D3D draws mixed reaction over performance, usage

Electronic News, Nov 25, 1996 by Andrew MacLellan

Las Vegas--Three-dimensional accelerated graphics subsystems are moving faster then ever onto the PC, according to key industry observers, but that good news is tempered by reports here that Microsoft's Direct3D application programming interface (API) has become a technological albatross around the neck of game developers.

While Direct3D is expected to emerge as a unifying interface across many PC platforms, independent software vendors (ISVs)--already stung by Microsoft's six-month delay in providing Direct3D (D3D) development software--claim to have outpaced the interface and are reluctant to dumb down their titles to ensure compliance. Microsoft has also failed to meet the expectations of some chip makers, causing companies to continue using proprietary APIs for longer than was initially expected.

The result, according to some top executives, is that the much-hoped-for tsunami of game titles may wash ashore over the next several months in a series of smaller, gentler waves.

"What we're finding is that the native API games are going to go on further than we had originally anticipated," said Jon Peddie, president of the Jon Peddie Associates multimedia research company. "There are a couple of reasons for that: the delay of D3D, some complaints by some of the ISVs that they don't want to be dictated to by Microsoft, and some complaints about the performance of D3D.

"This is normal. You hear this about many standards. Everyone is going to have some criticism of it, and so to get around it, what they're doing is continuing to develop native APIs. In fact, they're probably going to come out with two or three versions of every game they develop."

Kevin Dallas, Microsoft's group product manager for multimedia, places the responsibility for exploiting Direct3D on the shoulders of the chip companies and title developers who have yet to learn how to optimize approximation, lighting and rendering functions within the API's execution buffer.

"It really is up to the content developer how they will fill their execution buffer," said Mr. Dallas. "If you don't pay attention to how you fill it you can actually get lower performance...We will start seeing hardware vendors optimize their silicon to take advantage of the execution buffer and ISVs starting to write to the buffer to get the most out of the API."

Mr. Dallas said a number of ISVs and graphics hardware vendors are working closely with Microsoft and report good performance under Direct3D. Part of the problem in fact may stem from what he termed the "gut-wrenching change" many chip houses have undertaken by integrating complex 3-D algorithms into their 2-D subsystems.

"It doesn't surprise me you're getting that kind of thing with Direct3D. We got the same thing with DirectDraw," he said. "We really believe that D3D is a success. What's going to happen for developers is they are going to go through the same learning curve as DirectDraw. And DirectDraw is viewed as a great success."

Despite the complaints, the long arm of Microsoft has extended its grip to nearly every 3-D development partnership--and there were many to observe here at Fall Comdex--ensuring that Direct3D remains a checklist item.

Brooktree, for example, newly acquired by Rockwell Semiconductor Systems, revealed that the Bt2164 video/graphics controller it introduced here with Argonaut will support Direct3D as well as Argonaut's BRender development software. Alliance Semiconductor, which introduced a graphics subsystem recently with 3Dfx Interactive (EN, Nov. 18), is promoting the Microsoft API but is also supporting 3Dfx's in-house Glide and other software interfaces.

And PowerVR, the graphics system developed by NEC and VideoLogic, will employ a proprietary API in addition to Direct3D which the companies claim is unable to deploy the full suite of PowerVR functions.

While grumbling persists that Direct3D is slower than competing interfaces, APIs in general have difficulty standing up to the rigors of hand-tuned ISV titles, said one software company representative. And in some cases, it's more than a software bottleneck. The PowerVR chip, for example, is also affected by CPU limitations, according to VideoLogic executive VP of marketing Trevor Wing, who observed polygon rendering degradation when running on Intel's 166MHz Pentium.

"The development business is still very much resisting APIs," said Brian Davis, product line marketing manager for Brooktree's Multimedia group. "Part of the competitive advantage of one game developer over another is the 3-D technology from a software perspective. They're resisting moving to a common API because it creates a level playing field.

"The combination of the API and hardware have to get out of the way. They can't be performance bottlenecks."

These alliances, and others such as the Chips & Technologies/Real3D pact to bring 3-D graphics to the desktop after-market and notebook PC, represent a trend by semiconductor companies to partner with high-end 3-D technology houses. Having for the moment conceded the lower end of the market to the likes of S3 and ATI Technologies, these newer entrants are hoping to take arcade quality performance and shoehorn it into a mainstream graphics subsystem.