I had thought WARP automatically took over on games the system knows it will have problems running. I never knew it had to turned on, manually. Let me look into this. It might just help push this chunk of silicon further.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:02 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm sure you got it exactly the other way around. WARP is better > performing than Swiftshader, v2 or v3. > > What we really need is a launcher/wrapper of the WARP dll into > selected apps. I've tried doing it manually and haven't had any > success so far. But then again, I'm going through software rendering > due to sheer will of seeing any light at the end of the tunnel. And > unless Swiftshader improves beyond any measure of recognition, I won't > touch it with a 10 feet pole. > > On 12 Abr, 07:46, Nick <[email protected]> wrote: > > Aero would run quite fast with SwiftShader. The operations per pixel > > are really simple and the amount of overdraw is limited. Even on a > > somewhat older CPU, SwiftShader is faster than some of the integrated > > Intel graphics chips that do run Aero! Someone even got it working > > with the old SwiftShader 2.01: > http://tejaswi-solutions.blogspot.com/2008/11/swift-shader-version-20... > > > > Also, SwiftShader can't be compared to 3D-Analyze. The latter will > > *fool* applications into thinking your hardware does or does not > > support certain features. There's no guarantee it will work as it > > doesn't add any new functionality. SwiftShader on the other hand fully > > implements the features it reports. So it works on any PC. > > > > In my experience SwiftShader is also up to twice as fast as WARP in > > games that have equivalent Direct3D 9 and Direct3D 10 rendering. Did > > you compare the latest evaluation version (build 3383) or 2.01? > > SwiftShader 2.01 is much slower in some situations. SwiftShader build > > 3383 on the other hand really shines on multi-core CPUs. > > > > On Apr 9, 7:10 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ah well, i really dont understand... > > > Software rendering such as SwiftShader cant be compared with drivers... > > > Drivers are native, even if u have the most powerful software renderer, > u > > > cant really use a system without graphic drivers...imagine what's it > like to > > > use swiftshader with windows 7 aero, god im not willing to programming > or > > > write in word in 1fps... > > > > > again im not saying that it's fake, or anything like that, it's just > dumb to > > > compare driver with software renderer...those two are completely > different > > > category... > > > > > also SwiftShader in theory are the same with 3Danalyze, but SwiftShader > are > > > 100% pure software... > > > again who needs to play World Racing with 3Danalyze for 0.03fps while i > can > > > play it with software vertex for 15-25 fps? > > > > > oh and i did some real time performance some time ago and i found out > that > > > in comparison with SwiftShader and the new DirectX 11 WARP, the new DX > WARP > > > are almost 50% faster than SwiftShader in terms of full software SM2 > > > processing..again both are software renderer and in the same > category... > > > > > anyway, cheers :) > > > > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Kiki <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > :) happy face > > > > :D very happy face > > > > > > ~_~ gah, I don't know why I'm writing this... > > > > > > On Apr 9, 3:55 am, "Jose Villegas (MADBEAST)" <[email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > :( sad face > > > > > > -- > > > > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > > -- > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
