are 2 screenshots, DX9 and DX10 to show what the 2 pipelines look like side by side. Do you see a difference? Hint, look at the top left. Yes, ta-da, that is correct. DX10 is running faster than DX9. By 17% or so. So see, there is proof that DX10 might actually be ok. That is the only difference you should see! Being done with the 3rd milestone, "DX10 looking like DX9", means all DX9 rendering features are now operational in the DX10 pipeline and look identical. That means the engine is fully flyable in DX10, but no new features are enabled.
That puts the team fully into the "DX10 feature" phase or milestone. On to the finish line!
So thats where we are. Let the comments begin :-).
Comments
Anonymous
August 08, 2007
Sounds good Phil. I just hope that all this lovely candy is not wasted for many of us who are getting the 2GB memory out errors causing FSX to crash on a daily basis.Anonymous
August 08, 2007
Anofax: there is news on that coming, on 2 fronts. the 1st bit of news will be avaiable from Windows on 8/23. the 2nd will be apparent when I talk to the specific features of FSX-SP2(DX10)Anonymous
August 08, 2007
phil, things look good so far, but I'm really anxious to start seeing more "concrete" information on the performance gain from the DX10 upgrade. Currently I'm running FSX on Windows XP x64 w/ 4GB of RAM, an 8800GTX, and an AMD FX-62 (on a 590SLI board). Since SP1, I've been able to very nearly max every slider out (and add a few FSX.cfg optimizations) and still get very playable framerates. In short, I'm currently VERY VERY pleased with how FSX runs on DX9. That said, in order for me to use the DX10 (ooops, I mean SP2) update, I'll need to lay out another $250+USD just to get Windows Vista so that I can even humour the idea of working with the new pipeline and other improvements. I suppose what I'm driving at is that the SP2 improvements are going to really need to be greater than 10-15% like we saw in the SP1 update in order for folks like me to justify laying out that kind of cash. I made a conscious decision to put all of my money into my hardware, not my software since so far XP x64 is working just fine for me (actually, my own informal testing shows FSX running faster in WoW64 than in native 32-bit environment). I know this is a fairly long and rambling comment, but maybe I've hit upon the attitudes and feelings of other XP holdouts in the community.Anonymous
August 08, 2007
Svet-am: In September I will be providing more information, and hopefully the fact that DX10 is already 17% ( 4/24 ) faster indicates FSX-SP2(DX10) is worth paying attention to. And there will be visual features, not just perf work. Each user will have to evaluate that data and their own situation and decide if the upgrade is worth it, thats completely fair and I understand that.Anonymous
August 09, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
August 09, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
August 09, 2007
Denala: I am talking to FSX-SP2(DX10), as I dont work in Windows.Anonymous
August 09, 2007
Antonism: some of the fixes for DX9 we are trying to get in are bug fixes. there is nothing FSX has to do for SLI/CROSSFIRE except be less CPU bound. that is the goal of the performance feature we are working on. we are not changing the bucketing in SP2, its just the same as SP1. yes, the screenshots are supposed to be the same, just with a better framerate for DX10. and features are "yet to come".Anonymous
August 09, 2007
so far so good phil, I seriously hope the end product looks like this: http://img378.imageshack.us/img378/8205/93125220060811screen001qf4.jpg Happy vacation! :)Anonymous
August 09, 2007
Phil, OK, just SP2 will have the DX10 update, and inside the bug fixes of SP1. Do we need to install first SP1 and then SP2? Flight Simulator X may not need SLI or Crossfire, because it is more CPU bound, so SLi and Crossfire will jsut make a few changes to frame rate, right? I hope this work will end soon in September, so we don't need to wait a lot for FSX Acceleration. Aberforth, I watched this image in another site, I don't know if it is true, the update isn't completed.Anonymous
August 10, 2007
I have some disturbing thoughts about those comparison-pictures of the DX9 and DX10 pipeline: If you compare the pictures carefully (like switching between them fast) you will notice that the DX10-picture has slightly less autogen. Look at the bottom right corner, where the difference is quite obvious. This might be a reason for the better framerates, too.Anonymous
August 10, 2007
Paperflyer, DX10 is faster- you can take my word for it. It all depends on how you write the dx10 code (also GPU drivers). I'm more concerned about how good it looks, you know dx10 is the reason why I bought FSX back in oct 2006, i was happy with fs 2004. But fsx is good in all respects. I want to do some justice to my Quad and GTX SLI setupAnonymous
August 10, 2007
Aberforth: I can tell you right now that what we are working on is not an exact equivalent of the magic screenies.Anonymous
August 10, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
August 10, 2007
Antonism: SP2 is in independent release, and will have some small number of additional bug fixes beyond SP1. yes, you will have to install SP1, and then SP2. SP1 will be a pre-req for both Acceleration and SP2. We have not released a target date for availability, I said September for me to talk to specific features.Anonymous
August 10, 2007
Dear Phil, I do not doubt that DX10 is faster, after all the difference between those two pictures is not big.Anonymous
August 10, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
August 11, 2007
I question the increase framerate for the DX10 screen shot. I noticed that the simulation is "paused" for the DX10 screenshot. Could the fact that the DX10 screenshot is "paused" account for the frame rate difference when compared to DX9? My reparted framerate changes when I "pause" my simulation. Just a thought. ThanksAnonymous
August 11, 2007
Mats: we did a Photoshop difference between the two images in source form, and besides edge differences due to the current filtering setup in DX10 there were very few deltas. we are investigating those, but the edge you see is a jpeg artifact.Anonymous
August 11, 2007
Bigsky: both simulations were paused otherwise you could never get the same image. one screenshot grabbed the text, one didnt.Anonymous
August 13, 2007
I emailed some bugs SP1 did not fix to: tell_fs@microsoft.com, I hope you will look and fix them.Anonymous
August 16, 2007
"DX10 is running faster than DX9." http://anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=3060 has an interesting article on the way video memory is mapped into user mode under Vista DX9. Seeing as Vista is so different from XP, this raises the question: Did you compare Vista DX10 to XP DX9? Or was this Vista DX9? (which in most benchmarks appear weaker than XP DX9 if I am not mistaken) (I am pro-Vista btw, but I only use it at work for the time being -- at home I'd rather wait for Windows Server 2008 and hope third party vendors have worked out most of the driver issues by then)Anonymous
August 19, 2007
Hello Phil Just found this site and bookmarked it. Nice to have a site with updates about the future of FSX. I think FSX is an excellent tool for learning most aspects of flying. Personally I enjoy just flying around different parts of the world. I have a couple of questions that if improved will greatly increase my immersion level. Will FSX DX10 improve the ground textures away from the airfields? The ground seems a little out of focus giving the impression the buildings and trees are floating with no foundation. Will the shorelines be improved? Will places like the White Cliffs of Dover be modelled or will that be left to third parties. I look forward to reading more on the developments of FSX. Thanks ChivasAnonymous
August 22, 2007
Great news Phil, thanks for the update and all your hard work.Anonymous
August 24, 2007
Bikedude: it was Vista DX9 vs Vista DX10.Anonymous
August 26, 2007
So it was comparison of Vista DX9.0Ex and Vista DX10. Also notice than Vista is slower than XP on same hardware, because Vista needs a better computer to run. So XP DX9.0c is faster than Vista DX9.0Ex. DX9.0Ex is DX9.0c for Vista if you don't know it.Anonymous
August 26, 2007
Antonism: Of course I know XP has a small performance edge, I mentioned it in my blog months ago. And of course I know all about 9.L as it was previously called, as I was part of the DX9 team. Comparing DX10 has to be done on a Vista system against Vista DX9. Thats were you get the choice of which interface to run the app; so thats where the perf number counts the most.Anonymous
August 27, 2007
Can somebody tell me how to edit this: <GaugeString>%((A:Sea level pressure, inHg))%!2.2f!</GaugeString> In: C:Program FilesMicrosoft GamesMicrosoft Flight Simulator XGaugesradar.zip file: information.xml It displays Altimiter 29.92 etc dispite me setting millibars on radar local info! It's driving me mad! I'd like it to say QNH: 1013 etc. Anybody?Anonymous
August 27, 2007
Please, check if is possible available SP1 and SP2 as torrent files, because current servers is very, very slow. Regards, RenatoAnonymous
August 29, 2007
I guess I'll take the no comment as a no.Anonymous
August 30, 2007
Chivas: I am supposed to be on vacation, if you read the blog. And no, those are not features of SP2.Anonymous
August 30, 2007
" Will FSX DX10 improve " I didn't ask if SP2 would do anything, unless SP2 is part of the DX10 upgrade. Sorry for the imposition. Enjoy your holiday. ~Salute~ ChivasAnonymous
August 30, 2007
OK your right, I'm confused... SP2 is a DX10 upgrade to FSX. Was there an SP1 DX10 upgrade?Anonymous
August 30, 2007
No, SP1 wasn't an upgrade for DX10, it was just an upgrade for FSX and it just resolved some bugs and it had performance fixes and support for multicore. And strange that SP1 didn't help in my FSX copy, I'll have to report it somewhere.Anonymous
September 02, 2007
Hi Phil, Thanks so much for the great info. Just one question, is the issue of not being able to separate ATC comms to a separate USB headset when running FSX in Vista being addressed? Always struck me as somewhat ironic that FSX is 'optimized for Vista' yet this virtually essential feature for online play isn't available in Vista (but is in XP)! Thanks very much. Ads.Anonymous
September 02, 2007
Ads22: that was a late change to Vista, after FSX had already finalized. it is on the short list we are considering for SP2.Anonymous
September 02, 2007
That's great news - thanks very much Phil.Anonymous
September 04, 2007
Phil: a question. Once the update is installed will Vista then automatically acess DX10? Or will we need to download a new DX set - and will it also require a new GPU driver (I have nVidia 8800GTX installed) with the latest official driver.Anonymous
September 04, 2007
Hi Phil, my first post her. I got a little thing that's not so important but would be a nice thing to fix (for me ;) ) It has nothing to do with directX 10 but it could be a thing to add in SP3. When you look closely at the ground traffic (cars etc.) you see that the cars on the road, just apear and disapear. I think you know what I'm talking about. So maybe you can tell us if this could be fixed, or would that be to much for our graphic cards.Anonymous
September 05, 2007
Sebastiaan: thats not on the list for SP2. there is no SP3 in the plans.Anonymous
September 05, 2007
Ian: I dont understand your question. Vista has DX10 built-in, but uses DX9 for Aero rendering. Nothing FSX does will change how Vista works. To get a DX10 game to work, you need all of Vista, a DX10 graphics card and driver, and a DX10 game.Anonymous
September 06, 2007
Hi Phil, thanx for the comment. I have another quastion. It is an controversial subject for Flight Simulator, I know... but wil there be a damage model in the next generation of Flight Simulator (2010?) Or can u tell us that there will (n)ever be a damage model for flight simulator. Thanx! And keep up doing the good work! SebastiaanAnonymous
September 06, 2007
I think it is too early for Microsoft to develope next version of Flight Simulator, or even plan it. The crash and splash damage is improved in FSX over FS2004. In crash it has fire and in splash it has big waves. Noone knows when next version of FS will be realesed, or even what it will have. And yes, the damage needs improvement, but please don't talk too early for new FS, FSX is already new, and the DX10 update will keep us for much more time. Be happy with the current version of FS, it still has a lot to experience. Enjoy it, fly in the whole world, fly the missions, do them over and over again just for fun, enjoy the all new graphics, that still noone ran it on its best.Anonymous
September 06, 2007
Hi Phil, Will DX10 (SP2) need to be installed on a clean copy of FSX? (i.e. no add-ons) Steve-Anonymous
September 06, 2007
Hi Phil! First off thanks for those great updates! I have a slightly off topic question: I have both FSX and FS2004, and like to use the 2004 version sometimes for the better fps (instrument currency training etc.) I will be getting a Vista machine and a DX10 graphics card soon, and would like to know if FS2004 will still run on the new machine (since FS 2004 was designed for XP and DX9) Thanks!Anonymous
September 06, 2007
Rather then just checking your blog every 15 min for that next DX10 update :wink, :wink, I suppose I'll lend a hand. vicpai, I'm sure Phil will correct me if I'm wrong but I think I can say very confidently that you will be able to run FS2004 on your new Vista machine, DX10 card included, without any problems. Enjoy the new machine, -ThadAnonymous
September 06, 2007
I don't know where, but I've heard that you can run FS2004 on Vista. I hope I'll be able to run it when I get a new computer with Vista installed, because I don't want to miss some planes that they don't appear in FSX.Anonymous
September 07, 2007
Thad & antonism96, thanks for that info!!....it's good to know I can run FS2004 on Vista (especially since I've got a lot of "add ons" for it too)Anonymous
September 07, 2007
Thad, Yes,fs04 will work on vista with a DX10 video card. That's what I am curently using. I think you will find though that once you get FSX running smoothly, FS04 will take a back seat.Anonymous
September 07, 2007
Talking about realism, why isn't it possible te refuel at an airport? If I want to fly the world in a Cessna, it would be realistic te refuel at a lot of airports instead of flying it in 1 time... This is just a question that keeps spinning in my mind. I know it has nothing to do with DirectX 10.Anonymous
September 07, 2007
I want to install FS2004 on Vista because of missing planes. If you don't know how to refuel, here's the tip : if you are in an airpot, just taxi in the airport and park near a fuel tank. Then check if your fuel is at 100% first, buy pressing Shift+Z 2 times, here you can check the FPS and how much fuel you have. If you park near a fuel tank, you'll refuel automatically. Anyway, when next FSX-SP2 post is coming?Anonymous
September 08, 2007
@antonism96 Thank you very mutch!Anonymous
September 08, 2007
Hi Phil, Thank you for the great SP2 update. This may or may not be off the subject, but will SP2 address the issue of not being able to span using multiple screens? I know Vista currently doesn't support it and that is a bit frustrating. Thank you...Anonymous
September 08, 2007
Hy Phil! Thanks for the accurate infos. But where are the infos about the graphic dx10 features of fsx? You said you'd tell us more 4th o september... and now its five days later. I don't want be unpatient, but the truth is I AM UNPATIENT :) Can't wait until you post some screenies containing the visual features!!! Greetings from the swiss fsx enthusiast, JohnAnonymous
September 08, 2007
Sebastiaan, it is nothing, also this tip is easy. flightsimenthusiast101, please wait like the others, the team is working hard to deliver the new DX10 update, and they don't have time to write a post, do you know how hard is to make these things? Surely no. Expect the new post as a post-surprise with more things than expected. And I think it is too fast to show us new features, I think the features are the most difficult things, and they are "yet to come". I'm also unpatient but I think I should beter wait, because if you don't wait for something, you'll never get it. Wait, or never get the post?Anonymous
September 08, 2007
@antoism96: I know how hard it is to produce such features and Yes I can wait like the others "by the way: I dont think there is an alternative ;-)". I only wanted to show with my post how big my anticipation is! YOU SHOULDNT THINK I dint want to put aditional pressure on the hard working FS team "sorry, but I think you missunderstood my post antonism :-)". Thumbs Up for this upcomming and hopefully convincing SP2.Anonymous
September 08, 2007
flightsimenthusiast101 screenies are allready posted in this progress report. Just read it.Anonymous
September 08, 2007
antonism96 & flightsimenthusiast101, I know how you feel I'm eagerly awaiting the DX10 features post as well. Phil, made a post in the Avsim forums saying that he was very busy catching up on work after his vacation. He stated that he would not be able to get the update posted this week as a result. I'm sure he'll do his best to get the update posted sometime next week. Just a little longer and we should have the DX10 info "fix" we desire. -ThadAnonymous
September 09, 2007
Phil wrote: "Comparing DX10 has to be done on a Vista system against Vista DX9. Thats were you get the choice of which interface to run the app; so thats where the perf number counts the most." Are you saying that Vista is the preferred OS of your users, hence you target it? I suspect a great many FSX users choose both hardware and OS based on... well FSX performance. If XP gives "us" an edge, it will be the preferred OS for quite a while. That said, I saw yesterday a Quake4 benchmark which suggested that both nVidia and ATI enjoyed a tremendous performance boost under Vista. They compared previous generation GPUs (7600 from nVidia and something else from ATI) and using the latest drivers they doubled the performance on a Mac running Vista (comparing it with XP on the same hw). Let me see.. Oh yeah, here it is: http://www.barefeats.com/imacal3.html I hope their comparison isn't too flawed and somehow applicable to my modest 7800GTX. It might have some life in it yet. (OTOH, Q4 is OpenGL and FSX isn't...)Anonymous
September 09, 2007
Bikedude, I think you misunderstood what Phil was saying. He was explaining the only way to do an accurate comparison of perf between DX9 and DX10 is on the Vista OS because it can run both DX9 AND DX10. You can't do this comparison on XP because XP cannot run DX10. To do a comparison between XP DX9 and Vista DX10 would not be an accurate comparison because there can already be a perf difference between XP DX9 and Vista DX9. I don't think Phil is making the claim that Vista is the FS communities preferred OS. Although I run Vista and am quite happy with it Aces realizes that not everyone feels that way and that many will continue to use XP and/or DX9. In fact, he has stated in the blog posts, about SP2, that they are also working on some things to improve the DX9 experience. Just remember that to get the benefits of FSX (DX10), when released, you'll need a DX10 graphics card AND a Windows Vista OS. Hope that helps clarify things a little, -ThadAnonymous
September 09, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
September 09, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
September 09, 2007
Many thanks Phil. My question was naive I know, but I just wanted to get it straight. So when you release SP2/DX10 I have all but one of the preconditions - I have Vista and an 88000GTX card already installed... but I assume nVidia will need to supply a new driver. Is this correct and are the card manufacturers geared up to have drivers available as the update is released?Anonymous
September 10, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
September 11, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
September 11, 2007
OneTimeUse: I am delayed with being able to inform the community about what is in and what is out. Its going to take another week or so before I can "spill the beans" so to speak.Anonymous
September 12, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
September 29, 2007
hi thanks for all the updates on fsx. what i'd really like to know if there will be any improvment in the rain effects. i was quite dissapointed in the rain effects after going from FS9 to FSX. in FS9 we atleast used to get rain drops on the windows in FSX we get nothing. i was expecting to have realistic rain drops on the windows in FSX i was really suprised to see nothing! i know it's not important but it would really make it so much more realistic to have good rain effects. either way i still enjoy FSX.Anonymous
September 29, 2007
would make a big difference to the realism to have rain effects on the windscreen with working wipers. that would be soo cool. anyway enough on the subject i'm just dreaming i guess.
