DirectX 11 Set to Help Game Developers to Boost Performance of New Titles

[Rroff]

ET:QW isn't DX10 it's OpenGL.

Plus, I played through lost planet to the last boss using a 2900XT played at 1920x1200 and max in-game settings.

Yeah I know - but at one point in development they were including the equivalent features - but the 2900 couldn't display them properly - that and complaints from play testers that the more complex explosion effects, etc. distracted from the gameplay lead to them being canned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-trDO8d1CPQ (anyone who has played ETQW will be able to tell the difference)

As for lost planet and call of juraz, etc. ok some of those titles were extensively tested on nVidia hardware and ATI didn't get a look in until later - but the nVidia drivers only required fairly minor tweaking to get up and running - it took ATI months to reach the same level.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/505/2/

 

[Strife212]

Yet despite all these troubles, how do the current generation of ATI cards manage to ....generally outperform ?

lololol

 

[layte]

I couldn't care less about vista personally

My point was that early Nvidia drivers were hardly the paragons on excellence you are attempting to portray them as. Yes ATI had problems getting the feature set stable and working, just like Nvidia had problems stopping them tanking the entire OS. (as an aside, if you dont care about Vista, why are you arguing over the merits of DX10.. )

Anyway that is ancient history, both companies now have mature and stable drivers, I doubt either will drop the ball when it comes to DX11. Although... thinking about it, NV had terrible DX9 performance on their FX hardware, ATI with DX10 and the 2x00, perhaps it will be NV's turn again....

Here's hoping an interesting discussion about what DX11 can bring to the table can blossom in this thread, unfortunately I am not going to hold my breath.

 

[Jono8]

tbh teh HD2XXX was a rubbish card vs Nvida, anyway, the HD38XX was better but still not good enough, so maybe it was AMD/ATI that killed directX10 at first untill they brought out the HD48XX than left Nvida well behined.

thats my option on things. seems to expalin a few things and yes i did have HD2600XT i didn't like it. didn't have enough for a 8800GT got a HD3870 that was fine

what . You mean they finally caught up?

 

[Rroff]

My point was that early Nvidia drivers were hardly the paragons on excellence you are attempting to portray them as. Yes ATI had problems getting the feature set stable and working, just like Nvidia had problems stopping them tanking the entire OS. (as an aside, if you dont care about Vista, why are you arguing over the merits of DX10.. )

Anyway that is ancient history, both companies now have mature and stable drivers, I doubt either will drop the ball when it comes to DX11. Although... thinking about it, NV had terrible DX9 performance on their FX hardware, ATI with DX10 and the 2x00, perhaps it will be NV's turn again....

Here's hoping an interesting discussion about what DX11 can bring to the table can blossom in this thread, unfortunately I am not going to hold my breath.

Because I'm not arguing the merits I'm just saying... past history doesn't bode so well. I'm more interested in win7 than vista.

Its ancient history... but it shouldn't be ignored... people seem to quick to forget.

I was very wary of nVidia after the FX series debacle... but the 6800 was a decent offering, the 7 series wasn't too terrible, the 8 series has gone from strength to strength and I can't generally fault the 200 series - aside from messing consumers around with the whole 8800GTS renaming thing.

ATI have got on the ball with the 4800 series, but its too early not to be cautious.

 

[kylew]

Yeah I know - but at one point in development they were including the equivalent features - but the 2900 couldn't display them properly - that and complaints from play testers that the more complex explosion effects, etc. distracted from the gameplay lead to them being canned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-trDO8d1CPQ (anyone who has played ETQW will be able to tell the difference)

As for lost planet and call of juraz, etc. ok some of those titles were extensively tested on nVidia hardware and ATI didn't get a look in until later - but the nVidia drivers only required fairly minor tweaking to get up and running - it took ATI months to reach the same level.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/505/2/

I played through LP when it came out, pretty much days after it was released.

I don't really get why or how ET:QW was initially being developed using DX because every Quake game has been on OpenGL for as long as I can remember.

All of ID's games have used OpenGL to run.

What you're saying just doesn't sound right to me.

 

[Rroff]

I played through LP when it came out, pretty much days after it was released.

I don't really get why or how ET:QW was initially being developed using DX because every Quake game has been on OpenGL for as long as I can remember.

All of ID's games have used OpenGL to run.

What you're saying just doesn't sound right to me.

It was using the Open GL calls for doing features equivalent to the DX10 feature set.

 

[Trunks9486]

Aside from the 2900 which was a failure after that ATi performed right on schedule, excellent execution really, both the 3xxx series and especially the 4xxx. Before the 2900 too, the x1xxx series and the x8xx series were both quite good.

Both companies had trouble with initial DX10 drivers, it was a new driver model for vista and was expected. nVIDIA was ess affected due to lack of competitoin at the time plus excellent XP and DX9 performance offered by G80.

Anyway, past performance is not always indicative. Time will tell. This round nvidia should have spomething more competitve out, as this round really hurt them. I have high hopes for them.