PureBasic Forums - English

Hello everyone,
it seems that on windows vista,the performance of 2D/3D sprites decrease a lot... a beta of lethal judgment 4 run with 30/40fps on vista and with the same pc at 75fps on xp...? ( latest drivers for vista and xp )...
Does anyone know this issue..?

For me, the "wow" does not start now. I believe it's just OS overhead. Did you try with Aero turned off?

lethalpolux wrote:Hello everyone,
it seems that on windows vista,the performance of 2D/3D sprites decrease a lot... a beta of lethal judgment 4 run with 30/40fps on vista and with the same pc at 75fps on xp...? ( latest drivers for vista and xp )...
Does anyone know this issue..?

You should try using the OpenGL subsystem if you are using Sprite3D under Vista.

PB still uses the outdated DX7 which is NOT supported by Vista. Vista uses a special version of DX9 to emulate support for older versions of DX, unfortunately since this is emulated at runtime, it can cause an FPS hit.

I don't notice a performance drop from XP to Vista using PB sprite commands (or any other non-pure games/demos).

Using Galaxy 7600GS 500Mhz core, 1400Mhz memory with official NVidia drivers (not stock Windows auto installed drivers).

I didn't try it with the Vista installed drivers.

I've read about these speed decreases alot in the gaming world. Vista at the minute is plain and simply slower for games. Microsoft blame the drivers and say things will get better when better drivers are written. Can't see it myself tho'. :roll: I wish everyone would just boycott Vista.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/art ... Id=9011078

I must say that its not true that Vista is slower for games (for me at least). Everything (including 3D sprites) works fine and fast for me. It is however important to install the latest display drivers as the ones that ship with Vista does not include OpenGL + fast DX support for older versions.
Also I use an ATI card. Ive heard that theres still some trouble with the NVidia drivers. Also some games simply refuse to install or run, so that is definately an issue

Also, Aero is automaticaly disabled on fullscreen or PB windowed screen games.

Kale: Have you even tried Vista?

The only problems I have seen with nvidia drivers are for pre 6xxx chipsets - there are no nvidia supplied drivers (so no opengl). But my girlfriends computer has a fx5600 in it with the drivers supplied with Vista itself (not from nvidias website) - code I have written works fine, no apparent slow down or problems.

In any event, like it or not, Vista is here to stay. I have not noticed any slow downs or "real" problems with drivers (I must say I was expecting problems, but didn't really get any!).

Every one complains about a speed decrease for games in Vista. I still fail to see what they are talking about, I don't see any speed decrease for any games I play in Vista, in fact I see better performance with Vista then XP ever had with an average increase in frame rates of 10 or more with the exact same hardware that was running with the same games in XP.

SFSxOI wrote:in fact I see better performance with Vista then XP ever had with an average increase in frame rates of 10 or more with the exact same hardware that was running with the same games in XP.

This is an unfair statement and you really cannot compare gaming performance of XP and Vista for PB because you are really "not" using the same hardware.

Take a 2D (DirectDraw) game written in PB for an example. Under XP, it will be using DX7 no matter what and it will not be taking full advantage of your video card which will likely be a DX9 or DX8 card. Not to mention under XP, drivers have for years been giving worse performance for older DX7 based stuff as the drivers and hardware are tweaked for DX9 or DX8 performance.

On Vista, that same 2D game will NOT be using DX7 and the api calls are translated at runtime to DX9 calls, and the game will be running as "3D" and it will be taking full advantage of your video card. No matter what version of DX used for older games, they will be running as DX9 and should fly. Unfortunately, due to internal changes in DX over the years, some older 3D stuff does not necessarily have an equivalent in DX9 and instead of being translated to something hardware accelerated, the effect in question can be translated to something in software mode which will degrade performance.

Unfortunately, there are also hideous problems with drivers for some cards, and especially running something DX7 based with certain drivers. Until Nvidia gets their act together, you can sometimes get better performance using OpenGL.

I wish everyone would just boycott Vista.

I am but for different reasons. My main target is now Linux and the only versions of Windows my software will run on is XP and 2000. I won't support Vista, ME, 98, 95.

I won't support Vista, ME, 98, 95.

imho, your nuts!

DoubleDutch wrote:imho, your nuts!

For Vista, the choice wasn't mine. As an indie developer, I am essentially locked out and like most indie developers, I cannot afford to make my software fully Vista compatible.

I am an indie developer too, I haven't had any problems with Vista.

What problem have you encountered that stops your programs being compatible?

Brice Manuel wrote: I won't support Vista, ME, 98, 95.

98, ME and 95 support i agree on. Those platforms are so different, and you have to make a huge effort and often choose a completely other approach to make your software run on it. And i doubt its the effort worth!

Vista is another thing.

I think you should support vista, eg make it run. But if it runs with trouble, i guess you can't say its your fault. But do make it run

98, ME and 95 support i agree on. Those platforms are so different, and you have to make a huge effort and often choose a completely other approach to make your software run on it.

Also those older versions are going to be running on older systems that don't have the power I might need for my games (depends on the game).

What problem have you encountered that stops your programs being compatible?

The problem is the expenses that are now being put on indie developers, especially indie game developers, for FULL compatibility with Vista. Considering I only write freeware, its just not cost effective to spend a couple thousand dollars per game for FULL Vista compatibility.

I think you should support vista, eg make it run.

I considered "unofficially" supporting Vista and providing no tech support. But I am not comfortable with that.

Brice Manuel wrote:

98, ME and 95 support i agree on. Those platforms are so different, and you have to make a huge effort and often choose a completely other approach to make your software run on it.

Also those older versions are going to be running on older systems that don't have the power I might need for my games (depends on the game).

Yes that is also a concideration.

I considered "unofficially" supporting Vista and providing no tech support. But I am not comfortable with that.

True, it would seem a bit awkward. But as long as the gfx companies has trouble with it, and microsoft keeps doing weird stuff nothing can really be done good enough from your side. Purchasing vista, well, would that really help?