Slashdot Mirror


Windows 8 Graphics: Microsoft Has Hardware-Accelerated Everything

MrSeb writes "Microsoft has detailed the extensive changes made to the Windows 8 graphics subsystem and DirectX 11.1. In short, everything in Windows 8 is hardware accelerated, and as a result its text, 2D, and 3D performance will blow Windows 7 away. DirectX 11.1 has also received a significant overhaul that should result in faster and more efficient games and applications. The bulk of the graphics changes in Windows 8 pertain to hardware acceleration for simple, typographically-rich Metro-style apps. In Windows 8, the rendering speed of text and simple shapes has been massively increased across the board: Title and heading text renders 336% faster than Windows 7; Lines render 184% faster; Rectangles render 438% faster; and so on. The rendering of JPEG, PNG, and GIF image files has also been improved in Windows 8, mostly by expanding SIMD usage. In one demo, Windows 8 decodes and renders 64 JPEGs in 4.38 seconds, while Windows 7 performs the same task in 7.28 seconds. Amongst a few changes to DirectX, the most significant feature in DX 11.1 is the new, simplified, unified Direct3D 11.1 API, which finally brings together the many API offshoots that MS has implemented in recent years."

21 of 563 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe it's just me by thesk8ingtoad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but I have a fairly modest PC and I couldn't tell you the last time I said "Man, I wish I could render these 64 JPEGs in 4 seconds instead of this lousy 7." As far as I'm concerned, text and image rendering hasn't noticeably changed in 10+ years. But, I suppose you have to have something to make up for alienating your userbase with an interface designed for a machine it's not running.

    1. Re:Maybe it's just me by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've thought that. A few months ago I spend a day or two trying to get GIFs to compress as quickly as possible, trying to get it in under 50milliseconds for a project I was working on. I didn't succeed, but any speedup is welcome to me.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Maybe it's just me by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Suppose you've just downloaded a couple of hundred images from your camera-- Wouldn't it be nice if you could quickly scroll through the images and decide which ones are worth keeping, and which are not? Or perhaps you've photographed some library books, page by page, and it occurs to you that one particular article is more immediately useful, and you don't remember if that's IMG_209--IMG_215, or IMG312-IMG_334. If Windows renders the images quickly enough, it's very simple to flip through the images. If not, you'll be waiting for the images to load.

      Maybe it's a pdf from archive.org that needs thumbing through.

    3. Re:Maybe it's just me by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 5, Informative

      This has very little to do with displaying the image, it has a lot to do with reading the files, and unpacking them both of which hardware acceleration will not help with at all ...?

      Almost everything that needs hardware acceleration to be fast enough already has it, everything else it should be irrelevant, except MS is pushing whizzy graphics on Metro apps - you know those annoying animations that people have been complaining about for years .....

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  2. ...typographically-rich Metro-style apps. by Robert+Zenz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So, "typographically rich" is the new buzzword, yes?

    1. Re:...typographically-rich Metro-style apps. by Shimbo · · Score: 5, Funny

      So, "typographically rich" is the new buzzword, yes?

      Give us $1 million or WE WILL USE BLOCK CAPS EVERYWHERE.

  3. Seriously, can we give Microsoft some cred... by PortHaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Over the years I've knocked Microsoft quite a bit. But I have to say that after 2 years of using Windows 7 I am still happily pleased. I've had one crash with blue screen of death. And very few problems outside of trying to run iTunes.

    So let's be a bit fair. Heck, Windows 7 crashed less than my OS X experience of the same amount of time. Not saying it's perfect. But on decent hardware with good drivers, it's pretty darn good. And a lot better than anything Microsoft did in the past.

  4. Fighting the Wrong Battlefield by Sasayaki · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Software has dramatically outpaced hardware over the last decade. The lowest end PCs available for purchase can easily run Windows 7, especially if given a few extra gigs of RAM (by far the cheapest component) or given an SSD (by far the slowest component).

    End users will never, ever notice this speed because I've never waited for Windows 7 to render text. Ever.

    By all means, software speedups are more than welcome and it's good that Microsoft have avoided the typical bloat that many have suspect Intel pushes, but the most important battlefields by far for Windows 8 acceptance will be stability, ease of use, compatibility with legacy applications and hardware support.

    Stability is in doubt if there's big changes, which there looks like there will be.

    Ease of use... Metro has been copping a lot of flak from the technical user camp, but we don't know what Joe User will think of it yet. In any event, it's a lot of retraining, which is not a good sign.

    Legacy application and hardware support will probably be equal to Windows 7, with a loss in application support and a gain in hardware support.

    TL;DR: Well done, but I hope this isn't *all* Microsoft have when it comes to Windows 8.

    --
    Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
  5. Re:Yes but.. by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you've been watching Microsoft at all in the last 20 years, and expected anything but ugly, then you haven't been paying attention.

    A good part of the reason OSX is considered 'beautiful' is because people are comparing it to Windows. Yeah I just insulted Microsoft and Apple fanboys, but it's true.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  6. Re:crash faster by dynamo52 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes I know you trying to be funny but as an IT consultant for small and midsized businesses, I haven't seen a Windows system totally crash since XP and even then rarely saw any crashes after SP3. For all the haters here on Slashdot, Windows is still by far the best desktop environment available for use in a business setting.

    --
    Like this comment? I accept Bitcoin! - 153sc8UUBXyp12ofQqfAWDmJrzyiKCYC1x
  7. Let's be realistic by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 5, Funny

    To be fair, a Commodore 64 could render the Metro interface at a reasonable speed. The advantage of changing to an interface that looks like it is from the 80s or 90s is that you don't have to push around a lot of pixels or do fancy 3D tricks to make it work.

    When they finally retire the old non-Metro UI and just have the full-screen interface, I wonder if they will rename the product from Microsoft Windows to Microsoft Window. The tagline: there can be only one (program onscreen).

  8. Speed for all apps by caywen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Jesus, these initial comments bore the hell out of me.

    Here's the way I see it: Microsoft has finally gotten off their asses and recognized that efficiency really does matter when dealing with power efficient mobile GPU's. Given that Metro's ethos is stark simplicity, it'll be entertaining to watch how developers exploit the new capabilities. If the result is silky smooth navigation in nearly all apps, that'll be a big win. If the result is a rebirth of gradients, glows, glass, and other crap, I'll be pretty disappointed.

    Hats off to Microsoft for focusing not just on Metro speed, but speed for all apps.

  9. Re:Now you can fry eggs on gpu not only while gami by Gaygirlie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are you trying to imply rendering things in less time than before and more efficiently with a GPU produces more heat than the previous method of using more time to render the same thing less efficiently on the CPU? You might wish to rethink that.

  10. Re:Yes but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    You're using Windows with four screens? Are you using a different window manager or some additional software to manage windows?

    Windows 8 actually has quite significant multi-screen improvements built in, see the blog post http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/21/enhancing-windows-8-for-multiple-monitors.aspx

  11. Re:crash faster by billcopc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well then you can't blame the software for a hardware failure. I was running my original Windows 7 installation until a few days ago, when I decided to start fresh. 3 years without any significant problems, it's been the smoothest experience so far. I distinctly remember the day it launched, my coworkers asked about it, and they had to ask twice when they heard me speak the words "Windows 7 is fucking awesome". This, coming from a guy running a heavily-modified Gentoo-KDE workstation, bragging about 300-day uptime with XP relegated to a tiny VM on a side monitor.

    3 years later, well, I still think Windows 7 is great. Does what I expect from Windows, nothing more, nothing less. Runs fast, supports all my hardware, sleeps/resumes without a hitch, uptime is dependent on whether I care to install monthly updates. Pretty much my only gripe is I wish the default shell were Bash instead of CMD (and Cygwin still sucks).

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  12. Re:crash faster by epyT-R · · Score: 5, Informative

    applications don't get direct access.. drivers do. if the drivers clobber things they shouldn't, they can crash the kernel.. just like the unix derivatives in service today.

  13. Re:Yes but.. by billcopc · · Score: 5, Informative

    Windows 7 added a few simple keyboard shortcuts to quickly move windows around and dock them to the left or right half of a monitor. It does the same if you drag a window to the edges of a monitor. I can't speak for the GP, but personally I have not needed a 3rd party window manager since this addition. I can't even remember the software I was using back in the XP days, but it basically did the same thing.

    Since most well-behaved Windows apps remember their position on exit, this is just peachy. If they don't, proper alignment is just a few keystrokes away. Combined with the Win+(digit) shortcuts for the first 9 items on the start bar (docked or running apps), I don't even touch the mouse for most of my work.

    Here's a list of those shortcuts at Lifehacker

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  14. Re:crash faster by Barsteward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "due to being improperly configured."

    was that during install time when you inserted the Windows install disk instead of SuSE or Redhat? --

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  15. It's sad 8 has such a shitty UI by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Informative

    Because it is a good OS. This isn't the only place they've increased speed. Cakewalk tried out Sonar X1 (their top flight digital audio workstation product) on 8 and found an across the board speed improvement. Not a recompile or something that used new special 8 features, just the code they have out now running on 8.

    The technical types have done good work on it. It looks like they were just able to make it faster, more efficient and all that kind of jazz, and do so without increasing hardware requirements. Wonderful. What's more, they made it so it could run tablet and phone apps, which is cool if you find an app you like and want it on the desktop.

    Unfortunately marketing got involved and said "We have to use desktops to drive sales of the tablets nobody wants! Make it use a tablet interface even though that sucks for desktop use!"

    So we have a good OS, with a shitty UI. Oh well. Personally, it doesn't bother me much. I'll just replace the UI. I imagine Stardock will make a good set of tools to make it look good (they've already released a beta start menu tool) and Classic Shell already has Windows 8 support. So no problems for me.

    It more annoys me at work. What I can guarantee will happen is people will get it either because they want to try it or because they get a new computer, they'll hate the changes, demand 7 back (which we'll give them) and then never want to move from 7, ever, because they'll decide it is "The last good OS."

    I'm sure the MS programmers are pretty bitter at the marketing heads right now fucking up what really is quite a good set of technical improvements.

  16. Re:Worse by far. Ask why AD is used. by dontclapthrowmoney · · Score: 5, Informative

    "I want my apps and my config to move with me if I have to work on another computer". NFS mounted home directories on UNIX means that this isn't a problem on those machines. It does it without AD, therefore why implement it?

    However, windows wants it all on the C: drive and locally mounted, therefore they have to have this all reconfigured on boot/login.

    Yeah it's a real shame windows don't have something that lets your profile roam with you.

    - Roaming profiles
    - Folder redirection (with or without mandatory profiles)
    - Group Policy
    - Group Policy preferences (can't remember how I managed without those, now. What's a login script again?)

    And probably a bunch of other stuff I missed, that was off the top of my head. And it's click-and-drool to deploy for the most part, and troubleshooting is just right-click-and-drool.

  17. Windows enhanced fault-tolerant display drivers by benjymouse · · Score: 5, Informative

    applications don't get direct access.. drivers do. if the drivers clobber things they shouldn't, they can crash the kernel..

    Actually, Windows (since Vista) has a more fault-tolerant hybrid driver model for graphics drivers: A "core" part runs in kernel space and the bigger more complicated part runs in user space. If the part of the driver which runs in user mode causes memory corruption, only the user process is affected. This is the major reason why Vista and 7 systems seems more reliable than XP. Microsofts telemetry indicated that poor graphics drivers and overheating and misbehaving graphics cards were *the* major reason for instability of Windows systems.

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb188739.aspx
    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480220.aspx

    Windows also can allow the graphics card to re-initialize if it determines that it has faulted or freezes. For a period I was really annoyed about Internet Explorer 9 when I tried it out. It seemed smooth, especially so when I were scrolling up and down (GPU accelerated). But every 5 seconds or so it would pause for just a fraction of a second. Not much, but definitively enough to being annoying. Little did I know that it was actually the nVidia driver that faulted and the Windows graphics system was actually resetting and re-initializing. When I realized that and updated to the latest nVidia driver the problem went away (I still use Chrome; there still is this "feel" to IE9 that isn't quite right - cannot put my finger on it, though).

    they can crash the kernel.. just like the unix derivatives in service today.

    I don't think that OS X has a similar model - but then again on OS X Apple can tightly control and regression test the limited number of cards and drivers. I have definitively had X crash on me and taking all the apps down with it on more than one occasion - not so much after running Linux mainly under VMWare and Hyper-V.

    --
    Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*