AMD DirectX 11 White Paper Released
NV55
Trimble Bracegirdle
GTX8800)
in the expectation then that I would really need DX10 soon.
Two years later I have never needed to use DX10 & don't feel I'm missing
out.
My guess is DX11 is a bit like Windows VISTA versus Win 7 ...its a
essentially a
re-release to get technically & marketing wise, right that first attempt.
DX11 had better work on DX10 cards or I shall not be alone in stamping my
feet
& screeching at the Sky.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") mouse (at least he'll get some exercise)
Access
"Trimble Bracegirdle" <no-...@never.spam> wrote in message
news:4a477fc0$1...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> Its just over two years since I made certain to get a DX10 card (Nvidia
> GTX8800)
> in the expectation then that I would really need DX10 soon.
> Two years later I have never needed to use DX10 & don't feel I'm missing
> out.
>
Same here! I have a dual-boot system with Vista (DX-10) but I'm still
playing all my games on Windows XP!
Mickeysoft really should release DirectX-11 for XP or Vista! But of course
that won't sell any software licenses...
Antonio Huerta
> DX11 had better work on DX10 cards or I shall not be alone in stamping my
> feet & screeching at the Sky.
I did reading about DX11. It appears nVidia implemented their own
hardware solution (CUDO and PhysX), and AMD implemented their own
solution (hardware support of Havok engine). But what's likely to
happen, both will also support OpenCL, which is a software interface
to the graphical effects. The only thing is that, for example, in case
of nVidia, all that proprietary graphical hardware will not be
utilised. In other words, the DX11 will work on your DX10 card, albeit
slowly. Later, you will want to get a DX11 card which will be faster
at drawing DX11 graphics.
Benjamin Gawert
> Its just over two years since I made certain to get a DX10 card (Nvidia
> GTX8800)
> in the expectation then that I would really need DX10 soon.
When the Geforce 8 series came out I got one because they also were the
fastest DX9 cards available, not because of DX10. DX10 was just
additional value.
> Two years later I have never needed to use DX10 & don't feel I'm missing
> out.
I used DX10 in the games that made use of it (Crysis, Bioshock), and
while it wasn't groundbreaking, the gfx was a bit better than with plain
DX9.
Benjamin
DrTeeth
herb, Benjamin Gawert <bga...@gmx.de> disturbed my reverie and wrote:
> the gfx was a bit better than with plain
>DX9.
TBH, I would not be able to tell the difference if I did not know
which was which.
--
Cheers,
DrT
** Stress - the condition brought about by having to
** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights
** out of someone who richly deserves it.
Oliver Nowak
> On Jun 28, 11:35ï¿œpm, "Trimble Bracegirdle" <no-s...@never.spam> wrote:
>
>> DX11 had better work on DX10 cards or I shall not be alone in stamping my
>> feet & screeching at the Sky.
>
> I did reading about DX11. It appears nVidia implemented their own
> hardware solution (CUDO and PhysX),
Well, CUDA and PhysX aren't directly related to DX11, the former makes
the GPU accessible for general purpose computing tasks (if it's
parallelizable), the latter is for physics calculations (as the name
suggests). DX11 will have "compute shaders" however - the equivalent to
Nvidia's CUDA.
> and AMD implemented their own
> solution (hardware support of Havok engine).
I'm not up to date on this, but last I checked when they announced
support for Havok, they actually meant to optimize it for their CPUs
rather than run it on the video hardware. They've got, after all, all
of those quad core (and maybe sexa-core - do they plan desktop variants
of "Istanbul"?) CPUs to sell, which aren't properly supported by games
to date.
> But what's likely to
> happen, both will also support OpenCL, which is a software interface
> to the graphical effects.
OpenCL is another equivalent to Nvidia's proprietary CUDA (meaning
allowing for general purpose computing on the GPU, not necessarily
graphics) - this time a cross-platform multi-vendor open standard
effort which is headed by Apple, IIRC.
<snip>
--
O.
Augustus
> which was which.
When I went from XP SP3 directly to Windows 7 (avoided Vista completely on
my own systems), I immediately noticed that games like Fallout 3, Bioshock
and a few others had some nicer, finer details and better quality effects.
They still looked great in DX9, but the DX10 difference was more polished
and subtle. Kind of like good, well done makeup on an already gorgeous
woman. Probably get flamed for that last analogy.....
DrTeeth
"Augustus" <no_...@nowhere.net> disturbed my reverie and wrote:
> Probably get flamed for that last analogy.....
By people who need a life or look like my arse <lol>
Benjamin Gawert
>> the gfx was a bit better than with plain
>> DX9.
>
> TBH, I would not be able to tell the difference if I did not know
> which was which.
Well, the difference isn't really big, it just looks a tad better (at
least in DX10 with max details over DX9 with max details, DX10 with less
than max details is probably pointless as there probably is no
difference to DX9). But it isn't groundbreaking, and definitely doesn't
make up for the lack of proper gameplay (like in Crysis).
Benjamin
Yousuf Khan
> DX11 had better work on DX10 cards or I shall not be alone in stamping my
> feet
> & screeching at the Sky.
There's always a software and hardware portion of all DX versions. I'm
sure the software portion will continue to work on as ancient hardware
as you can get.
Yousuf Khan
Yousuf Khan
> Antonio Huerta wrote :
>> But what's likely to
>> happen, both will also support OpenCL, which is a software interface
>> to the graphical effects.
>
> OpenCL is another equivalent to Nvidia's proprietary CUDA (meaning
> allowing for general purpose computing on the GPU, not necessarily
> graphics) - this time a cross-platform multi-vendor open standard effort
> which is headed by Apple, IIRC.
Yeah, you can basically think of OpenCL will be to DirectX11's "compute
shaders" feature, as OpenGL was to previous DirectX's 3D graphics
engine. They are competitors to each other, where one is multi-vendor
while the other one is single-vendor but a big vendor (Microsoft).
Yousuf Khan
Victor
I definitely can see a differerence in those games that support dx 10
especially fsx.Lighting is much better.
Also seems to run better in 10 than 9.Framerates are higher and don't
jump around as much.
Shawk
Stalker Clear Skies has a large boost in performance in DX10 compared to
DX9. Haven't measured the framerate but in DX10 I can play maxed
settings at 1680x1050 and in DX9 I have to drop the rez down
substantially to get the same performance
DrTeeth
a herb, Victor <v25...@yahoo.com> disturbed my reverie and wrote:
>I definitely can see a differerence in those games that support dx 10
>especially fsx.Lighting is much better.
In FSX using DX10, all my runways and taxiways flash and I cannot use
it. ATi 4870 latest drivers (as always).