Celestia and Geforce FX, DDS textures on Radeon 9700?

anton-rumata · Post #1by **anton-rumata** » 08.05.2003, 17:55

Hello!

I am very much inspired of the program Celestia.
For the moment I have a Radeon 9700 in my computer. Unfortunately I cannot use DDS textures, because Celestia works then unstably (version 1.3). Are DDS textures fully functional only with Nvidia cards?
Already did someone test Celestia with a Geforce FX? I do not intend to buy such a expensive graphic card. It interests me nevertheless with view into the future.
I thank you already now for your answers. Please my bad English forgives!

Anton

Don. Edwards · Post #2by **Don. Edwards** » 09.05.2003, 01:10

Its my understanding that .dds textures were working under the newer ATI radeon cards. I would make sure you have the newest Catalyst drivers for your card and look carefully through your .dds files for corruption. There is a plugin available from NVidia that you can use in Photoshop if you have it. It will open any .dds texture as a normal image file. That way you can see if the texture is in fact intact. Aslo be aware that the newest build of Celestia 1.3.0 is buggy. Try downloading the older version 1.3pre6 and try that. There still may be a few issues with the vertex nd pixel shadders on the ATI cards, but it is miles away from where it used to be. Sorry I can't be more help as I am in the other camp when it comes to video cards. I use NVidia. No ATI until they are 100% Celestia friendly.

anton-rumata · Post #3by **anton-rumata** » 09.05.2003, 08:01

Hello @Don. Edwards,

thanks for the fast answer. I can use dds the textures nevertheless now. My Radeon 9700 indicates it.
Nevertheless I can determine a problem. If I worked with Celestia and it liked to again start later, a problem of Windows XP is indicated to me. But for this error I already found a solution. I change briefly the dissolution of the desktop and reset her again. Afterwards Celestia can be started again. That is somehow strange.
You recommended the version 1.3pre6 to me. How does it differ from the final version? I would use the beta version gladly, but merging of the many new pictures (dds files for example) is somewhat complex me.
I would see gladly also times the employment of pixel and Vertex Shadern natural with a Radeon 9700 and Celestia. But I am now already very inspired over the quality of the pictures shown!

Anton

If someone already tested Celestia with a Geforce FX, me much would interest, as the program with this card runs.

Don. Edwards · Post #4by **Don. Edwards** » 09.05.2003, 09:12

Anton,
No one needs to test the GeForce FX because Celestia is already 100% compatible from the start. Most of the code was native from the beginning. Chris the author of Celestia is I believe contracted to NVidia so there’s your answer in a nutshell. Celestia will be 100% compatible with the GeForce FX cards because its 100% compatible with the GeForce4 cards. The ATI cards have a different way of handing the calls to there pixel and vertex shaders than NVidia cards so that has been the issue up until recently.
The main reason to go to the beta is that Celestia 1.3 has a known bug in its vertex shading handlers. I was just recently apprised of this problem myself and I have gone back to the older build to find that most of the troubles I had are gone. Hopefully Chris will have this hammered out in build 1.3.1.
Other things you can try are; change the color level from 32bit to 16bit, try smaller textures, try turning off bumpmaping as this seems to have problems with ATI cards at the present time, and again always keep your video card drivers updated. Don't just use the drivers that came with your video card. Go to ATI and download the newest set of drivers for your card. As for Windows XP. I use it and have never had a problem with Celestia running on it. Celestia as far as I am concerned runs better in the pure 32bit environment of XP versus the quasy 32/16bit of the Win9x core.
I hope this helps some. Good luck.

Guest · Post #5by **Guest** » 09.05.2003, 09:34

@Don. Edwards
Thanks! I will try the earlier version out!

Perhaps I will buy into a few months again a Nvidia map. The Geforce FX is however somewhat expensive me (and loud).

Anton

Guest · Post #6by **Guest** » 09.05.2003, 09:37

Ups! I was not logged in! Now still times!

@Don. Edwards
Thanks! I will try the earlier version out!

Perhaps I will buy into a few months again a Nvidia card. The Geforce FX is however somewhat expensive me (and loud).

Anton