DirectX 10 Games

[m21s]

Originally posted by: flexy
apoppin, dopnt confuse him.

You probably mean VISTA SUPPORT (means: the fact that vista, the windows engine, itself actually utilizes DX10) will be added in a later SP.

Right now it only uses DX9 and NOT DX10, that's right.

But DX10 is already in Vista.

So your telling me that games can utilize DX10 now,But the OS which it runs in can't?
Vista can't utilize DX10 (now), but games will.

Why does this sound odd to me.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: m21s

Originally posted by: flexy
apoppin, dopnt confuse him.

You probably mean VISTA SUPPORT (means: the fact that vista, the windows engine, itself actually utilizes DX10) will be added in a later SP.

Right now it only uses DX9 and NOT DX10, that's right.

But DX10 is already in Vista.

So your telling me that games can utilize DX10 now,But the OS which it runs in can't?
Vista can't utilize DX10 (now), but games will.

Why does this sound odd to me.

unfortunately there are NO dx10 games that could ultilize Vista . . . and DX9c games will run like crap - compared to XP

and the Vista Desktop will ship with DX9c and be patched to DX10 . . . when there is a HW base

of course Vista has DX10 'functionality' . . . built in . . . that you fully utilize in the YEARS to come
[xp is dead end for dx10]

what's there to confuse?

don't just swallow the MS hype about Vista
:Q

they ARE right . . . it's the future . . . you WILL enjoy benefits [to be fair - especially 'security', right away] .. . . just not the immediate future.

 

[m21s]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: m21s

Originally posted by: flexy

of course Vista has DX10 'functionality' . . . built in . . . that you fully utilize in the YEARS to come

This is what strikes me funny.

I understand everything else just fine.

So I have to wait "years" to fully utilize DX10 features in an OS that was built for DX10.

Maybe thats normal, but to me sounds so so wrong.

 

[misanthropy]

If Vista doesn't have Direct10 straight out of the box that is halfass.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: m21s

Originally posted by: flexy
apoppin, dopnt confuse him.

You probably mean VISTA SUPPORT (means: the fact that vista, the windows engine, itself actually utilizes DX10) will be added in a later SP.

Right now it only uses DX9 and NOT DX10, that's right.

But DX10 is already in Vista.

So your telling me that games can utilize DX10 now,But the OS which it runs in can't?
Vista can't utilize DX10 (now), but games will.

Why does this sound odd to me.

Probably because it doesn't really make much sense that microsoft themselves can't get DX10 working for their fancy desktop while third party developers who have had much less access to the code can make their games work with it already.

Having DX10 installed is one thing...but if you're not using it, its kind of hard to say what condition its in.

 

[archcommus]

Unfortunately graphics haven't seemed to improve much at all since maybe the release of Doom 3/Half-Life 2. Hoping next year changes that, but I'm not sure, some of the shots look fishy. May have to wait till 2008 to see some really great new stuff. I'm all for getting a quad core system, Vista, and DX10 next summer, but I'm not all for getting a new PSU just to power this awful next generation of video cards coming up.

 

[poohbear]

well the doom3 engine has'nt even been pushed to its limits, now that vid cards can handle it in ultra quality mode, we might actually see outdoor environments w/ the doom3 engine. besides, the Doom3 engine does a terrific job of using all the features of DX9, so they're really shouldnt be any new graphical features till dx10.

 

[imported_Crusader]

Originally posted by: archcommus
Unfortunately graphics haven't seemed to improve much at all since maybe the release of Doom 3/Half-Life 2. Hoping next year changes that, but I'm not sure, some of the shots look fishy. May have to wait till 2008 to see some really great new stuff. I'm all for getting a quad core system, Vista, and DX10 next summer, but I'm not all for getting a new PSU just to power this awful next generation of video cards coming up.

archcommus- what do you mean aweful next gen of video cards coming out? They arent that much more power hungry.
400watt for a 7950gx2 (total system) vs 450watt for a 8800GTX? Its not that bad.
I've been on a 550watter for 2 years now. Anyone who has built a rig in the past 2 years up till now -surely- got a hefty PSU like I did? If not.. thats unfortunate and not a good decision IMO for a new build.

I setup my rig up back then for 6800GT SLI, and I'm still more than good for these uber high end single cards.
If I were to build today, I'd prob shoot for a Quad rail 700watter, or at least what I have now.

 

[NanoStuff]

400watt for a 7950gx2 (total system) vs 450watt for a 8800GTX? Its not that bad.

It is that bad when you consider the GX2 is a 2-GPU card. Try and imagine an 8950GX2, that's power consumption to lose sleep over.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

400watt for a 7950gx2 (total system) vs 450watt for a 8800GTX? Its not that bad.

It is that bad when you consider the GX2 is a 2-GPU card. Try and imagine an 8950GX2, that's power consumption to lose sleep over.

I really hope ATI/NV sleep over the power consumption issues.

 

[Dethfrumbelo]

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

400watt for a 7950gx2 (total system) vs 450watt for a 8800GTX? Its not that bad.

It is that bad when you consider the GX2 is a 2-GPU card. Try and imagine an 8950GX2, that's power consumption to lose sleep over.

In a likelyhood, the 8800GTX is also a 2 GPU card. If there is going to be such a thing, an 8950GX2 would then be 4 GPUs.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: Crusader

Originally posted by: archcommus
Unfortunately graphics haven't seemed to improve much at all since maybe the release of Doom 3/Half-Life 2. Hoping next year changes that, but I'm not sure, some of the shots look fishy. May have to wait till 2008 to see some really great new stuff. I'm all for getting a quad core system, Vista, and DX10 next summer, but I'm not all for getting a new PSU just to power this awful next generation of video cards coming up.

archcommus- what do you mean aweful next gen of video cards coming out? They arent that much more power hungry.
400watt for a 7950gx2 (total system) vs 450watt for a 8800GTX? Its not that bad.
I've been on a 550watter for 2 years now. Anyone who has built a rig in the past 2 years up till now -surely- got a hefty PSU like I did? If not.. thats unfortunate and not a good decision IMO for a new build.

I setup my rig up back then for 6800GT SLI, and I'm still more than good for these uber high end single cards.
If I were to build today, I'd prob shoot for a Quad rail 700watter, or at least what I have now.

I don't run much in my system - single core CPU, gig of RAM, few add-in cards, one HDD and one optical drive. I shouldn't need to upgrade my current 400 W PSU with that system config just because of my video card.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: archcommus

Originally posted by: Crusader

Originally posted by: archcommus
Unfortunately graphics haven't seemed to improve much at all since maybe the release of Doom 3/Half-Life 2. Hoping next year changes that, but I'm not sure, some of the shots look fishy. May have to wait till 2008 to see some really great new stuff. I'm all for getting a quad core system, Vista, and DX10 next summer, but I'm not all for getting a new PSU just to power this awful next generation of video cards coming up.

archcommus- what do you mean aweful next gen of video cards coming out? They arent that much more power hungry.
400watt for a 7950gx2 (total system) vs 450watt for a 8800GTX? Its not that bad.
I've been on a 550watter for 2 years now. Anyone who has built a rig in the past 2 years up till now -surely- got a hefty PSU like I did? If not.. thats unfortunate and not a good decision IMO for a new build.

I setup my rig up back then for 6800GT SLI, and I'm still more than good for these uber high end single cards.
If I were to build today, I'd prob shoot for a Quad rail 700watter, or at least what I have now.

I don't run much in my system - single core CPU, gig of RAM, few add-in cards, one HDD and one optical drive. I shouldn't need to upgrade my current 400 W PSU with that system config just because of my video card.

for that they have the "add in" PSes . . . not very expensive . . . if you want "that" kind of card.

i am certain your PS will be suitable for the 'mainstream' g80s that are released this Spring . . . perhaps a better match for your rig, anyway.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: archcommus

Originally posted by: Crusader

Originally posted by: archcommus
Unfortunately graphics haven't seemed to improve much at all since maybe the release of Doom 3/Half-Life 2. Hoping next year changes that, but I'm not sure, some of the shots look fishy. May have to wait till 2008 to see some really great new stuff. I'm all for getting a quad core system, Vista, and DX10 next summer, but I'm not all for getting a new PSU just to power this awful next generation of video cards coming up.

archcommus- what do you mean aweful next gen of video cards coming out? They arent that much more power hungry.
400watt for a 7950gx2 (total system) vs 450watt for a 8800GTX? Its not that bad.
I've been on a 550watter for 2 years now. Anyone who has built a rig in the past 2 years up till now -surely- got a hefty PSU like I did? If not.. thats unfortunate and not a good decision IMO for a new build.

I setup my rig up back then for 6800GT SLI, and I'm still more than good for these uber high end single cards.
If I were to build today, I'd prob shoot for a Quad rail 700watter, or at least what I have now.

I don't run much in my system - single core CPU, gig of RAM, few add-in cards, one HDD and one optical drive. I shouldn't need to upgrade my current 400 W PSU with that system config just because of my video card.

for that they have the "add in" PSes . . . not very expensive . . . if you want "that" kind of card.

i am certain your PS will be suitable for the 'mainstream' g80s that are released this Spring . . . perhaps a better match for your rig, anyway.

Really? That would be nice. My current PSU is an Antec SmartPower 2.0 400 W. If/when I get a first gen DX10 card, it would probably be more mainstream like you say, not the top end model, but I wouldn't be putting it in my current config - I'd probably also be getting some kind of dual-core CPU, 2 gigs of memory, and a new hard drive (not an additional drive). Think the PSU would still be sufficient for that? We're probably talking like -

Core 2 Duo or Quad (if it's affordable)
whatever board
2 gigs DDR2
TV card
Audigy 2
USB card
whatever NV/ATI video card
one optical
one probably 7200.10 series Seagate drive

 

[Dkcode]

I would love to see huge breakthroughs in AI instead of better visuals. If i had to choice to pause on what we currently enjoy graphically, and push the AI up to the same level; i would do so. Theres nothing more frustrating that having to babysit a squad of AI controlled players such as in GRAW.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: blckgrffn
I thought that Dx10 wasn't finished and wouldn't be released until after Vista launched. Where are the people getting these renders getting their hardware/API to give us these looks? Even Crysis will be launching as a DX9 only, with Far Cry'ish DX10 add ons later...

Nat

supposedly those crysis shots were done DX9 style. and i heard somewhere that it ran pretty good on X1900XTX in CF

could be pre-renders though, every time i see screens of crysis its the same bunch of shots

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: wizboy11

Originally posted by: josh6079
Forget that Crysis, with EA involved I'm not going to give them one penny until I think they actually sponsored a stable game that doesn't introduce problems instead of fix them.

Where's Quake Wars?

Also, what exactly is Alan Wake supposed to be? FPS? RPG?

Halo 2? Why'd they even bother?

Just because EA is marketing it doesn't mean that they are working on the game. The original crysis team is still the people doing all the work. After the first Farcry and all the hype over this one, I really hope they don't dissapoint.

yeah, EA took the reigns of Burnout and packaged it in there own crummy way, but the core of burnout was still there and they've all rocked very hard indeed. criterion were obviously very much incharge.... EA were just there to add garnish and another franchise to their list

 

[beemercer]

Wowoow, these may be able to get me to start playing games again.

 

[Kakumba]

jeebus those are some good looking games. Cant wait for them to be available over here. Or anywhere... but especially here.

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: josh6079
Where's Quake Wars?

Also, what exactly is Alan Wake supposed to be? FPS? RPG?

QuakeWars is OpenGL, and Alan Wake is a third person action RPG, I think.

Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy
What are you guys talking about? I dunno about all of them, but some of those screenshots (Bioshock, for example) are a few months old and most likely DX9. Alan Wake looks like STALKER with 2006-era textures. Nothing special on that one either.

Alan Wake's specialty is an even more advanced lighting/shadowing engine then Doom3 and some hardcore physics... I wonder if Alan Wake might be the PPU's killer app next year? Maybe they can offload the physics to a PPU so single-core users can run it?

Originally posted by: Crusader
archcommus- what do you mean aweful next gen of video cards coming out? They arent that much more power hungry.
400watt for a 7950gx2 (total system) vs 450watt for a 8800GTX? Its not that bad.

A single-GPU card shouldn't draw more power then a dual-GPU card, even one of the previous generation. Plus, think about the heat output!

 

[BassBomb]

Originally posted by: Dkcode
I would love to see huge breakthroughs in AI instead of better visuals. If i had to choice to pause on what we currently enjoy graphically, and push the AI up to the same level; i would do so. Theres nothing more frustrating that having to babysit a squad of AI controlled players such as in GRAW.

i agree except some AI is good (FEAR and FarCry) but it can use work still

 

[Regs]

I agree on the AI part. It will actually be visually pleasant to see something other than dumb bot soldiers. I would like to see in crysis - "the hunter becomes the hunted".

I'm hoping the G80 and the ATi equivalent can pull high detail out of these games. They all look pixel shader heavy which seems to be on target for what the G80's pushing.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: josh6079
Where's Quake Wars?

Also, what exactly is Alan Wake supposed to be? FPS? RPG?

QuakeWars is OpenGL, and Alan Wake is a third person action RPG, I think.

Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy
What are you guys talking about? I dunno about all of them, but some of those screenshots (Bioshock, for example) are a few months old and most likely DX9. Alan Wake looks like STALKER with 2006-era textures. Nothing special on that one either.

Alan Wake's specialty is an even more advanced lighting/shadowing engine then Doom3 and some hardcore physics... I wonder if Alan Wake might be the PPU's killer app next year? Maybe they can offload the physics to a PPU so single-core users can run it?

Originally posted by: Crusader
archcommus- what do you mean aweful next gen of video cards coming out? They arent that much more power hungry.
400watt for a 7950gx2 (total system) vs 450watt for a 8800GTX? Its not that bad.

A single-GPU card shouldn't draw more power then a dual-GPU card, even one of the previous generation. Plus, think about the heat output!

When you hear of performance and hardware talk with Alan Wake, all you hear about is how it uses four or five threads and runs great on a quad core processor. Well, if it comes out in early 2007, guess what, I don't think I'll be able to afford a Core 2 Quad, not until a flavor of it comes under $300 really. So I'm going to have to buy dual core and Vista for this game, and it still might run sh!tty?