WinSAT and the WinSAT Aurora shaders in LH pre-/postreset

[//Dan]

As you may or may not know, WinSAT (Windows System Assessment Tool) contains a cool little aurora (one of the few left in Vista, although you never get to see it normally) which it uses to test your computer’s graphics hardware. If you’ve never seen it, go to the command line and enter “winsat aurora”. This works for sure on Vista, and probably works on 7 and above as well. If you copy the Vista WinSAT files to XP you can run it there too. But I digress.

I did a little bit of digging (emphasis on ‘little’) in the WinSAT files. Interestingly the WinSAT aurora is drawn using a couple of PNG files and a bunch of what I assume are DirectX shader files (.fx). The most interesting thing in my eyes however were the dates on the files: from anything as generic as “2005” to very specific dates (april 20, 2004). I checked some WinHEC and PDC documents and PowerPoints but all references to WinSAT stem from 2005 or later, which is post-reset. This raised two questions for me: was WinSAT originally intended to be implemented in the pre-reset versions of Longhorn? And furthermore, were these files really intended to run as part of the WinSAT assessment or were they meant for something else entirely?
The first thing I thought that might use the WinSAT WEI score was gameux, but I have not yet checked pre-reset Longhorn builds’ gameux.dll files for references to it. Does anyone have any clearer information on this?

The second question came as a result of a bit of blue-sky thinking. Well, that was the case originally anyway. At first I thought the files might have been used to draw an aurora on the login screen as is seen in various concept videos, but thanks to (new.)Longhorn.ms I have a new theory that is far more plausible. The WinSAT aurora is Direct3D-driven as evidenced by the source files for the aurora having been stored in a folder called “d3d” (D:\longhorn\base\wcrs\d3d\aurora\aurora.cpp to be specific). Most of you probably already knew that and it kinda makes sense when you think about it, but it was new to me. Anyway, Longhorn.ms recently published an article on Aero and the auroras, which briefly goes over the 4066 Phodeo aurora (which is apparently also DirectX-driven). So maybe these WinSAT files originated as Phodeo auroras? The files were written in April, which rules out inclusion in 4066 itself (built February 26th, 2004) but post-4074 build could potentially have these files in them somewhere.

So what do you guys know/think?

[wasabilee]

4066 aurora is not dx driven "per-se"
it is also just transparent PNG's going left-right direction within 3D space

IIRC the original aurora's are pure WPF/Avalon animations (vector)
and these what we see are transformed into "fixed" png images that travel

maybe within 405x range they concluded not all machines will be ready
to run pure WPF anim's so its easier to transform them into either
animated PNG's or .AVI as vista/7 has (task dialogs)

in fact you'd need mid-end GPU (read gaming graphic card) to even enable
these nicies, same thing went with glass, so if they implemented true WPF
anims within OS, lets say for login screen like in concepts, it would not work

also the "winsat aurora" don't work on win7 pro
even if resource wp is there

[Maza]

A 2004 aurora illustration from Robert Stein (who designed graphics and visualizations for Windows) suggests that both WinSAT and WEI were intended for the pre-reset operating system. [emphasis mine]

A real-time version of this was custom designed for the OOBE (Out Of Box Experience) during the first install. When the installer rates your systems hardware, to determine if it can handle the Glass display, it would use the real-time Aurora to throw data at the systems cpu and gpu while it also lets the user now that "something" is going on, and the system hasn't stalled.

Moreover, at least one report from September 2004 lists a feature that sounds exactly like the WEI, and also goes into detail about "Longhorn" compatibility with Xbox 360—then referred to as Xbox 2—peripherals.

Microsoft is already working with major hardware manufacturers, such as Nvidia, ATI, and Intel (along with OEM manufacturers), to create prepackaged PCs with varying levels of midrange to high-end hardware with appropriately varying price points. Under such a plan, prepackaged PCs with certain processor speeds, certain amounts of RAM, and certain types of video cards would be given simple classifications or "levels."

According to Lester, the plan is to simplify the process of selecting a good PC for games without having to be an expert on hardware. He provided a hypothetical example that compared a PC with a "level 5" designation that might have a medium processor speed, a medium amount of RAM, and a midrange video card, to a "level 7" PC that might have a faster processor, more RAM, and a higher-end video card. As you might expect, the "level 5" PC would also be less expensive than the "level 7." Either way, the "level" designations are not final, and they may not even be used at all. However, Microsoft is considering employing them to help newer users figure out what PCs they would need to be able to play the games they want to play.

Microsoft is also considering applying this simplified designation system to a game's system requirements. That is, while game publishers will still be able to print detailed technical requirements on the back of a game box (speed of 3.0GHz and at least 512MB of RAM, for instance), these requirements might also be given a simpler designation. In essence, this system would let newer PC game players quickly and easily determine that they need computers of at least "level 5 or higher" to play a game with certain specific requirements rather than trying to figure out exactly how much RAM they currently have.

There also seems to be a reference to the Games for Windows LIVE Tray and Play functionality that was scarcely used.

Lester went on to explain other features that Microsoft's Games for Windows group wishes to improve on or simply wants streamline out of existence. One example was the conventional game installation system that requires users to sit through several lengthy loading screens. Lester stated flatly, "We need to make that go away." Ideally, Microsoft would like to make PC game installation as easy as the plug-and-play experience of console games, which can be played the instant a disc is dropped into a drive.

While September is after the reset occurred, certainly Microsoft did not plan these features in such a short time period. I imagine that it would take at least a few months for planning, to get hardware manufacturers on board, etc, etc.

[wasabilee]

well since that purple aurora was "leaked" (if one can call it that)
in form of wmv video (small res), I guess the person has original animation of it
or at least a build that has it

[aeroslate]

well since that purple aurora was "leaked" (if one can call it that)
in form of wmv video (small res), I guess the person has original animation of it
or at least a build that has it

IIRC one of the earlier WinSAT auroras looks somewhat similar. I'll try and find it again.

edit: found it, Build 5219

[Melcher]

Great post Dan and thanks for sharing this! I knew there was some work on something WinSAT like indeed (like maza said). There are loads of patents for aurora effects from 2004-2005. I could even make my own little aurora from some of the patent filing images http://longhorn.ms/?attachment_id=657

[wasabilee]

thanks aeroslate
now you got me itching to install vista betas again

[viper]

Ah yes the Vista WinSAT testing.
I liked the D3D myself
Type in: winsat d3d –objs c(20) –texshader –totalobj 15

[Melcher]

Been looking through the builds and found another cool aurora:

http://longhorn.ms/?attachment_id=724

[//Dan]

Looks good!

I already knew the GenGame assessment has a ton of parameters. It's fun to mess around with for a few minutes, but doesn't really generate anything visually interesting IMO.
I just had a look at Vista 5219. The Aurora assessment fails to run due to some XML schema definition mismatch. I haven't looked into possible fixes yet (and obviously it has been fixed in the past), but the winsat.exe and WinSATAPI.dll contain all the necessary resources to draw the aurora shown above.

As far as I know 5219 does not feature the Performance Rating & Tools control panel. Which file is responsible for that anyway? Not that it'd matter, as WinSAT under 5219 does not seem to generate a report (maybe because of the XSD issue?). The directory %systemroot%\Performance\WinSAT\DataStore is simply not created. I jumped through the file using PE Explorer but there doesn't seem to be anything preventing it from functioning.

Melcher, which build features that aurora? It might be a good idea to create a list of builds/WinSAT & aurora versions.

[Melcher]

Dan, I've updated the article with the different aurora effects: http://longhorn.ms/aurora-aero

[//Dan]

I see. Looks interesting, I'll give them a spin in a sec.
Interesting how they decimated the aurora in the RTM. Most likely Microsoft chose to ruin the aesthetics of the aurora in favor of a more grueling benchmark.

[Y@riK]

Windows Vista 6.00.6001:

[wasabilee]

mmm would be sweet to have this recorded in HD
if they trigger within VM then is not problem is it ?

[viper]

mmm would be sweet to have this recorded in HD
if they trigger within VM then is not problem is it ?

I have a 3 minute .avi 5259aurora video, recorded by snagit.
Sadly its plays @ 2 fps & weighs in @ 13.6 MB, would that help?

[wasabilee]

nope
you need at least 25 fps and H264 codec set on 2000 kbs bitrate

i'll try 5219 later in sunday (hopefully)

[Melcher]

I don't think you'll be able to capture a HD version of the 5219 aurora effect as it will never fill the whole screen. (nope, not even with a -fullscreen parameter). Have a look a this vid I capture some time ago: .

Nvm, skip this

[hounsell]

How about a 1080p60 1min recording of the 5219 effect? With max AA on a 4k screen downsized?


Am trying to get together a 4k recording


Edit: It took me some pretty heavy computing power to record and then encode it from a raw AVI, but here it is, in 4k glory:


Because YouTube's 4k is rather eh, here's the MP4:
https://mega.co.nz/#!GJkE1BxK!n62g7gPmm ... as7WGcwYhQ

[wasabilee]

any chance you could upload 1080p one on host too
youtube always degrades quality since they re-encode to VP codec i think

BTW i was thinking before on this aurora
this one is clearly one from 4074 and obviously exists in its original form
http://www51.zippyshare.com/v/f5d5MPFD/file.html

[//Dan]

No, that aurora does not exist anywhere in Longhorn. It's an animated concept aurora that was downloaded from RS3Art's website at some point. The movie was originally 400x280, so it's not really worth upscaling.

[Melcher]

No, that aurora does not exist anywhere in Longhorn. It's an animated concept aurora that was downloaded from RS3Art's website at some point. The movie was originally 400x280, so it's not really worth upscaling.

Exactly. A lot of people do not seem to notice the difference between concept and implementation. While that video is clearly just some concept probably made in a video editing tool, the aurora effect in WinSAT is a DirectX implementation of that.

[wasabilee]

too bad, that one is prettiest of them all
btw does anyone know if 5048 or unleaked 5098 (was it ?)
contain any ?

[//Dan]

...made in a video editing tool, the aurora effect in WinSAT is a DirectX implementation of that.

According to Robert Stein (at least some) auroras were made in 3DS Max with the Brazil R/S plugin. But something like the movie above could be done in After Effects just as easily. A while back I created a Longhornesque aurora animation with an animated glass Windows flag in Quartz Composer. It wasn't perfect, but I did use it has a screensaver for a while. Too bad QC has such a horrible UI...

[hounsell]

any chance you could upload 1080p one on host too

https://mega.co.nz/#!KQU1zJaa!n4DJO5QTM ... Tt6rEsQ_EE

[wasabilee]

thanks tom !