Excactly, in other words in a years time a X2 will still be fast enough to play DX10 games and there is no need for a quad core CPU.deadkomodo said:Or are you saying if you solely play games then no need to upgrade CPU nearly often? If so fair point
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Cascades DX10 demo
- Thread starter zytok
- Start date
deadkomodo said:yeah thats what I was thinking
Yeah but I don't really mind what its doing, I got G80 for stuff to look good and run better and it does.
BUT I would not get vista and get DX10 yet based upon those screen shots. Now had it been revolutionary looking WOW then i would have been nudged in the right direction.
Physics and interactions are graphical? I'd rather my GPU be used for games to make them look good and one of my CORES on my CPU do something worthwhile in games such as physics. (Afterall more people have dual cores than D10 cards)
Then again better physics is a good thing no matter how its delivered to usso fair point
The whole point of the demo is to show how all the work is done on the GPU. If you thought DX10 will make things look much better then you'll be disapointed.
DX10 makes the hardware more efficient, allowing developers to draw new kinds of effects in better ways. Its up to the game makers to use the technology to produce great graphics - nothings changed there.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
bfar said:
Ive said that all along, all Dx10 does is take the load of the CPU so you can have moe objects etc... on screen and keep the frame-rate up as the GPU is doing the work instead of the CPU, everyones expecting the games being ran in Dx10 mode to look totally different than they do in Dx9, they are going to look like totally different games, the only difference is going to be SM4.0 instead of SM3.0, which lets face it hardly looks any different to SM2.0, so the odd better effect like better looking water for instance, like SM3.0 did to SM2.0, remember the SM3.0 water in that Il2, man everyone was tommy tanking over it, it was only a better looking water effect ffs, everyone was saying don't buy the crappy x8 series you want the 6 series frm Nv for the better looking water, you had to browse this place wearing a MAC as everyone was going off at a water effect.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 623
- Location
- Uxbridge, West London.
Massivly underwelmed by the graphics in that demo.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 11,244
MetalStorm said:
for the umpteenth time its not about graphics ! 
/rantI suggest people running it press 'a' and read about whats it all about.....off top of head the whole point of the demo IS:
-The dragon flys each have there own AI controlled ON GPU
-Dragon flys are duplicated using instancing ON GPU
-Water physics done ON GPU
-Randomly generated geometry of the rock ON GPU
-Random texturing ON GPU
-Does have very nice textures (ya a gfx thing! ) even when zoomed in VERY close
-The entire seen is done ON GPU..........nothing in that seen is done on CPU, everything I mean everything you see is ALL done on the ON GPU
Thats what the demos for......proof of concept design.............proves that everything bar sound, (in future randomly generated landscapes, water/atomsphere effects, AI, physics can all be done ON GPU..........what will the cpu do then
)