DirectX 9.0 Final

[The Edge]

System Requirements

Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows XP

Windows Millennium Edition: Microsoft Knowledge Base article 267951.
Windows XP: Microsoft Knowledge Base article 310405.

Quick Info

File Name:
dxwebsetup.exe

Download Size:
292 KB - 165583 KB

Date Published:
12/19/2002

Version:
9.0

Download: DirectX 9.0 End-User Runtime English (http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/2/3/22371837-c4dc-4f8b-af21-00c80d8b235c/dxwebsetup.exe)
Download: DirectX 9.0 End-User Runtime Other Languages (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=51608b06-ae0d-4652-b9a0-eae0aa6ae6d7&DisplayLang=en)

Edge

[sillKotscha]

I hate webinstaller!!! can someone provide me a link to a full download...

btw. thx The Edge - 10min ago I postet the same on german.doom9 ;)

[The Edge]

I was going to ask the same question but it says you get that option when you run the web installer. I can't check this as I'm running NT here in work:angry:
can't find it via FTP either.

Edge

[wmansir]

I'm going to hold of on this download, because it's not uninstallable unless you do a system restore and I don't know what people with DX8.1 hardware will gain (besides possible bugs).

For those looking for the Redist (full version) page:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=8510f9c3-1679-482b-b903-2352b58af584&DisplayLang=en

direct link, 32MB:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/d/8/6d8af880-c050-455c-9536-4a04725db85f/dx90_redist.exe

[sillKotscha]

^_^ thanks

btw... on the following page you will find an uninstaller for DX9 but I don't know if this one works only for rc's or for the final as well??...

http://www.xbetas.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=10

cheers Sill

[The Edge]

Thanks wmansir :)

Edge

[wmansir]

Also, the only people who can really make use of DX9 are those with Radeon 9700/9500s, and so it might intrest you to know ATI posted new Catalyst 3.0 drivers, they support DX9 and are WHQL certified.

Now all you need to play DX9 games are...well DX9 games.

EDIT:

Before you go installing this you may want to check out this story: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=6835

Basically, an "inside source" says the release is not ready for prime time.

[timecop]

Originally posted by wmansir
Before you go installing this you may want to check out this story: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=6835

Basically, an "inside source" says the release is not ready for prime time.

That article is old.
The SDK is available.
Its the first DirectX SDK to have native .NET bindings for DirectDraw, Direct3D and DirectSound/Music.

If its buggy, who cares? Microsoft will have 9.1 or whatever out soon enough.
You mean you don't reinstall Windows every month or so anyway?
I do, I don't mind if dx9 trashes my system. About the only interest I have with DX9 as a programmer is with .NET language bindings.

[fileman]

*lol*

This attitude is cool... but it's also an evidence of incapacity for Microsoft - I think you all know what I'm talking about: using customers as beta testers.

Regards, fileman.

[masken]

The 32mb English redist is available here:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=8510F9C3-1679-482B-B903-2352B58AF584&displaylang=en

I'll wait at least a week or so for compability reports before I install anything.

Don't touch things that work ;)

[The Edge]

Anyone install this yet?
It will take some time for me to download this via 56k connection:eek:

Edge

[ookzDVD]

Should I uninstall the old 8.1 first?

Or just install the new one without uninstall the old one ?

[BlackSun]

I have installed the DirectX9 SDK with the debug runtimes, and I have no problems, it works very fine (I'm using WinXP)

[trbarry]

Anybody know if DX9 has any noticeable effect on Xvid or Divx playback performance?

- Tom

[chemmajik]

Originally posted by trbarry
Anybody know if DX9 has any noticeable effect on Xvid or Divx playback performance?

Why have you? I havent bothered installing DX9, since it really doesnt offer anything new for video that was promised. I've been afraid of it hosing my XP system so haven't bothered.

[seannyb]

dx9 is safe, for me and many others at least. dx9 exposes some stuff of dx7/dx8-hardware that was not available before, also (occlusion queries, for instance) but it doesn't matter much for video playback...

[Emp3r0r]

I installed the SDK and tried to communicate with the managed runtime but I had some wierd resizing errors when using Microsoft.DirectX.AudioVideoPlayback namespace. It would screw up the dimensions initially but only with divx avi's and ogm's. I tried avs and they had the correct visable dimensions on playback. I guess this is because of the beta nature.

[trbarry]

"Anybody know if DX9 has any noticeable effect on Xvid or Divx playback performance?"

Why have you? ...


No, I haven't installed it either, and probably won't soon unless I hear of some significant advantages for me.

But someone on another board said there was supposed to be some code in DX9/VMR that could help accelerate MPEG4 playback. If that was actually implemented by someone it would maybe help with my quest to play back Xvid smoothly at HDTV resolutions.

Otherwise I'll wait.

- Tom

[Koepi]

Hi Tom,

I think for HDTV resolution XviD playback you'll need hardware support/acceleration, it's four times the data to process compared against DVD resolution.
My Duron700 starts already to stutter at 640x352 with all features thrown at the video, if the bitrate exceeds 2mbit (i.e. as seen in Crocodile Dundee 3). Overlay helps it certainly, but the rest needs pure processing power... now imagine your machine needs more than 4 times the memory bandwidth of my sdram-133 (not even possible with RDRAM i think), over 4 times the processor power (well, that _is_ posible ;) but not yet on x86...) and so on.

It's the nature of our MPEG4 implementation I think. You could do some speedups if you'd accept a quality loss during playback by using less accurate but faster asm/mmx/xmm, but you will know better than I do how much it could help (after all I'm not into mmx-stuff at all, i just leeched the AMD docs and will read them - next year ;) ).

Hum. I hope this isn't to inaccurate, but it is my oppinion of what's happening.

In the end, a new DX won't help it, except it can detect a stream as mpeg4 and replace the decoding routines of the codec by some hardware accelerated ones (i.e. nvidias accelerated MoComp for MPEG2 can be useful for mpeg4 as well - why isn't NVidia jumping in and makes us the gift of an accelerated DSF source?).

Hu, long post, sorry for that. Be carefull with your fireworks tonight mates, don't drink as much as I will do, and HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Best regards
Koepi

[Emp3r0r]

pasteNew Features in DirectShow
Video Mixing Renderer Filter 9 (VMR-9). This new, redistributable
rendering filter is similar in concept and design to the VMR that is
available for Microsoft Windows® XP. The VMR-9 is more powerful than
the original VMR (now called "VMR-7") because it is fully compatible
with the DirectX 9.0 graphics capabilities and it offers improved
support for deinterlacing and ProcAmp control (brightness, contrast,
hue, and saturation).

New deinterlacing support in DirectX Video Acceleration.

New deinterlacing support in the digital video (DV) decoder filter.

New encoder application programming interface (API) specification:
The Encoder API defines a standard, format-neutral way in which
software or hardware encoders can communicate with applications and
device drivers.

IGetCapabilitiesKey Interface is a new interface that filters can
implement to enable applications to query for the filter's
capabilities.

Enhancements to the GraphEdit utility.

The digital video disc (DVD) Graph Builder enables applications to
use the VMR-9 through the IDvdGraphBuilder::RenderDvdVideoVolume
method. The DVD Navigator now supports playback of audio during fast
forward; users can now watch a movie at speeds higher than 1x
without raising the pitch of the audio track, if the decoder
supports this feature.

A new utility program called Profile Enumerator that displays
information about Microsoft Windows Media™ system profiles installed
on your computer. This program is located in (SDK root)\bin\DXUtils.

AVStream driver development and runtime support on all platforms
prior to Windows XP has been improved for close functional parity
with Windows XP.

New samples.

For more information, see What's New in DirectShow.

[Infophreak]

Please edit that last post - it looks AWFUL in both Mozilla 1.3 alpha amd IE6. It doesn't have any linebreaks at all and therefore royally screws up the page.

[MaTTeR]

LOL...you'll find posts like that all over this board and others. You can't expect users to edit the posts for us because we use Mozilla;) It's amazing the Mozilla devs still haven't even attempted to fix this line break problem.

[Infophreak]

"Mozilla 1.3 alpha amd IE6".
Try and read the whole post the next time.
(alright, I hit the wrong key on the keyboard... I'll give you that)

[trbarry]

It's the nature of our MPEG4 implementation I think. You could do some speedups if you'd accept a quality loss during playback by using less accurate but faster asm/ mmx/xmm, but you will know better than I do how much it could help (after all I'm not into mmx-stuff at all, i just leeched the AMD docs and will read them - next year ).

Koepi -

I have no problem with a quality loss with integer mmx, I don't think it's even significant. But I want more than just mmx/xmm etc., I want video hardware accel.

The big thing holding up Xvid HDTV playback is the lack of access to hardware acceleration in all the video cards that is already used for MPEG2/DVD playback. I'm not a Dshow wizard and nVidea, ATI, and Matrox have not made it easy to take advantage of hardware IDCT, motion comp, and dequant (or even fast write?) where they already exist in hardware.

If it weren't for this I don't think MPEG4 would be extremely slower to decode than MPEG2, barring some of the slower experimental options in the dev tree. But it makes it look slower because we can't take advantage of hardware we've already bought.

Grrrrrrr. :(

On my dev machine I've already got a 2.4G P4 with rdram and can decode 1280x720p @ 24 Xvid just fine in software only, but with nothing to spare. That's the machine I use for programming and encoding.

But for actually watching movies I've got a PC133 866 P3 and that is obviously a bit slower. Though even there it can pretty much handle 1/4 res Xvid HDTV at 960x544 @ 24 up to about 4 mbits or so.

But I'd previously heard DX9/VMR was going to somewhat open the door to using hardware accel for mpeg4 somehow and I'm a bit disappointed that it doesn't seem to do that. I could care less about embedded deinterlace as I do that before reencoding anyway.

I keep hoping that one of our forum members that actually understands dshow will figure out how to take advantage of some of those nifty features we've already got on a lot of our video cards and put it into the Xvid or ffdshow decoders.

Anyway, Happy New Year.

- Tom

[drebel]

@TrBarry

win200sp3(and some pre-sp4)installed and just tested dx9 with mediaplayerclassic(by gabest) which takes advantage of vmr9.Xvid plays fine,no jitter anywhere(704x...)and video quality seems a lot better(i really dont know why)

Problem:nic's xvid.ax seems to have a problem with overlaying subtitles(big delay and incompatibility with vobsub,from what i've read),and ffdshow latest(13.12.2002) outputs in yuy2 when directly linked to vmr9
Otherwise,when yv12 is forced in ffdshow(by disabbling all other color formats),a color converter filter is automaticly placed in between to make it happen

I'll try new graphedit to see what happens...

regards and a happy new year to all
george

PS: Duron@933,GForce2MX ,41.09 modified,rivatuner here...

[trbarry]

Drat!

One of the Avisynth forum threads seemed to suggest the VMR renderer was about the only way to render directly in YV12, hopefully a performance gain. I was at least hoping I'd pick up that ability with DX9 under Win/Me.

- Tom

[Koepi]

I upgraded my DX SDK to 9 as well now, and XviD compiles flawless ;)
Not that it gained anything (...how can I notice that, I don't have a "speed test"), but if you want to be hip you have to install the newest stuff - even if it's worse than the old things.

ANyhow, I don't have any problems with DX) (+SDK), so I'd say it's safe to install.

Regards
Koepi

[gabest]

I guess VMR9 would only accept yv12 if the used video card could do blting from it onto the desktop (my gf2mx can't). I say this because DX9 doesn't seem to have any overlay support in it. Mpeg2 decoders can still use the hw-accelerated mpeg2 decoding / deinterlacing features of the video card through the renderer's input pin, just like with the overlay mixer or the VMR7, but the decoded picture will arrive back in yuy2 (check the info on VMR9's property page). At this point the yuy2 surface could be blted onto the primary surface in a window, or used as a texture to create some crazy effects, or blted on the backbuffer first to compose it with other graphics (like what mpc does to do its subtitling) and flip/copy it to the primary later.

I don't know exactly how much mpeg4 macroblock decoding differs from mpeg2, but as I think a normal video card (and MS's highly undocumented interfaces) are only prepared to handle mpeg2.

[trbarry]

I don't know exactly how much mpeg4 macroblock decoding differs from mpeg2, but as I think a normal video card (and MS's highly undocumented interfaces) are only prepared to handle mpeg2.

I don't know the internals of how it does it but I've always been under the impression that dshow hardware acceleration takes MPEG2 macro blocks and motion comp info in and processes it to dump it on the screen. I've never heard of a way to get the IDCT'd, motion comp'd, or dequanted info back to process it yourself in a way that would help MPEG4.

But maybe someone will figure it out.

It just bothers me when folks (at other forums of course ;) ) tell me that MPEG2 is so much more efficient to decode but all they're doing is taking advantage of all the code written for commercial DVD players that were made with the proprietary vendors developement kits.

Actually I'm a little surprised that at least Divx Networks hasn't cut a deal for MPEG4 hardware accelerated playback from ATI, etc. Maybe there is something fundamentally busted about current video hardware accel where it just can't work with MPEG4 or something. ??

But I guess maybe I'm drifting OT. Sorry.

- Tom

[gabest]

I don't know the internals of how it does it but I've always been under the impression that dshow hardware acceleration takes MPEG2 macro blocks and motion comp info in and processes it to dump it on the screen. I've never heard of a way to get the IDCT'd, motion comp'd, or dequanted info back to process it yourself in a way that would help MPEG4.It is possible, the only problem is the async speed of the bus between sys- and video memory. The gain would be lost when transfering the images back from the video card.Actually I'm a little surprised that at least Divx Networks hasn't cut a deal for MPEG4 hardware accelerated playback from ATI, etc. Maybe there is something fundamentally busted about current video hardware accel where it just can't work with MPEG4 or something. ??Well, as I said there must be some major difference which is preventing the currently used video cards from using them for mpeg4. Or the reason is completly else :)

[trbarry]

Yep. If if, else else. :D

- Tom

[sillKotscha]

Originally posted by Koepi
[...]but if you want to be hip you have to install the newest stuff [...].

ANyhow, I don't have any problems with DX) (+SDK), so I'd say it's safe to install.

Regards
Koepi

same here, no problems with the new_hip_stuff :D

one sidenote:

i have the impression, that encoded movies (divx and xvid) do look sharper in my eyes. Could that be true or is it just my impression because it's new and 'hip' :p

and another sidenote:

I couldn't get *.dat files to play after installing dx9. Before installation they played just fine. It helped me to re_install XCD DirectShow filter - strange. Anyone noticed that, too?

cheers Sill

[chemmajik]

Hmm I didnt know that the SDK's where finally available beyond beta, hopefully the documentation is also included & improved when it comes to movie video related programming. Is the SDK still compatible with VisC6 Pro & not require .NET installed?

[Caleb666]

hey,

Many of you guys have the DierctX9 SDK, so could you please rip the graphedit utility and report it on the doom9 download section?

It would be great if somebody did that with every directx release..

Btw, is there anything noticably new in the new graphedit?

[Koepi]

chemajik:
yes. it works with visual studio 98.

and for the future: don't PM me that you wrote a post asking a question. I'll find it anyways, and if i feel like answering it i will - this way you just upset me as you're indicating that your post is much more important than everyone else's posts.

Regards
Koepi

[The Edge]

@Caleb666:
You can find a newer version of Graphedit (directx9 compatible, but not taken directly from SDK) here. (www.progdigy.com ) (Bottom of the page;) )

Edge

[chemmajik]

Thanks anyways Koepi, I've kinda lost interest in the whole ideal now.

[masken]

There *might* be a way to uninstall... just found a link. It's in German, and I have *not* tried this application myself. Generally, I've had bad experiences with third party apps that messes with MS OS's, but perhaps it will solve something for those having probs.. Oh well, here's the link anyhow ;)

http://www.3dcenter.org/downloads/directx-dx9uninstaller.php