Part 2: 2D, Acceleration, And Windows: Aren't All Graphics Cards Equal?
The 2D GDI For Windows XP Through Windows 7, In Detail
XP: Clear Sailing without Competition
Up until (and including) Windows XP, GDI played a key role in rendering 2D graphics. The presence of easily-simplified procedures makes this patently obvious. The mouse movements used to draw a line are transmitted to win32.sys, the central clearinghouse for graphics input. It doesn’t matter whether we’re using the mouse, keystrokes, or other graphical inputs; all such data congregates in this routine and goes directly to 2D graphics rendering modules form there. Our user actions include only 2D graphics information, which gets translated immediately into GDI drawing instructions. These are forwarded to the GDI, as illustrated by the purple arrows in the following diagram.
These simple procedures used to handle 2D graphics in software also explain why it’s so easy to convert them to hardware acceleration, provided that the graphics card offers the necessary capabilities to render them independently. The blue arrow in the preceding figure shows how information returns to the calling application, so that it may be notified that window contents have changed (for example, when other windows may no longer obscure some of its visible content), thereby forcing a redraw.
Windows Vista: CPU instead of GPU, and Buffering instead of Direct Delivery
As we explained in Part 1 of this story, Vista introduces a completely new path for graphics data through the OS. Using the GDI, all versions of Windows up to and including XP handled 2D drawing through outputs from win32k.sys to manage window contents on-screen.
In Vista, the DWM (dynamic window manager) takes over this role. As a consequence, Vista uses only Direct3D to manage windows instead. Every windows for every application is written to the texture storage as a 3D texture map on the graphics card. This is a practical evolution for more modern graphics cards, but it also means that GDI can no longer read from or write to this data. The communications chain appears to be broken in this situation.
At this point, the double buffering of window content that we explored in Part 1 of this story comes into play.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
What exactly is going on here? Look at the red arrows in the preceding diagram. In the place of a unified graphics driver (in XP this is called the DDI Display Driver) the new CDD (Canonical Display Driver) is addressed instead. This module is independent from the graphics card in Vista. While the pending window content is stored as a texture map in the graphics card RAM, each window must also be stored in an equivalent buffer in the system RAM as well (its size equals window width times window height times four bytes for 32-bit color data).
The most current rendering of each window get transformed into a bitmap in the system RAM buffer, after which it is converted into a 3D texture map in the video RAM on the graphics card. Throughout, the DWM manages all windows and moves their contents around using Direct3D. The DWM also contains data about which portions of each window are visible on-screen, so that when any region in a window becomes obscured or gets revealed it can be redrawn (shown by the blue arrow in the preceding figure). At this moment, the DWM copies the contents of system RAM into the video RAM, re-rendering the window using Direct3D. The applications no longer need to redraw the window (in contrast to the way things worked under Windows XP).
The aforementioned approach effectively disables 2D hardware acceleration, resulting in a significant performance reduction compared to Windows XP. This manifests itself most clearly in Vista’s well-documented tendency to drag on 2D graphics and to consume large amounts of RAM.
Windows 7: Hardware Acceleration in Miniscule Doses
Even in our initial testing for Part 1 of this story, we could tell that Windows 7 once again offered at least partial support for hardware acceleration of GDI commands—that is, for cards with WDDM 1.1 drivers. Where such drivers are not available (for example, on some Intel graphics chipsets), Windows 7 behaves more or less like Vista. What does this mean for us exactly? Let’s take a look at a diagram of graphics flow in Windows 7:
At first glance, things look pretty much the same as they did under Vista. We can see, however, that it’s no longer necessary to double-buffer every widow’s contents. Instead of system RAM, the term aperture memory now comes into play. This refers to a specific region within the normal system memory that the graphics card can access directly. If a window area changes because of movement or overlays, those window contents may be copied directly from this memory range to the video RAM on the graphics card.
By comparison with Windows XP, only a subset of the GDI commands are supported in the GPU—namely, ClearType, ColorFill, BitBlt, AlphaBlend, TransparentBlt, and StretchBlt. Here’s the skinny for those not already in the know: this means direct text output, surface area fills with simple colors, and copying of image contents and transparent overlays. Whereas rendering of complex geometrical figures isn’t supported at all, copies of image contents and area fills can easily be transferred from aperture memory directly to video RAM.
Summary
Windows 7 reduces memory usage by eliminating most of the double buffering of window contents. Even Vista benefits from some of the same effects, thanks to advances resulting from the newer WDDM driver model. That’s why hardware acceleration is once again possible, thanks to the new platform update (which occurred in tandem with the introduction of DirectX 11) for Windows 7. Those specifics are what we hope to chase down in the rest of this story.
Current page: The 2D GDI For Windows XP Through Windows 7, In Detail
Prev Page Introduction: Why GDI Output For 2D Graphics Remains Relevant Next Page 2D Graphics Output Using GDI: Direct Or Buffered?-
mdm08 I have a 5850 with 10.1 drivers and it seems Photoshop CS4 doesn't recognize it as a graphics card that can improve performance so all those cool new features like animated zoom, kinetic panning, and such seem to be disabled. Also, it when you have a very complex group of objects and you try to nudge it ( move it one pixel with arrow keys) the computer actually shows the spinning wheel and has to process this instead of being instantaneous like it was on my older 7600GT. Is this an issue related with what this article is saying about apps written for GDI or is this a different issue i'm experiencing?Reply -
jrharbort Scores on 9600M GT and T9600 Core 2 Duo with Windows XP and latest graphics drivers. Only 11 active background processes no including benchmark, and themes disabled.Reply
BENCHMARK: DIRECT DRAWING TO VISIBLE DEVICE
Text: 8556 chars/sec
Line: 47513 lines/sec
Polygon: 7757 polygons/sec
Rectangle: 6564 rects/sec
Arc/Ellipse: 3874 ellipses/sec
Blitting: 13974 operations/sec
Stretching: 266 operations/sec
Splines/Bézier: 10510 splines/sec
Score: 984 -
It would be great if you can run the test on some "pro" cards (quadroFX, quadroNVS, firePro & fireMV). Just to see if the "pro" drivers change standard UI rendering or the optimizations are only for the professional DCC software.Reply
-
liquidsnake718 mdm08I have a 5850 with 10.1 drivers and it seems Photoshop CS4 doesn't recognize it as a graphics card that can improve performance so all those cool new features like animated zoom, kinetic panning, and such seem to be disabled. Also, it when you have a very complex group of objects and you try to nudge it ( move it one pixel with arrow keys) the computer actually shows the spinning wheel and has to process this instead of being instantaneous like it was on my older 7600GT. Is this an issue related with what this article is saying about apps written for GDI or is this a different issue i'm experiencing?Oh great, more news on a 5xxx series not being able to handle simple apps like CS4.... I have yet to use CS4 on my desktop with my 5850..... I hope Ati comes out with more patches if this is a problem.Reply -
taltamir windows XP is dead... get on the windows 7 64bit bandwagon already you Luddites! (not referring to the authors of the article, they raise good points; I am referring to those customers who insist that XP is some sort of holy grail of windows bliss never seen before or after)Reply -
Scores on P4 2.8 HT Northwood W ati 2600 pro drivers 10.1 aero Win 7 :Reply
BENCHMARK: DIRECT DRAWING TO VISIBLE DEVICE
Text: 8106 chars/sec
Line: 6528 lines/sec
Polygon: 249 polygons/sec
Rectangle: 1484 rects/sec
Arc/Ellipse: 6127 ellipses/sec
Blitting: 379 operations/sec
Stretching: 80 operations/sec
Splines/Bézier: 5263 splines/sec
Score: 362 -
Scores on P4 2.8 HT Northwood W ati 2600 pro drivers 10.1 aero Win 7 :Reply
BENCHMARK: DIB-BUFFER AND BLIT
Text: 12633 chars/sec
Line: 21067 lines/sec
Polygon: 4087 polygons/sec
Rectangle: 535 rects/sec
Arc/Ellipse: 5604 ellipses/sec
Blitting: 1443 operations/sec
Stretching: 213 operations/sec
Splines/Bézier: 12213 splines/sec
Score: 607 -
giovanni86 BENCHMARK: DIRECT DRAWING TO VISIBLE DEVICEReply
Text: 54466 chars/sec
Line: 73135 lines/sec
Polygon: 23943 polygons/sec
Rectangle: 3927 rects/sec
Arc/Ellipse: 26911 ellipses/sec
Blitting: 9827 operations/sec
Stretching: 464 operations/sec
Splines/Bézier: 41911 splines/sec
Score: 2600 -
helle040 Rdaeon 4670, amd 7750be, winxp, drivers 10.1, resolutie 1280x1024, 32bitReply
Text: 45746
line: 40508
Splines/beziers: 20466
Poygon: 322
Rectangle: 1954
Arc/E.: 3494
Biting: 2406
Stretching: 211
Score: 1150 -
wxj I’ve always preferred GDI operations over those of the NOD. GDI have more basic operations set verses NOD’s more complex and sometimes unreliable operations.Reply