Why is DirectX so slow in Win2k?
Just thought I'd ask this to see if anyone knows. It's a question that's been nagging me for some time. I just can't seem to understand why directx runs so much slower in Win2k. The problem has never affected any other graphic api's such as OpenGl or Glide so it's not something that is just because of the os being ...
Just thought I'd ask this to see if anyone knows. It's a question that's been nagging me for some time. I just can't seem to understand why directx runs so much slower in Win2k. The problem has never affected any other graphic api's such as OpenGl or Glide so it's not something that is just because of the os being the way it is. It has to be something M$ is doing with it.
My Directx runs incredibly slow compared to the same system with Win98SE (many times slower in some cases). I've tried different drivers, directx vers, etc. But nothing seems to change that horrible performance margin.
I suspect that it simply has something to do with the way M$ has Directx talking to the HAL layer, but it's only a guess.
Operating System: Windows 2000 Pro sp1 (running fully PNP w/ ACPI)
Processor: AMD K7 T-Bird 800 w/ 256 Megs PC133
Motherboard: Asus K7a (1004c BIOS) w/ the newest Via 4 in 1, Promise 100 drivers b25
Hard Drive: Maxtor 1536H2 on the Promise 100
Video: Asus 6600 SGRAM w/ Asus sba bios (AGP Geforce 256,32meg - Nvidia drivers v6.31 - certified)
Sound: SB 128 PCI (1373 chip w/ 5.12.01.4035 WDM drivers - certified)
Modem: USR 56K PCI
Network: NETGEAR FA310TX Fast Ethernet Adapter (PCI 10/100 card)
SCSI: PCI Advansys SCSI Host Adapter
CD Burner: Smart&Friendly 4x SCSI
Printer: Epson Stylus 740 (USB)
Scanner: UMAX Astra 1220U (USB)
Misc: Creative PC-DVD 5X drive, USB Intellimouse Optical w/ intellipoint 3.2 (ver. 3.20.0.484), Gravis Xterminator gamepad with 4.2.0.2 driver
DirectX: 8.0 RC1 (4.08.00.0219)
My Directx runs incredibly slow compared to the same system with Win98SE (many times slower in some cases). I've tried different drivers, directx vers, etc. But nothing seems to change that horrible performance margin.
I suspect that it simply has something to do with the way M$ has Directx talking to the HAL layer, but it's only a guess.
Operating System: Windows 2000 Pro sp1 (running fully PNP w/ ACPI)
Processor: AMD K7 T-Bird 800 w/ 256 Megs PC133
Motherboard: Asus K7a (1004c BIOS) w/ the newest Via 4 in 1, Promise 100 drivers b25
Hard Drive: Maxtor 1536H2 on the Promise 100
Video: Asus 6600 SGRAM w/ Asus sba bios (AGP Geforce 256,32meg - Nvidia drivers v6.31 - certified)
Sound: SB 128 PCI (1373 chip w/ 5.12.01.4035 WDM drivers - certified)
Modem: USR 56K PCI
Network: NETGEAR FA310TX Fast Ethernet Adapter (PCI 10/100 card)
SCSI: PCI Advansys SCSI Host Adapter
CD Burner: Smart&Friendly 4x SCSI
Printer: Epson Stylus 740 (USB)
Scanner: UMAX Astra 1220U (USB)
Misc: Creative PC-DVD 5X drive, USB Intellimouse Optical w/ intellipoint 3.2 (ver. 3.20.0.484), Gravis Xterminator gamepad with 4.2.0.2 driver
DirectX: 8.0 RC1 (4.08.00.0219)
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
well explain how DX performance kicks win2k's ass in whistler but yet they are using the same version, well Whistler uses DX 8 beta but from performance on 2k with DX 8 it doesnt even compare at times. It could just be the way DX is tweaked in 2k compared to whistler. 9x doesnt come close to whistlers benchmarks in Direct X.
to be honest its hard to compare numbers because there are so many different variables that go into making a system. Just the kind of ram u have can make a freaking 15% difference, thats huge!!!
I have a couple installations of win2k, my primary, a backup with all the pertinent software and utillties, and a clean isntall I use for testing and benchmarking.
Primary install dx7 = slower then win98 and on par with other win2k boxs.
clean install dx8 = just as fast and faster in games compared to 98. spanks my dx7 performance in win2k.
I havent toyed with whistleryet, no time to install it yet.
I have a couple installations of win2k, my primary, a backup with all the pertinent software and utillties, and a clean isntall I use for testing and benchmarking.
Primary install dx7 = slower then win98 and on par with other win2k boxs.
clean install dx8 = just as fast and faster in games compared to 98. spanks my dx7 performance in win2k.
I havent toyed with whistleryet, no time to install it yet.
Sorry guys, I'll have to agree with DosFreak on that one. why? go run a game like X-wing Alliance in Windows 98 and Windows 2000. There's a big difference. Not sure if this is true or not but I heard it has to do with the Nvidia's drivers in 2k...heard there is a bug in the NT kernel that limits them to just PCI speeds using directx...not sure how it is with other brands of cards...I've read this from an Nvidia rep. Good news is, I heard it will start to be fixed in the 6.40 driver set and the 7.xx driver set....so look for things to start shaping up with directx...I believe M$ is putting the ball in Nvidia's court on the directx performance.
I don't know how you could get the same numbers from Win98 and Win2k. What kind of video card and system are you using?
Even using a simple video tester like Wintune shows huge perfomance gaps. Using the exact same machine and hardware Wintune will score:
Win2k@1024x768:
289 Direct3D Null driver score
76 Direct3D Primary driver score
Win98SE@1024x768:
284 Direct3D Null driver score
185 Direct3D Primary driver score
In fact my simple Duron600 with it's wussy TNT 16meg AGP card scores:
Win98SE@1024x768:
219 Direct3D Null driver score
149 Direct3D Primary driver score
Which makes that lowly card 2x as fast as my Geforce in d3d!!
Even using a simple video tester like Wintune shows huge perfomance gaps. Using the exact same machine and hardware Wintune will score:
Win2k@1024x768:
289 Direct3D Null driver score
76 Direct3D Primary driver score
Win98SE@1024x768:
284 Direct3D Null driver score
185 Direct3D Primary driver score
In fact my simple Duron600 with it's wussy TNT 16meg AGP card scores:
Win98SE@1024x768:
219 Direct3D Null driver score
149 Direct3D Primary driver score
Which makes that lowly card 2x as fast as my Geforce in d3d!!
Thanks ledzeppel, that's the best explination I've seen so far . I'm glad that you go Nvidia to acknowledge that the problem does exist. And I'm really glad to see that they said that they are going to do something about it- hehe. I do have to admitt, Nvidia's service rocks. They have the best beta release system of anyone. Keep them leaked drivers a flowing
