rec.autos.simulators

OT: DirectX 9.0b

mach

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by mach » Mon, 28 Jul 2003 15:35:19

OK... well, given that I donwloaded and installed DX9.0a only a couple weeks ago
and now a few days ago they've released DX9.0b, I'd like to know from those of
you who may already have installed it if it's worth the trouble... I mean, I'm
downloading it right now, but would you say it's absolutely necessary to install
it (i.e., does it fix some terrible problem Dx9.0a had and noone had noticed,
or something like that)?

--
__________   ____---____       Marco Antonio  Checa  Funcke
\_________D /-/---_----'      Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru
       _H__/_/                      http://www.racesimcentral.net/
      '-_____|(    

remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

elrik

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by elrik » Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:14:06


I think it protects against some obscure attack vulnerability or other.

I installed it - no problems.

Elrikk

Steve Smit

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by Steve Smit » Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:02:57

It fixes yet another one of MS's infamous vulnerabilities.

Installing it is no prob.  You can d/l the whole redistro, but there are 2
simpler options: an online upgrade (which, like the redistro, can't be
undone) and a <1Kb patch, which can be undone.

I installed it, no probs.


DOKK

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by DOKK » Tue, 29 Jul 2003 05:38:31

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 13:02:57 GMT, "Steve Smith"


>It fixes yet another one of MS's infamous vulnerabilities.

>Installing it is no prob.  You can d/l the whole redistro, but there are 2
>simpler options: an online upgrade (which, like the redistro, can't be
>undone) and a <1Kb patch, which can be undone.

>I installed it, no probs.



>> OK... well, given that I donwloaded and installed DX9.0a only a couple
>weeks ago
>> and now a few days ago they've released DX9.0b, I'd like to know from
>those of
>> you who may already have installed it if it's worth the trouble... I mean,
>I'm
>> downloading it right now, but would you say it's absolutely necessary to
>install
>> it (i.e., does it fix some terrible problem Dx9.0a had and noone had
>noticed,
>> or something like that)?

>> --
>> __________   ____---____       Marco Antonio  Checa  Funcke
>> \_________D /-/---_----'      Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru
>>        _H__/_/                      http://machf.tripod.com
>>       '-_____|(

>> remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

got 25 fps more with Radeon 9700 Pro on F1C Suzuka test day
(now 120 fps) (athlon 2800+)

DOK

Steve Smit

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by Steve Smit » Tue, 29 Jul 2003 20:51:44

You got 25 fps more with 9b than 9a?


> On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 13:02:57 GMT, "Steve Smith"

> >It fixes yet another one of MS's infamous vulnerabilities.

> >Installing it is no prob.  You can d/l the whole redistro, but there are
2
> >simpler options: an online upgrade (which, like the redistro, can't be
> >undone) and a <1Kb patch, which can be undone.

> >I installed it, no probs.



> >> OK... well, given that I donwloaded and installed DX9.0a only a couple
> >weeks ago
> >> and now a few days ago they've released DX9.0b, I'd like to know from
> >those of
> >> you who may already have installed it if it's worth the trouble... I
mean,
> >I'm
> >> downloading it right now, but would you say it's absolutely necessary
to
> >install
> >> it (i.e., does it fix some terrible problem Dx9.0a had and noone had
> >noticed,
> >> or something like that)?

> >> --
> >> __________   ____---____       Marco Antonio  Checa  Funcke
> >> \_________D /-/---_----'      Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru
> >>        _H__/_/                      http://machf.tripod.com
> >>       '-_____|(

> >> remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

> got 25 fps more with Radeon 9700 Pro on F1C Suzuka test day
> (now 120 fps) (athlon 2800+)

> DOK

Dave Henri

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by Dave Henri » Tue, 29 Jul 2003 22:34:51



    I would guess it was more like he WASN'T getting the full performance
from his hardware while he had dx9a because of driver conflicts.  Something
about installing 9b corrected a problem  9a would have also given similar
performance if his system had been 100%.  
    Since b is considered a security fix rather than a feature or
performance update, perhaps his slow fps was due to a background program
hogging his system resources.

dave henrie

Ed Solhei

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by Ed Solhei » Tue, 29 Jul 2003 23:32:21

"Steve Smith" said:

Now you tell me!!!

--
ed_

DOKK

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by DOKK » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 01:38:21

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:51:44 GMT, "Steve Smith"


>You got 25 fps more with 9b than 9a?

Yes, strange isnt it?

DOK

DOKK

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by DOKK » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 01:39:41





>> You got 25 fps more with 9b than 9a?

>    I would guess it was more like he WASN'T getting the full performance
>from his hardware while he had dx9a because of driver conflicts.  Something
>about installing 9b corrected a problem  9a would have also given similar
>performance if his system had been 100%.  
>    Since b is considered a security fix rather than a feature or
>performance update, perhaps his slow fps was due to a background program
>hogging his system resources.

>dave henrie

I would think so myself, except that i didnt change anything else. So
maybe driver conlict, i dont care, it now runs even smoother, i dont
care why ;-)

DOK

Steve Smit

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by Steve Smit » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:34:51

Tha's why I asked!  ;o)


> On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:51:44 GMT, "Steve Smith"

> >You got 25 fps more with 9b than 9a?

> Yes, strange isnt it?

> DOK

mach

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by mach » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 14:17:31

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 13:02:57 GMT, "Steve Smith"


>It fixes yet another one of MS's infamous vulnerabilities.

>Installing it is no prob.  You can d/l the whole redistro, but there are 2
>simpler options: an online upgrade (which, like the redistro, can't be
>undone) and a <1Kb patch, which can be undone.

Do you really mean <1KB, or is it acutally <1MB?

--
__________   ____---____       Marco Antonio  Checa  Funcke
\_________D /-/---_----'      Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru
       _H__/_/                      http://machf.tripod.com
      '-_____|(    

remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

Steve Smit

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by Steve Smit » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 21:33:29

It's a little more than 900 kilobytes.


> On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 13:02:57 GMT, "Steve Smith"

> >It fixes yet another one of MS's infamous vulnerabilities.

> >Installing it is no prob.  You can d/l the whole redistro, but there are
2
> >simpler options: an online upgrade (which, like the redistro, can't be
> >undone) and a <1Kb patch, which can be undone.

> Do you really mean <1KB, or is it acutally <1MB?

> --
> __________   ____---____       Marco Antonio  Checa  Funcke
> \_________D /-/---_----'      Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru
>        _H__/_/                      http://machf.tripod.com
>       '-_____|(

> remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

Richard S Becket

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by Richard S Becket » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 00:16:17

Wow!!!!!

That's like the weather man saying it's going to be sunny, and it not
raining! (In the UK).

R.

Cesar Borgi

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by Cesar Borgi » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 09:45:05

I think performance and security are two completely separate issues,
not two sides of the same coin as you are implying.

--Cesar

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:16:17 +0100, "Richard S Beckett"


>> MS website says "security fix" and "performance enhancing".

>Wow!!!!!

>That's like the weather man saying it's going to be sunny, and it not
>raining! (In the UK).

>R.

Richard S Becket

OT: DirectX 9.0b

by Richard S Becket » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 17:50:26

I just put the latest NVidia driver on, and upgraded from dx 8.1 to 9.0b.

Erm...

Nothing much happened.

I did notice that I get less of a frame rate drop in the parts of the
circuit where the frame rate drops, but I didn't get higher frame rates
anywhere.

Overall, erm...well, my pc still works.

R.


1. DirectX 5.0b

2. MGP demo (F1RS2) won't run with Directx 5.0 - where can I get Directx 6.0?

3. Slightly OT: DirectX 6.1 Expired??

4. OT - DirectX 6.1 - No Sound problem

5. OT: DirectX headaches and online racing

6. OT OT Digital Scale info for Snarl OT OT

7. OT OT-We don't know yet...-OT OT

8. LFS -> New patch just released 1.0b

9. IY[S#V/#EPYM\VSFB#X>?64X!FT%)S:T95T9N5A1`C1%0B/U=I72P"AA

rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.