But why would that be useful?
I'm maybe wrong but I think there were no DX7-level cards that supported all of the 8 texture stages. For example, Riva TNT2 supported only 2, and even Geforce 256 supported only 4 (with restrictions AFAIR).

So, even if a DX8/9 game has fixed function mode it won't necessarily run with such a card. Like Unreal 2 that used as much as 6 stages for certain type of rendering.

The goal is to check if a D3D8-9 game can run properly when the video card lacks programmable D3D shader support. On modern cards such older games simply default to the shader-based render paths, and many usually do not offer an option to pick the fixed-function mode.

I and a few PCGW members are trying to determine such games' support levels. A particular use case is for checking RTX Remix compatibility; if a game uses D3D8 or 9, and has a fixed-function render path, then it can be assumed it'd be compatible.

Perhaps the highest available D3D7 card can be emulated? I think that'd be a Geforce 4 MX? If it's not feasible for you, could an option to block shader support work, similar to how there is one to disable HW T&L? (EDIT: If I'm understating that option correctly. I guess that doesn't do what I think it does.)

use 3d-analyze if you simply want to mask shader capabilities.

I won't add a new option for that because it'd have no use for regular usage, it'd just an extra confusing option.
I could however give you a build from the latest version in which shaders are disabled, if no other solutions prove to be exist.

Btw, a game using only the FF pipeline is not a warranty for compatibility with rtx turmix because doing the transformation and lighting through D3D is required for that.
I didn't encounter much dx8/9 game doing that. They mostly either used shaders or did their own T&L.

Dege wrote on 2026-02-10, 20:11:

I could however give you a build from the latest version in which shaders are disabled, if no other solutions prove to be exist.

That would be helpful, thanks.

Dege wrote on 2026-02-10, 20:11:

...for compatibility with rtx turmix ... transformation and lighting through D3D is required ...
...dx8/9 game ... mostly either used shaders or did their own T&L.

Can you elaborate on "their own T&L"? I thought a D3D game's fixed-function path would use the T&L through D3D.

eddman wrote on Yesterday, 00:43:

Can you elaborate on "their own T&L"? I thought a D3D game's fixed-function path would use the T&L through D3D.

They do the Transform & Lighting calculations on their own, and gives the transformed vertices to the DX runtime for direct rasterization.
In other words, the fixed function vertex pipeline is evadable. And RTX Remix can do nothing with that.

Wait, you mean "software" vs "hardware" T&L, right? Yea, I knew about those. A good number of games, at least the D3D8 ones, support HW T&L though.

eddman wrote on Yesterday, 21:58:

Wait, you mean "software" vs "hardware" T&L, right? Yea, I knew about those. A good number of games, at least the D3D8 ones, support HW T&L though.

No, a game either does its vertex teansform & lighting through the FF vertex pipeline (no matter if it's hw or sw) or does it completely on its own and feed the DX runtime with the already transformed vertices.
In the latter case there is no FF vertex pipeline at all. Primitives coming from the game go directly to the pixel pipeline of the rasterizer.

Aren't we are talking about the same thing? When I wrote "software" and "hardware", I don't mean the entire renderer, like the ones found in D3D6 and older games (although it can be available in D3D7 and higher games too).

I mean "Software T&L" vs "Hardware T&L", like the option found in a game like Max Payne. With the SW T&L option the game still uses D3D for acceleration, except for the T&L part.

Doesn't the "HW T&L" option in games use the hardware FF pipeline?