2D performance in reverse? A Comprehensive Analysis | Retro Part 2 of 2

1 - Einführung: Die Relevanz der 2D-Grafikausgabe über das GDI 2 - Das 2D-GDI und dessen Grafikausgabe von XP bis Windows 7 im Detail 3 - 2D-Grafikausgabe über das GDI: direkt oder gepuffert? 4 - Die Symptome der HD 5xxx-Serie und deren Relevanz unter Windows 7 5 - Tom2D: Unser einfacher 2D-GDI-Benchmark 6 - Tom2D: Textausgabe 7 - Tom2D: Linien 8 - Tom2D: Kurven 9 - Tom2D: Polygone 10 - Tom2D: Rechtecke 11 - Tom2D: Ellipsen 12 - Tom2D: Blitting 13 - Tom2D: Stretching 14 - Fazit

Over 13 years ago, I was concerned with the elimination of 2D hardware acceleration in Windows Vista and XP and made no friends for life with the driver team at (then) ATI in Toronto. The good thing about the two articles that hit like a bomb back then is that both AMD and NVIDIA started reacting frantically back then and also took remedial action pretty quickly. The bad thing is that some things could still not be solved as performant as under Windows XP and the graphics cards with specialized 2D functions. So today comes the part two of the article series.

ATI in reverse gear? 2D performance falls by the wayside | Retro

Excerpts from the original article from 20.01.2020

Let’s deal more with the relevance of the GDI today and explain 2D graphics output in detail. In order to be able to classify the results correctly, some basic theoretical knowledge is of course necessary. We have therefore delved a little deeper into the subject, again simplifying the presentation so that it remains simple and understandable. Of course, this means that technical finesse falls by the wayside, but comprehensibility for the broad readership has priority.

Why do we still test the GDI in times of Windows 7 and Direct2D?

One might think that, at the latest since the introduction of DirectX10-capable graphics cards and Vista, the old GDI would be superfluous for the output of 2D character content. With WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation) and thus also Direct2D, the successor propagated by Microsoft has been waiting in the wings on these systems for quite some time. However, there are still a lot of arguments and reasons why the GDI (Graphics Device Interface) still has an undeniable importance and therefore one should also put a part of the attention on this area.

• The GDI also supports older graphics cards, Direct2D needs at least a graphics card with DirectX10 support
• The GDI exists since Windows exists, Direct2D runs only since Vista and Windows 7
• All programs that are compatible with XP (and older) use the GDI

Many software manufacturers shy away until today from the conversion, because one accesses with different programs often enough the same libraries, which were created once ready. A conversion of these modules would have also an adjustment of all affected programs to the consequence. Since the increase in performance is hardly subjectively noticeable in many cases, software manufacturers like to suppress this conversion for economic reasons. If one follows for example, how long alone the implementation of Direct2D in parts of the Mozilla Firefox lasts, one will understand the industry, if it accomplishes this conversion only very slowly. In addition, it would not be an option for many companies to completely exclude XP customers as a target group for business reasons. Implementing both would then add to the price that no one would be willing to pay anymore. For these reasons alone, GDI will certainly remain with us as long as XP plays a significant role in the end-user sector.

Direct2D as part of the Direct3D output (D3D)

But there are also technical reasons. The existing and often very mature code is not really 1:1 portable. Direct2D also creates a not to be despised overhead and can’t really do anything that Direct3D could do. And where one rather renounces Direct3D, one will have weighed the reasons surely well. The GDI can also be used independently of the output device (monitor, printer). A single routine can thus be called within a program for displaying and printing at the same time, the code and the programming effort are thus reduced to half and also the error probability is reduced. Many of the existing cheaper printers are also GDI printers, so that this component of the operating system will probably be maintained for the time being, especially since there are still enough printer drivers that only support the GDI.

The sense of it all

We ourselves see the implementation of WPF/Direct2D of course as a technical advance forced by Microsoft and probably also irreversible, but despite all the euphoria about new technologies, we would like to use this article as an emphatic reminder of the present. There are still so many technical legacies, including Windows XP, that you can’t just look forward without considering the current situation. That something like this can quickly go wrong is probably best seen in the example of the XP phobia of the 780G/785G onboard graphics.