Matteo Bruni (@Mystral) commented about dlls/d3dx9_36/tests/texture.c:
+ ok(hr == D3D_OK, "Unexpected hr %#lx.\n", hr); + + IDirect3DSurface9_Release(surface); + ID3DXBuffer_Release(buffer); + + /* + * Wine's JPEG compression quality is worse than native. Native uses 4:2:0 + * subsampling which is the same as what we use, but whatever compression + * settings they're using results in a JPEG image that is much closer to + * the original uncompressed surface. This is most apparent in 16x16 + * blocks with multiple colors. + */ + get_texture_surface_readback(device, texture, 0, &rb); + /* 64-bit Windows has worse JPEG compression. */ + if (sizeof(void *) == 8) + { Okay, now this is just weird...
Are the JPEG generated by 32-bit and 64-bit d3dx9 identical as far as header / metadata go? Do they just happen to effectively use two different encoders? I don't really want to add to the pile further, but I'm kinda curious about d3dx10 / d3dx11 as well... -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/7636#note_98841