DiRT 2 Demo DX11 Performance and IQ Preview @ [H]

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,774
DiRT 2 Demo DX11 Performance and IQ Preview - What are some new DX11 features DiRT 2 Demo brings with it, and what do they look like? Will DX11 cause a large drain on performance? These topics are briefly previewed today with the DiRT 2 demo and a handful of video cards.

Of course, this is not to say that performance on the NVIDIA based video cards was bad. On the contrary, it was quite good. We are looking at 8X MSAA at 2560x1600 being playable on the GTX 285, and 4X MSAA on the GTX 275. That is certainly an acceptable level of AA given the high resolution at which we tested. The only problem with the GeForce GTX 200 series of video cards in this game is that they do not support DX11. Thus, they do not benefit from the image quality enhancements available in the DX11 renderer.
Click to expand...
 
Okay, DX11 looks like it wont eat the GPUs - thats good. However, this looks like smoke and mirrors for most of the effects (except HDAO and tessellation).. Like the pictures of the back of the truck with the tire.. Where's the self shadowing? Oh thats a DX10 feature, where's the hi-rez texture, oh thats DX10 feature... Actually no.. I think they were in crysis... on DX9 mode...

So this begs the question : Where is the DX10 mode? I know its an 'ATI TWIMTBP" game, but I'd like them to allow at least some of the features to work.. By not alienating the people that have DX10 hardware.... and removing detail options that are usually available to them.

Though I am happy that the game runs so incredibly well on GTX 275.

Yeah I'm still bitter about Crysis, it proved that 99% of the features could have been done without DX10..

Things like ambient occlusion is in a lot of games.. just not HD AO... Tessalation is in games, just not up to the capabilities of newer shader stuff that ATI's hardware can pull off. I''ll have to check the demo out to see what options it has to get a better idea of what DX9 has vx DX11.
 
One important thing I got from our testing so far is that there was not a big drop in performance from DX9 to DX11 like we saw in the first round of DX10 games compared to DX9. Especially important since the DX11 mode is also running Tessellation.

I think we are going to see a lot more of this kinda thing in games, jumping from DX9 straight to DX11 and treating DX10 like it never existed.
 
Mazgazine1 said:
Okay, DX11 looks like it wont eat the GPUs - thats good. However, this looks like smoke and mirrors for most of the effects (except HDAO and tessellation).. Like the pictures of the back of the truck with the tire.. Where's the self shadowing? Oh thats a DX10 feature, where's the hi-rez texture, oh thats DX10 feature... Actually no.. I think they were in crysis... on DX9 mode...

So this begs the question : Where is the DX10 mode? I know its an 'ATI TWIMTBP" game, but I'd like them to allow at least some of the features to work.. By not alienating the people that have DX10 hardware.... and removing detail options that are usually available to them.

Though I am happy that the game runs so incredibly well on GTX 275.

Yeah I'm still bitter about Crysis, it proved that 99% of the features could have been done without DX10..

Things like ambient occlusion is in a lot of games.. just not HD AO... Tessalation is in games, just not up to the capabilities of newer shader stuff that ATI's hardware can pull off. I''ll have to check the demo out to see what options it has to get a better idea of what DX9 has vx DX11.
Click to expand...

A few thoughts on your response:

Yes, self-shadows should exist in the DX9 version, and I don't know why they aren't there. DX9 is certainly capable of it, but is is curiously absent. It may be that the developers weren't satisfied with the precision of the shadows available in DX9. I don't think that it is AMD/ATI's fault, as it was more likely a developer decision.

DX10 is an aborted product, in my opinion. It never delivered either the performance or the IQ payoff that it promised. It may as well have never existed.

Tessellation exists in some DX9 games, yes, but it is a proprietary ATI implementation. Tessellation did not exist as a part of the DX9 API (or DX10 for that matter), but it is part of DX11. Whenever Fermi comes out, it will have a tessellation engine as well, in order to fully support DX11.
 
If you have the dirt 2 coupon, you can play the game now. The pc thread has info on how to do it. I love this game with the eyefinity as it make the game so much more. My favorite is the true rally events as I am a huge fan of learning lines and perfecting them.
 
Nice review as always. I didn't now that they totally bailed on DX10 in this game. I was hoping to see the difference between DX10 and DX11 as all I've seen were the diffs between DX9 to DX11 which I thought was odd. But this explains it.

As much as I would like to get a 58x0 right now, I refuse to pay over MSRP on them and think my GTX280 SLI will be fine until the 5800s are a lot more available and maybe a price drop or two.

I'll be happy with this game still in DX9 at 1920x1200, I'm sure. I think it still looks damn good in DX9 mode and most of those extra details aren't going to matter when you're doing 120 MPH+ on the trail, heh.

Thanks again [H]!
 
3 GTX 280s at 2560x1600 nvidia195.62 drivers everything maxed.

dirt22009-12-0714-04-11-16.jpg
dirt22009-12-0714-04-25-76.jpg

dirt22009-12-0714-17-32-24.jpg
 
Killer review ! Hard is probably first site to show differences between dx 9 and dx 11 so clearly. Congrats guys
 
Cool, thanks for the screens, Mike. Good to see what I can expect from my 280s. But I'm guessing it's not scaling very well past the 2nd GPU? I figured you'd get a bit more frames than that from 3 of them.

What's that "post process" on Medium for? Also, the ground cover is on not on "ultra", is there a reason for that? I'm guessing they're locked down in DX9?

Thanks again ;).
 
Does anyone have average and min framerates at 1920x1080 with the settings cranked?
 
one thing i notice between the demo and the full game is the performance seems lower in the full version versus the demo.
 
OK dude ive got the coupon wheres teh pc thread to let meh play teh game NOW yo? i need some linkage
 
what i want to know is why there wasnt a 5770 Review on Dirt 2. is the 5770 that bad?
 
so you say both your 5770's handle well? the test you showed is both cards overclocked or stock? any possible way you can run that test with just one card and show the results?
 
fightingfi said:
ROFLtMAO @ dirt 2 not letting nvidia using dx 10 :D Nvidia swallows :p GO ATI :D
Click to expand...

Well, there are still quite a few 4800-series users out here who are stuck with 2004-style DX9...

Unfortunately, this probably won't be the first game that skips DX10 completely. DX10 was dead in the water from day one because Microsoft artificially locked XP out. The fact that most games ran at much lower framerates in DX10 mode and suffered bugs and rendering artifacts didn't exactly help.

Basically Nvidia and ATI could have skipped DX10 completely and just made the GT200 and 3800/4800 series super-fast at DX9 instead. Would have made the GPUs smaller and cheaper.

DX9 will still be implemented for games, to provide compatibility with WinXP. But why bother with DX10 when DX11 works with both Vista and Win7? Just let all users of DX10 cards use DX9 instead. Maintaining 3 separate rendering paths would be too costly and time consuming.
 
Sorry if it's been mentioned in the thread already but is DX10 only missing from the demo or is missing in the final retail also?
 
Is it me or does that game look pretty crappy for a new title thats DX11?

Doesn't feel at all like a really good comparison between the DX versions.. The DX9 mode is missing alot of things that DX9 can do. Could it be that they (game developer) was paid off to try and make DX11 (which really has a VERY small user base at the moment) look better by making the DX9 look worse on purpose?

Is it a console port? Maybe dx9 = console equivalent and dx11 = the pc developed rendering path.
 
Not very exciting, really. I've been playing the full game and honestly DX11 v. DX9 in this game is moot. I can't really tell the difference when actually racing. Now if you analyze screenshots or are specifically looking for something, you'll the differences. However DX11 doesn't improve the game as a whole. The only that might really standout would be the 64 bit HDR, but it's really subtle. As far as tessellation, you can't see it in the water because it happens after you've passed by. And as long as the crowds aren't sprites, you won't ever notice how detailed they are, and the cloth waves and ripples in the DX9 version as well as in the DX11.

I think that a racing game is a poor show horse for DX11. An adventure or action game, where you more readily focused on the environments around you, would be a better test case.
 
Whoop. Dee. Doo. Seriously. I see nothing compelling here. Sure, ATI is rockin' again with their cards, but DX11? WTF? I was expecting a lot more. Looks like we're still waiting for a "killer app" for DX11. Never got one for DX10 and I'm starting to doubt we'll see one for DX11. meh.
 
unab0mb said:
Whoop. Dee. Doo. Seriously. I see nothing compelling here. Sure, ATI is rockin' again with their cards, but DX11? WTF? I was expecting a lot more. Looks like we're still waiting for a "killer app" for DX11. Never got one for DX10 and I'm starting to doubt we'll see one for DX11. meh.
Click to expand...

If you are expecting a revolutionary change in the way games are presented, I suggest that you are going to be waiting forever.
 
unab0mb said:
Whoop. Dee. Doo. Seriously. I see nothing compelling here. Sure, ATI is rockin' again with their cards, but DX11? WTF? I was expecting a lot more. Looks like we're still waiting for a "killer app" for DX11. Never got one for DX10 and I'm starting to doubt we'll see one for DX11. meh.
Click to expand...

i know jeez give it a chance. DX11 is just being created and is still in the baby stages. what did you think once the dx11 cards were released there were going to be hardcore dx11 titles out pushing the GFX cards to the max?

the one thing im dissapointed by is there were No 5770 reviews for Dirt 2 I had to go on youtube to see what people were doing.
 
Last edited:
4LC4PON3 said:
i know jeez give it a chance. DX11 is just being created and is still in the baby stages. what did you think once the dx11 cards were released there were going to be hardcore dx11 titles out pushing the GFX cards to the max?
Click to expand...

Not exactly, but why not? Baby stages? DX11 wasn't just created. It's been a work in progress ever since the Vista/DX10 flop. That gives it 3 years+ development time. Also DX11 is evolutionary, not revolutionary; it's not like it's using an all new code base and written from the ground up. If MS was working with developers, IHWs, etc. a ton for Win7 and DX11, I'm sure not seeing it (they skipped the DX11 part). If they were, you'd think MS would have had a "killer app/game" for DX11 ready to go just as they had a "killer OS" ready to go to quickly sweep Vista under the rug. But again, I'm seeing a lack of focus on DX11 and PC-gaming again. I'm just saying so far it looks like history is repeating itself. Gamers are being ignored again.

Again, I said something compelling (tessellation looks awesome, but I haven't seen it in real action yet), not something to max out new DX11 cards. Of course I don't expect that, but I do expect to see something more than a couple of shadows and some colors blend together better. I have my expectations, you have yours. You bet I expect more for plopping down at least $300+ of my hard earned cash for a new vid card or $50+ for a "DX11" title. I'm just not impressed. That will change in the future, I hope.
 
I think there is a noticeable difference between DX 11 and DX 9 in visual quality in this game. I couldn't put my finger on it exactly, but everything just looked better compared to when I forced DX 9 mode through the config file.

Seeing this article and the accompanying explanation puts into words what my eyes were seeing. There are subtle differences in this implementation, but when you add them together they make for a stunning visual package.

We're not going to see the true potential of DX 11 from a console port, but this is a decent start. Can't wait to see more titles that are tailored to DX 11 and its capabilities.
 
Wow, this is the most [H] coverage of Dirt 2 IQ/performance that I have yet seen (after seeing 2-3 others on the web)!

Hey Mark or Brent, I'm wondering if you could confirm whether microstuttering is present or not with 5970 cards.

PCGamesHardware is a reputable site, and just announced that microstuttering exists when using a 5970. The critical issue is that Dirt 2 is a game that was obviously developed in close ties with ATI (regarding DX11 support).

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...DX-11-Update-Radeon-HD-5970-results/Practice/

But the micro stuttering of the dual GPU card is strong and 50 frames per second on the 5970 feel about as fast as 30 fps on the 5870.
Click to expand...

If that's the case, then I'm still happy to be a retired SLI veteran, having experienced this horrible problem with 2x 7900GTX's in SLI where Test Drive Unlimited at 40 fps felt like 23 fps. My 8800GTX chugged along at 45 fps which felt like 45fps.

PCGamesHardware seems that they know what they are talking about, but perhaps you could test it with the newest Catalyst hotfix drivers if you are indeed going to cover 5970's performance (true performance, that is..).

Anyways, I look forward to reading your next article on the full version of Dirt2. It was the first time I've seen such good comparisons of High-Def Ambient Occlusion.. it looks absolutely great (almost as good as turning AF on)!!
 
GoodBoy said:
Is it me or does that game look pretty crappy for a new title thats DX11?

Doesn't feel at all like a really good comparison between the DX versions.. The DX9 mode is missing alot of things that DX9 can do. Could it be that they (game developer) was paid off to try and make DX11 (which really has a VERY small user base at the moment) look better by making the DX9 look worse on purpose?
Click to expand...

Guys, DX9 is fully programmable, it can do tons of things that games don't have it do. DX9 vs. DX10 vs. DX11 isn't a case of what it can or can't do, its a case of what it can and can't do WELL. HDAO is a perfect example - DX9 *CAN* do it, but DX11 does it *better*. Why program in a separate DX9 functionality when the cards that can power it support a better way? Too many of you are looking for checkbox features - something DX9 straight up can't do that DX11 can and that looks awesome. Guess what? Those days are long gone. That era ended what programmable shaders showed up.

Is it a console port? Maybe dx9 = console equivalent and dx11 = the pc developed rendering path.
Click to expand...

It is a port, so that is possible.
 
unab0mb said:
Not exactly, but why not? Baby stages? DX11 wasn't just created. It's been a work in progress ever since the Vista/DX10 flop. That gives it 3 years+ development time. Also DX11 is evolutionary, not revolutionary; it's not like it's using an all new code base and written from the ground up. If MS was working with developers, IHWs, etc. a ton for Win7 and DX11, I'm sure not seeing it (they skipped the DX11 part). If they were, you'd think MS would have had a "killer app/game" for DX11 ready to go just as they had a "killer OS" ready to go to quickly sweep Vista under the rug. But again, I'm seeing a lack of focus on DX11 and PC-gaming again. I'm just saying so far it looks like history is repeating itself. Gamers are being ignored again.

Again, I said something compelling (tessellation looks awesome, but I haven't seen it in real action yet), not something to max out new DX11 cards. Of course I don't expect that, but I do expect to see something more than a couple of shadows and some colors blend together better. I have my expectations, you have yours. You bet I expect more for plopping down at least $300+ of my hard earned cash for a new vid card or $50+ for a "DX11" title. I'm just not impressed. That will change in the future, I hope.
Click to expand...

Do I sound cranky like this when I say I'm not impressed with eyefinity?

kllrnohj speaks wisdom:

kllrnohj said:
Too many of you are looking for checkbox features - something DX9 straight up can't do that DX11 can and that looks awesome. Guess what? Those days are long gone. That era ended what programmable shaders showed up.
Click to expand...
 
Considering that Dirt 2 was never intended to be a DX11 title up until AMD's request, I think the differences are somewhat significant, especially with the shadows. I'm sure when we start seeing games developed from the ground up with DX11 in mind, we'll see a much greater difference in IQ.
 
Good review guys. Looking forward to the full version review.

One small suggestion: Please post the photos side-by-side for easier comparison.

Thanks again! ;)
 
I am thinking that most of you guys are expecting to be dazzled by DX11. While this version of directX is more technical achievement then nice new shiny graphics.

If you take today's development cycle then the 3 to 5 years for a title to appear why there are so few DX11 titles. And in the near future there wont be but a few.

If i take for example the mmorpg Age of Conan it promised out of the box DX10 support that was well over a year ago and even to date DX10 version of Age of Conan still only exists in a beta form rather then a polished sleek final build.
 
Not sure if the comparison of frame rate differences between the cards on the conclusion is strictly fair.

Frames Per Second is a non-linear measurement of performance it's 1/x of the time it takes to render a frame, thus when comparing performance penalty between 2 cards ((nvidia vs nvidia) vs (ati vs ati)) like is done in the article you can get an unbalanced comparison.

Do 1000/x on the frame rate to get the time to render in ms (milliseconds) and then look at the difference in render time for both 5870 vs 285 and also 285 vs 275 which you find to be 23% and 19% it actually works out to be the exact same performance penalty in both cases 4.82ms (them being the same is just a fluke and has no significance, although it does help prove the point)

Put another way, if you altered the testing settings in one of the tests so that the faster cards were matched in frame rate the slower cards would be getting approximately the same frame rate.

A good explination of frame rate non-linearity
 
PrincessFrosty said:
Not sure if the comparison of frame rate differences between the cards on the conclusion is strictly fair.

Frames Per Second is a non-linear measurement of performance it's 1/x of the time it takes to render a frame, thus when comparing performance penalty between 2 cards ((nvidia vs nvidia) vs (ati vs ati)) like is done in the article you can get an unbalanced comparison.

Do 1000/x on the frame rate to get the time to render in ms (milliseconds) and then look at the difference in render time for both 5870 vs 285 and also 285 vs 275 which you find to be 23% and 19% it actually works out to be the exact same performance penalty in both cases 4.82ms (them being the same is just a fluke and has no significance, although it does help prove the point)

Put another way, if you altered the testing settings in one of the tests so that the faster cards were matched in frame rate the slower cards would be getting approximately the same frame rate.

A good explination of frame rate non-linearity
Click to expand...

Good point.. hmm! :cool:

I already had an idea of how this works, and I bet that many people here already have a general idea of what 20fps means and what 40 means, and what 60 also means. We just know that 20 fps is generally unplayable, even in a slow-paced game.

I like the idea of using the "time per frame" rather than "frames per second". That way, 20fps would seem that much worse than 50fps. And the lower you go, the time per frame doubles. All we'd aim for is say, 20ms or lower. 30ms and it's still playable. 40ms and it's not comfortably playable. Anything lower than 15ms is pretty much redundant, even if it's 1 ms (like 1000fps).

However, it's always good to watch the minimum frame rates, and that's what I love about [H]ardOCP. It shows a graph of the game's performance over a time interval, so that I know how much/often the frame rates dip below a certain baseline of say, 30fps or so. Let's say 30ms (which is roughly equivalent to 30fps--actually 33fps).
 
making this game dx11 was just a ploy by amd to sell more high end video cards. it clearly doesnt need dx11, and obviously wasnt built from ground-up in dx11.

fun game though... it still seems very much like the first unfortunately. i thought there would be dirtbikes and all kinds of shit, but just a few cars and trucks again it looks like. ...also waiting to see what GRID2 will look like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top