I'll suggest a nudity tag ;o) But it seems unlikely that DirectX has anything to do with it, Poser does not use ANY for of 3D accelleration, including DirectX.

sorry bout the nudity thought i removed it well i fixxed it i uninstalled the direct x back to normal i think my graphic card didnt like it . happy rendering

Message edited on: 08/12/2004 04:06

Poser doesn't -have- to be accelerator aware for Direct X to have an affect; not anymore. The API sits between the metal and the software, and has been steadily taking over access to even higher level VGA functions. About the only way to avoid involving Direct X is to set your color depth to 256 colors, and screen res to 640x480. Otherwise, you are going to invoke at least a few calls to Direct X, and unfortunately, they have been spending so much time on getting the latest Shader technology implemented for Doom 3 and HalfLife 2's release, they haven't been paying a lot of attention to basic function integrity.

I noticed no problems here with directx9.0c... and an ati aiw 9600xt, with the latest cat 4.7 drivers. Now since SP2 is due out today, THAT might be a different matter. (There's actually a IT link available now for network installation, but I figured I'd wait for the "commoner" version)

Yeek. Guess I'll stick with 9b until they get the bugs fixed. As long as Doom 3 runs, I'm happy. :-)

Are they finally releasing SP2? Last I looked (couple days ago), it was still in RC2 stage. Been waiting for this as XP Pro doesn't see all of my 4GB memory (only 3GB). This is supposed to fix that (crosses fingers).

Yep.. a link was posted last night for IT installers to put it on networks. I almost grabbed it, but I'd hate to find out P5, Dogwaffle, or a much needed utility breaks.

Yep.. a link was posted last night for IT installers to put it on networks. I almost grabbed it, but I'd hate to find out P5, Dogwaffle, or a much needed utility breaks.

Metastopholis: you found the solution yourself. Not all videocards/drivers can work with DX9, only the "latest" ones.

kuroyume0161 wrote: " Are they finally releasing SP2? Last I looked (couple days ago), it was still in RC2 stage. Been waiting for this as XP Pro doesn't see all of my 4GB memory (only 3GB). This is supposed to fix that (crosses fingers)." This is most likely not an issue with XP, but with your motherboard. Check your motherboard's documentation to find out how much RAM it can manage effectively. A board may have 4 slots for RAM, but that doesn't mean that it will recognize or interface with it properly. ;)

I had the same trouble, Meth. I have Windows XP and decided the only way to get rid of it was to do a system restore to the day before I installed the DirectX. Hope this helps. :)

Well, of course I checked. It's an Intel SE7505VB2 Dual-CPU Server board. It can handle up to 8GB! as long as each bank set of DDR DIMMS are matched (and they are). The BIOS shows 4GB... Windows XP Pro (now SP2) still shows 3GB. There are no BIOS settings (like PAE) that could effect this. There are two possibilities: a new BIOS flash may fix this or XP just doesn't get it. For the latter, this seems rather possible since a friend of mine has the exact same hardware (but with dual 3.06GHz instead of dual 2.66GHz Xeons) and only sees 3 of 4GB as well with WinXP Pro. Now, for the former, there is a slight problem. There is a newer flash firmware for the BIOS, but I haven't been able to flash it whatsoever. Can only use floppy Phlash and it continually complains about memory management. I've even went as far as removing ALL hardware attached to the board or purposely turning ON memory management (and it said that it was already running...as suspected). I've asked for support twice from Intel in the past year (!) trying to resolve this problem with no response at all. I guess as long as you didn't buy one of their "full" server systems for $10K, you don't get support (even if you purchased their CPUs and motherboard for $2K). Oh well... :(

kuroyume0161; Ummm, if I'm not mistaken, the 3 gigabyte memory addressing range is all you are going to see. It's the 32 bit addressing limit, remember? The -only- way a service pack could get around that limitation is to split the banks and set up some kind of independant soft switch memory manager...effectively not addressing 4 gig, but 2 banks of 2 gig each, and using the direct addressing for above the 2 gig mark for bank selection. Just like they did in the old, old days. Linux has that built into it at compile time; hopefully MS did its homework so we don't have another go around of addressing failures like was seen in Win 3.0........

2^32 = 4294967296 (4GB) I had this address range on my old Amiga 500 ten years ago (even though their full hardware memory capacity was limited)! ;) And with two processors (as someone mentioned somewhere), they could either give each cpu a bank set (2G each) or share the entire memmory address space. For most people, and for me at the moment, this is not a concern. I'm not utilizing all the memory now. But, large print-sized images (300-600 DPI) in Photoshop or working with an hour's worth of video in Premiere can deplete that in a twinkle. Even with 3GB, I've seen "Not Enough Memory" for operations in both of these apps. Again, what can be done? MS's solution is, of course, to force you to get 64-bit hardware to support their upcoming 64-bit Windows OS...

Gaaaah! I knew that...... : Note to self; never talk techy first thing in the morning. Check the specs on the northbridge. That may be designed or set at the factory to only address 3 gigs.

Now that we've completely stolen the thread :) I will do some more research and see what can be done from both hardware/firmware and software p.o.v. Don't really wanna waste $250 worth of memory indefinitely. ;)