DirectX 10 - Think Your Ready?

gord

gord

gord

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2003
Posts
19,413
Location
Midlands
Well, it seems to be that DirectX 10 will not be backwards comptable with 9,8,7. WHOA!!, you might say, but hold up there. Rumours are that there will be software emulation included at the expense of system resources.

What does this mean for all of us. DirectX 10 will offer the next big leap, pixel shader 4.0, new DLL library structure and less CPU dependence. However if your running a DX9 based rig, dont expect amazing performance in these next gen titles.

What sort of divides do you think this will create in the communities. I mean, they havnt entirely stopped 9,8,7, but there seems to be a definite push by microsoft to draw the line and start again.

In my eyes this is no bad thing. I think evolution of technology is all very good, but sometimes we need a revolution in order to really advance. Im pretty sure this will not be apparent in the short term but the long term will undoubtedly prove bright.
 
I agree with the revolution thing.

But i can't help think about all the pennies it'll cost me when i have to get a new graphics card to play a new release properly.

Haven't had to do that since 3Dfx first came out. :o
 
I agree. Backwards compatibility is great, but sometimes it is just better to scrap it for the sake of making a hopefully large leap forward.

I can't see it being that much of a divide. There will always be the people who can afford to upgrade and those that can't. Eventually the prices will drop enough for all who care to upgrade.
 
Last edited:
Hell I was happy playing Chaos Theory with Pixel shader 1.1 (I think it was that) with some AA and AS.

Ive not even tryed HDR yet on HL2/CSS.

I doubt im going to be trying DX10 anytime soon after the first Dx10 game is released.
 
tbh it takes SO long for any game to take advantage of the latest DX that we can rest asured that we have YEARS left to get our rigs up to date,
also anyone who makes a game that cannot be played accseptably on a current rig will find their sales to be lacking.
 
Nieldo said:
Hell I was happy playing Chaos Theory with Pixel shader 1.1 (I think it was that) with some AA and AS.

Ive not even tryed HDR yet on HL2/CSS.

I doubt im going to be trying DX10 anytime soon after the first Dx10 game is released.
Click to expand...

HDR eats FPS for lunch.
6600GT (256) and a 3200 with 1gig ram (2-2-2-4) is taken to the cleaners on maps like Nuke and Millita when HDR is turned on.

I'm guessing that there will be games released with the option of DX10 for ULTRA settings, and DX9 and lower for non Ultra setups.
 
gord said:
DirectX 10
Click to expand...

*yawn*

What is wrong with DX 9 exactly. Personally I find bringing out a new DX version every year or two to be stupid and unneccesary, but there ya go. Pixel Shader 1, 2, 3, 4, 500.. yeah whatever.
 
So what exactly is DX10 going to do that DX9 can't do, and I mean in layman's terms rather than technical talk of pixel shaders and other stuff that sends me to sleep.
 
dirtydog said:
*yawn*

What is wrong with DX 9 exactly. Personally I find bringing out a new DX version every year or two to be stupid and unneccesary, but there ya go. Pixel Shader 1, 2, 3, 4, 500.. yeah whatever.
Click to expand...

Aye well, thankfully many people like to push the boundaries and advance further. Depending on your opinion of wrong, there is nothing 'wrong' with DX9, it works, but how efficiently and with enough functionality and scalability to allow graphics to reach the ultimate level of realism? I think not.

Your personal opinion is unfortunately flawed in terms of 'stupid and unnecessary'. If you want a visual demonstration of early use of DirectX10 then take a look at the Crysis video. From the makers of FarCry their next engine is supposedly directX10 based and i for one think it looks a great deal better than at least the old farcry, which was far from ugly. Some people would probably say they dont think it looks much better. Infact, i have a feeling about your opinion.

Check it out and report back.

dirtydog said:
So what exactly is DX10 going to do that DX9 can't do, and I mean in layman's terms rather than technical talk of pixel shaders and other stuff that sends me to sleep.
Click to expand...

Well, going on that video which is easiest to explain. Almost all of the functionality shown there CAN be done in DX9. HA!, i hear you say. However depending on your opinion of CAN the functionality changes. Its all very well being able to make it work at a few fps, but DX10 seems to be reorganising the its structure for improved efficiency, time saving, while rendering scenes and taking a load off the central processor. Thats the best laymans terms i can think of right now, due to DirectX10 being a technical piece of software it would be best to use an analogy, which is best formed with detailed knowledge of the software, naturally i dont have this.

Hope this clears it up for you. And remember to check out that video. Its very impressive for an early build.
 
I'm not planning any significant upgrades in the near future, so I'm not going to worry about it and simply adopt a wait-and-see approach.

The only people who need to take this into consideration really are people who do not frequently update their graphics cards, and are thinking of buying a high end (dx9) one in the next 6 months.
 
Fairly safe to assume that once they realise how many people without Dx10 hardware will be missing out, and therefore missing out on the potential sales some half arsed fix will be put in place which will limit its true potential.

Having to make things backwards compatible with your existing userbase is one, if not the, major thing that holds back development of new ideas.
 
If they are making DX10 so different to 9, there may be no reason why both cant run on the system with either the game itself or OS choosing which version to run dependent upon the game being played.
 
gord said:
Well, going on that video which is easiest to explain. Almost all of the functionality shown there CAN be done in DX9. HA!, i hear you say. However depending on your opinion of CAN the functionality changes. Its all very well being able to make it work at a few fps, but DX10 seems to be reorganising the its structure for improved efficiency, time saving, while rendering scenes and taking a load off the central processor. Thats the best laymans terms i can think of right now, due to DirectX10 being a technical piece of software it would be best to use an analogy, which is best formed with detailed knowledge of the software, naturally i dont have this.

Hope this clears it up for you. And remember to check out that video. Its very impressive for an early build.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen the video but regardless of how good it looks, it doesn't prove to me that it couldn't be done in DX9. If you raise the minimum system requirements for Crysis above what they were for Far Cry then obviously you can achieve more.

How many games make full use of DX9 anyway? Most games still cater for DX8 cards and as was just pointed out to me, DX9 has been around for about four years.

We were told that DX9 would be amazing yet to me games look little better than with DX8. What do we get, a subtle difference in how water is rendered in Half Life 2 between DX8 and 9 and stuff like that. Woo hoo.
 
At first I'm sure most games will have both dx10 and dx9 renderers. They would be shooting themselves in the foot if they didn't. How many people are going to have a dx10 card in the first couple of years? An incredibly small number.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom