d2d1_3.h to improve rendering performance?

[storaid]

Hello, Tiki

I checked your log, looks like the TuneBrowser is using D2D 1.0 API.

Have you tried using “d2d1_3.h” (also known as D2D 1.3) to improve rendering performance?

I mean using the new features brought by newer D2D(d2d1_1.h or later) to improve rendering performance, such as better multi-threading control.

Thanks

[Tiki]

TuneBrowser is supporting Direct2D 1.1 for a long time now.

However, I have not enabled Direct2D 1.1 because there is no advantage to the TuneBrowser in terms of functionality and performance, and conversely, Windows 10 users who use older drivers may experience problems (I do not intend to support both Direct 2D 1.0 and 1.1 or higher).

If you have any specific information on Direct2D 1.3 performance, could you please share it with me for future reference?

[storaid]

Hello, Tiki

Did you use the ID2D1Effect interface from d2d1_1.h??

Although it’s not from1.3 feature.

[storaid]

I believe that after version 1.0, the implementation of interfaces such as ID2D1Effect, ID2D1Device, and ID2D1DeviceContext can simplify code and make full use of GPU resources possible.

IMO, I see no reason not to take advantage of these features.

https://github.com/Ray1024/Direct2D

[Tiki]

Did you use the ID2D1Effect interface from d2d1_1.h??

I tried.

I believe that after version 1.0, the implementation of interfaces such as ID2D1Effect, ID2D1Device, and ID2D1DeviceContext can simplify code and make full use of GPU resources possible.

I wanted to know the specific performance information you mentioned. When I tried it, there was not much difference in performance. It was richer in expression, however, it was not a feature that TuneBrowser desperately needed.

[storaid]

Hello, Tiki

Well, I understand what you mean.

In your case,  the TuneBrowser doesn’t rely on many special effects.

If you’re not using a new interface or applying rich effects, such as ID2D1Device1 and ID2D1Device3, then I agree with your point of view that upgrading to the newer version won’t necessarily bring performance improvements.

Direct2D API provides richer effects with each update.

This is just my personal opinion, take it as you will.

Direct2D 1.1 to 1.3 have been out for over 6 years now, and I haven’t seen any updates to them.

Tiki, if you are worried about compatibility with older operating systems, such as Windows 8, I think you can stay with version 1.0

However, given that Windows 10 is commonly used now and it’s a basic requirement for your software, I personally don’t think there would be significant compatibility issues when switching to a newer version.

Current GPU including iGPU already provide at least DirectX 11 support.

Even the very old Intel Haswell GT2 iGPU architecture guarantees at least DirectX 11.1 support, with some features of DirectX 12.

Therefore, in my judgement, I don’t think using a newer version of Direct2D would cause significant compatibility issues.

It’s been quite a while since the Direct2D API was updated.

 

Thanks

[Tiki]

Thank you for your opinion.

What I’m thinking about the applying of Direct2D in TuneBrowser, is already written above. m(__)m

[投稿者]

投稿