anyone try the Lost Planet DX10 or DX9 demos

ematsui

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
90
they are out.. wondering what kind of performance people are getting in dx10 and if there is any huge visual differences between the 9 and 10 versions
 
There are a few threads on this already but for good measure:

WinXP SP2, DX9 version
X1800XT PE
2GB
A64 4200+ @ 2.8GHz

Snow : 24fps
Cave : 25fps
 
I have tried the DX9 and DX10 versions.
To be honest there doesn't seem to be that much difference visually??
As for performance, it depends what resolution and settings you set, but there doesn't seem too much difference in FPS between XP DX9 and Vista DX10.

At 2560x1600 4xAA & 16AFwith everything maxed I get about 16FPS Snow & 20FPS Cave average.

At the other end of the scale at 800x600 & if I tone textures,shadows etc down I can get 200+ FPS in both.

The happy medium for me is 1280x800 4xAA, 16AF with all maxed. At this level I get between 60-100FPS.
 
There are a few threads on this already but for good measure:

WinXP SP2, DX9 version
X1800XT PE
2GB
A64 4200+ @ 2.8GHz

Snow : 24fps
Cave : 25fps

Damn your card performs worse than mine. I still get about 30fps. Must be the 36 pixel shaders kicking in.
 
Damn your card performs worse than mine. I still get about 30fps. Must be the 36 pixel shaders kicking in.

yeah I was surprised how badly it ran as its ace for Oblivion, Stalker etc.
Still, no real loss, I wasnt impressed by the game anyway.
I so wanted to get a 2900 card (for VIVO) but my PSU (Hiper 580W) wont handle the overclocking needed to make the card perform and boy does it need some juice!
If only NVidia would release a card with VIVO.
Looks like I'll have to get a separate Video In card and a GTX <sigh>.
 
well dont start bashing your cards too quickly... this is only a demo, and a port at that

its an xbox360 game first and foremost

and its horribly optimized for our pc hardware

the 360 has 1 physical processor - with 3 cores, all 3 of them runing at 3.2ghz

the gpu has a slighty diff. architecture than a normal pc one - but safe to say that our 8800s can hold up against it

this game runs at 1280x720 at 30fps

so mix and mash that all up and you can cleanly see why we get around 30fps when running on our hardware at various resolutions

i have a great system with a crap processor [x2 3800+ @ stock] - but if i set the res to 720p then i get well over 30fps

ive seen reports of guys with quad intel c2d's and 8800ultras having shady results from these demos

so all in all - performance reflects the 360 build

if this were a pc game from the ground up we'd see significant differences

hopefully they can better script the game to work with pc hardware
 
Not very impressed with the game, like most ported console games, it starts looking like crap when you go to higher resolutions than the "native" 720p (most egregious example is the GTA series).
 
Using the dx9 version, I get 30ish FPS at 1920x1080, and 50ish at 1280x920 with the PC in my sig.
 
I have used the DX10 version, since I can. I am not sure how to get it to change resolution, not that I would anyway. My monitors are both 1280X1024 native 19"ers.

I got pretty bad (not playable) frame rates when I first ran it at full settings while it stretched the (unchangeable) 1280X720 across my whole screen. I changed it to "compensate for aspect ratio" (or whatever it is called) and eliminated the "motion blur" (annoying, IMO) and I am >60 for both, now. Very playable. I haven't much, though. I am not a huge fan.
 
i waas blown away by the d10 graffics i can see their the diffents now wow.
lost planet is on my list of games to buy. 8800gtx and gateway 22 inch looks incredible 65 frame avg.
 
Okay - so we have one guy saying "not much difference between the DX9 and 10" and one guy going "i was blown away by the DX10 graphics".




So what's the deal - DX10 on Lost Planet - zomg, or meh?
 
I saw a gamespot article on the dx9 vs dx10 subject, and they asked the developer and were told that the DX10 is not visually different but that DX10 is used to increase performance through reduced overhead for the same operations. Then the article compares apples to apples (they say you can only go to "medium" shadow as the max under dx9) and got slower with DX10. I am not sure if the DX9 was XP and the Vista was used (obviously) for the DX10 or if Vista was used in both versions.

Also, if "medium" shadows are the most available in DX9, isn't the "it's only for performance" immediately a BS argument? It would seem so, IMO. Gamespot said they could see a small difference in the shadow quality between the two, but the performance hit they saw was not worth the minimal IQ improvement.

Who knows. I don't much even care, but found this on the main page when I went to download the latest Supreme Commander patch from gamespot. Oh, and death to GPGnet and its forced, broken (in my case) auto patching.
 
Hah, I just googled up that gamespot article.

Summary (pretty much same as above): little difference visually - some improvment with better shadows on DX10. Developer claims DX10 = 10 - 20% performance improvement. Gamespot then goes on to show that DX10 performance sucks more, not less.

I've seen some Flight Sim 10 screenshots with DX10 which look good, and some really nice faces from Crysis, but I have this nagging feeling that eyecandy will outpace the hardware's ability to deliver it with good fps, or that the developer's inability to optimize to "mid-high-end" gpus will do the same.
 
All I can say is that I've never seen such a CPU capped game before NEVER!!
 
I actually thought that the graphics in this game are fantastic! I have only played the DX9 version but I got very playable framerates (~30 give or take) on both the cave and snow.
I did think that the gameplay was a bit lacking though.
I think that if they would just create a game just like this but with more of a desert type setting they could actually get away with calling it "StarshipTroopers", now that would be cool.
 
I have to bring in the DIRT demo as an example of how good dx9 can look. If you look closely the terrain isn't the greatest but the cars and their shadows are awesome.
 
Very marginal difference between the two, which I would explain as others have due to Lost Planet being a direct Xbox360 port. Don't expect Crysis with that one :cool:
 
Very marginal difference between the two, which I would explain as others have due to Lost Planet being a direct Xbox360 port. Don't expect Crysis with that one :cool:

Even in Crysis the differences are rather... eh. Don't get me wrong, there IS a clear difference, though it is mostly while in motion. Things are simply more dynamic. In the end, they both still look incredible. Sort of the same here with Lost Planet (to my eye), but I would have to agree. There is really so little difference here to say there is none. Softer shadows, WOO!! From what I have seen, DX10 performance is even WORSE at comparable settings. Something doesn't sit right. Port? Sure. We'll see with Crysis, or whatever turns out to be the first DX10 game from the ground up. Even Crysis sounds more like it was developed as DX9 first; so don't be surprised if you hear developers claiming DX10 was after the fact talk post release.
 
Ok so I finally have time to try the demo and it locks up my pc, about a couple of mins ingame and boom BSOD,

IRQ NOT LESS OR EQUAL or something and the other one was about nv4disp, already tried an 8800GTS and GTX, any ideas ? Its the DX9 version btw. Already tried on stock settings too.
 
I was having the same problem in Vista Ultimate x86 on the sig rig, backed down my FSB overclock from 218 to 214 and it went away. However you did state that you ran it at stock setting. I was just telling you what worked for me.
 
Back
Top