DX9 vs Dx10 CPU Overhead with G80

fornowagain · 19 Dec 2006 at 17:26

With the new Microsoft operating system Vista releases entered the countdown stage. symbol mapping technology will enter a new milestone. DirectX 10 specifications for a new game to dominate the market direction. Su makes graphics chips for another huge capital investments and R & D manpower, CompoTech the past three years, including the time spent gathering information research and development and working closely with Microsoft, Following earlier in the DirectX 7 and again leading rival ATI DirectX 9.0c. launched the world's first to support DirectX 10 graphics chip. codenamed G80 core of a new generation of high-GeForce 8800 product family.

Direct X API has become the most pervasive, simply because without authorization, and rich functional and easy to use. welcomed by game manufacturers, but the current version of DirectX 9 specifications and hardware design, bring to the game designers have many restrictions.

Drawing API in non-existent, programmers need to direct the preparation process control 3D graphics card. Although this method is very efficient, but compatibility on poor performance the program designers need to make different programs for different hardware to achieve compatibility effect of this trouble and time, therefore, The industry is the development of a single unified specifications, procedures and graphics card hardware designers were unified API for communication, only a programmer and graphics hardware manufacturers to substantially reduce the compatibility of concern, At present, the most common API for Direct X and OpenGL.

However limited the application API; Every game software in the role of weapons and features. 3D is a procedural thing (Object). And each picture frame may occur hundreds of Object game. When transmitted to each Object DirectX 9 API programs, the re-sent-driven programming, After processors need to deal with, when Object more also increases the burden on the processor. and require more time and the resulting bottlenecks in the implementation, known as API Overheard. So manufacturers in the design of the effectiveness and quality of the game, they need to make their choice.

DirectX 10 will no longer need to improve some functional processor intervention

DirectX 10 due to substantially reduce the processor and lowering processor bottleneck, DirectX 10 will allow software developers to promote wider use of Object in the procedural game, make games more realistic

lay-z-boy · 19 Dec 2006 at 17:27

copycat tbh

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=127153

fornowagain · 19 Dec 2006 at 17:29

Not quite, followed the link and started from there. Re-hosted with a tidy up. Its a good read, worth sharing imo.

Looks like less CPU bottlenecks. SLi should fly with DX10

lay-z-boy · 19 Dec 2006 at 17:30

Totally agreed there, im looking forward to see everything pull through.

Firegod · 19 Dec 2006 at 19:35

Ok I didn't understand a word of that. What's it mean in lamens terms?

FreeStream · 19 Dec 2006 at 19:45

CPU is used less to do drawing tasks, so CPU bottleneck is reduced, thus more time to do more drawing or more physics/loading or whatever.

This could help a lot in the FS-X bottleneck.

LoadsaMoney · 19 Dec 2006 at 20:18

Yeah as i said if your still expecting a whole graphics change, 'oh my god what game is that :eek:

', 'oh its blah, blah, blah' 'jesus looks nothing like that on my Dx9 card, looks like a totally different game' then ouch.

Cyber-Mav · 19 Dec 2006 at 20:26

this is strange those benchmarks don;t mimick anything thats so far been tested. all gaiming done on vista is actually far SLOWER than gaming on XP.

FreeStream · 19 Dec 2006 at 21:43

Cyber-Mav said:
this is strange those benchmarks don;t mimick anything thats so far been tested. all gaiming done on vista is actually far SLOWER than gaming on XP.

Name me a DX10 game that has run on vista on DX10 hardware properly?

Cos I aint seen any benchmarks..

Cyber-Mav · 19 Dec 2006 at 23:52

crysis.

crytek themselves say that there is a 20% hit in fps when going from windows xp to windows vista in dx9 mode.

and going from vista dx9 to vista dx10 there is a further 15% performance hit.

edgaruy1980 · 20 Dec 2006 at 00:04

World Conflict, was developed on Vista and was not so great, most people is over rating DX10, one thing the sound will SUCK on dx10

, you know DX10 does NOT support multichannel, so you will stuck on Stereo, and Creative made a "patch" only for the X-FI series, no solution yet for other sound card :mad:

Also the shader 4.0, has only one layer more, I attend to the developers conference from Nvidia, and there are not great new things.
Another thing Intel has not developed new chipsets supporting Vista, so you will have bottleneck, note most i9XX chipset run on a real bandwidth of 9 Gb/s only 3Gb/s more than the i8XX series.The next PCIex will pump 4 Gb/s, but you have another 5Gb/s bandwidth to be shared with System memory,hard drive and Cpu.
Microsoft has pushed to new developing, but as the market is slow, most hardware developers are just waiting, to see how accepted is VISTA.
Here in US, corporate business are not switching to Vista, security still is a issue and there is not substantial gain.

joeyjojo · 20 Dec 2006 at 00:09

Cyber-Mav said:
crysis.

crytek themselves say that there is a 20% hit in fps when going from windows xp to windows vista in dx9 mode.

and going from vista dx9 to vista dx10 there is a further 15% performance hit.

But it looks so much better, hence slower :confused:

Just like css is faster in DX7, but looks rough.

xsnv · 20 Dec 2006 at 00:24

joeyjojo said:
But it looks so much better, hence slower

Just like css is faster in DX7, but looks rough.

lol. So a DX10 game that looks better than it's DX9 counterpart warrants a 15% performance hit? - Assuming of course that the above crysis statement is true.

I would be surprised though as one of the main features of DX10 is it'a ability to produce better visuals using less gpu power...

Tute · 20 Dec 2006 at 00:43

I believe Dx10 also brings SM 4.0?

So it's not just going to be speed changes, there will be visual improvements too.

lay-z-boy · 20 Dec 2006 at 00:50

Tute said:
I believe Dx10 also brings SM 4.0?

So it's not just going to be speed changes, there will be visual improvements too.

*Insert generic response of its totally useless*

Cyber-Mav · 20 Dec 2006 at 00:54

remember, dx10 is supposed to be FASTER than dx9. i believe microsoft said its 6 times faster.

so going by that logic if 2 systems are configured the same but one has a radeon 9800pro running vista and the other has a x1950xt running on xp the end result should be the same.

why is it that i really much doubt this?

Hades · 20 Dec 2006 at 01:19

Microsoft want us to buy Vista. Most people can't see a reason for Vista. Therefore it does not surprise me that we see these kinds of speed improvements banded about. Maybe they are true. Maybe they aren't. I'll wait until I see hard evidence of the improvements before I consider spending any money on DX10/Vista.

Cyber-Mav · 20 Dec 2006 at 01:25

not gonna bother with vista, will ignore vista threads and just carry on watching my thundercats dvds till there is something better to post on

Emlyn_Dewar · 20 Dec 2006 at 01:25

Cyber-Mav said:
remember, dx10 is supposed to be FASTER than dx9. i believe microsoft said its 6 times faster.

so going by that logic if 2 systems are configured the same but one has a radeon 9800pro running vista and the other has a x1950xt running on xp the end result should be the same.

why is it that i really much doubt this?

But that wouldn't be the case surely? You'd need to have a DX10 card in the first place to get the supposed speed increases.
I really don't get why people hate the idea of DX10 and are pretty much writing it off, how can it be so offensive?

Cyber-Mav · 20 Dec 2006 at 01:27

reason is dx10 promises soooo much but it delivers not.

dx10 = agiea ppu

same concept. both hyped up loads but deliver reduced performance.