DX-11

N

notsane

Gawd
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
583
I wonder if the DX11 launch will be like DX10 introduction where the cards "support" the new spec, but they are not actually powerful enough to run it at the res we would want. :)

Oh ya, then it was forever before any games came along that ran in that format and if you pick up a card right away it was obsolete before the new games were out.

Pessimistic? Yes.

Possibly a good discussion.
 
Dirt 2 was running just fine in DX11 at 7800 resolution no less. DX11 patch for Battleforge seemed to play smoothly as well. CryEngine 3 in DX11 also ran smoothly at a high resolution. I'll have more commentary on DX11 in a couple of weeks....
 
notsane said:
I wonder if the DX11 launch will be like DX10 introduction where the cards "support" the new spec, but they are not actually powerful enough to run it at the res we would want.
Click to expand...
DX10 wasn't really to blame for that. Yeah, it naturally came at the same time as Vista -- when hardware manufacturers were still a little wet behind the ear and trying to figure things out. Game developers were as well, which hampered DX10's performance potential.

You could write a DX9 game today that brings any graphics card you could imagine to its knees. You could do the same with DX8, even. The advent of DX10 just so happened to coincide with a slew of graphically-intensive games.

Now that we're very firmly fixed in lock-step with console rendering capabilities, that won't happen this time around. We'll get a few showcases here and there, but no real knockouts. DX11's main appeal certainly isn't D3D11 :)
 
it was also announced that S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat will support DX11...don't know if they mean native DX11 support or a DX11 patch to be added later

I think DX11 will take off much quicker then DX10...DX10 was a Vista 'exclusive' so that hampered its success...DX11 will be helped by Windows 7's popularity and will also be backwards compatible with Vista
 
jeremyshaw said:
Curses..., that will make too many people stay with Vista....
Click to expand...

Ain't nothing really wrong with Vista... sure there were some issues before SP1.... but when SP1 came out, it fixed most of those.

With a little tweaking there is nothing at all wrong with it.

Or do you think Mojave is the OS you want? :p
 
Elledan said:
What about the over 50% of Windows users still on Windows XP? :p

*still uses WinXP and Win2k3 on her systems*
Click to expand...

Up and onto 7, of course.


*psst*, don't worry, I still use Windows 2000 Advanced Server, mostly because I have never crashed it...yet, in all of 8 (!?) years.
 
I cant see the whole not to powerfull thing happening to videocards happening like phide said the thing isnt about the api games wise the other features will mean greater usage for videocards in everyday applications that use the cpu.

In a way DX11 is one thing to get excited about , this sounds so wrong but it is really a _major_ step in DirectX history. This ofcourse on the idea that MS implements it well :) .
 
The implementation of DX11 will have many advantages over DX10 because it'll be available on both Vista and Windows 7. With Vista already having some market share, and Win 7 looking like it will be more readily adopted by people from the positive reviews, it'll be embraced faster.

Add on the fact that DX11 is built on the foundation of DX10, and you can see how there will be a buncha titles that are DX11-capable out before the end of the year rather than a year after Win 7 release.
 
cyclone3d said:
Ain't nothing really wrong with Vista... sure there were some issues before SP1.... but when SP1 came out, it fixed most of those.

With a little tweaking there is nothing at all wrong with it.
Click to expand...

The hysteria did not die down until early this year when SP2 came out. The echo chambers in the technology community are amazing. Anyway, Vista does not need any tweaking, it works just fine unless you have an under powered machine (like 1GB of RAM).
 
Staples is right. Altough the people familiar with PC's eventually stfu about vista. The rest of the fury came from mac ads.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
Windows 7 shows that Vista still needs tweaking.

*runs for cover* :p
 
I know almost nothing about it, but there's a great video on Utube demonstrating how DX 11's so-called 'tesselation' will allow for much greater detail in games. Apparently DX11, unlike DX10, is actually 'less' demanding on your card, because it more efficiently draws from the power of your GPU (the pipeline to your GPU is linear, at present, and DX11 will allow for multiple routes to your GPU, so it isn't starved for information.)

Here's the video.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Wp4Y-u8-Qw
 
Elledan said:
Windows 7 shows that Vista still needs tweaking.

*runs for cover* :p
Click to expand...

I went from the Win 7 RC back to Vista. Honestly, they are far more alike than people want to admit. The biggest difference I noticed was that they greatly improved UAC for 7. That and the redone taskbar are the only two things that stand out as being different. This is on my system in sig.

I suspect the main reason people are pushing 7 over Vista is that then they don't have to admit how incredibly wrong they were about Vista :p ;)
 
Awsome.... i5, i7, GTX300, ATI5xxx, Windows 7, DX11, Eyefinity, 3D Vison, Multi Terabyte Storage, SSDs.

Man, what an exciting time for [H]ard core gaming.
 
It is ALL meaningless without developers committed to implementing it. Not only that, but you need a game worth caring about too, not just a tech demo.
 
WabeWalker said:
I know almost nothing about it, but there's a great video on Utube demonstrating how DX 11's so-called 'tesselation' will allow for much greater detail in games.
Click to expand...

The cute part being of course that hardware tesselation has been supported by GPUs for a like a decade already, yet MSFT has refused to support it in D3D unlike OpenGL which has had it since before OGL 2.x.

It's like the programmable shaders thingy of DX11 which has been in OpenGL since the very beginning (GLSL).

Funny how MSFT propaganda/spin can make people believe anything old is new again :)
 
Elledan said:
The cute part being of course that hardware tesselation has been supported by GPUs for a like a decade already, yet MSFT has refused to support it in D3D unlike OpenGL which has had it since before OGL 2.x.

It's like the programmable shaders thingy of DX11 which has been in OpenGL since the very beginning (GLSL).

Funny how MSFT propaganda/spin can make people believe anything old is new again :)
Click to expand...

The compute shaders are new, that is something OpenCL more or less is providing. Hardware tessellation has been around for a while (ATI's ancient TruForm was basically hardware tessellation), but DX11's implementation is a bit different. Also, we now have cards powerful enough where a massive increase in triangles won't kill your framerates ;)

Also, I don't believe MSFT ever claimed that the tessellation in DX11 was new or different, so I'm not sure why you are pinning this on "MSFT propaganda/spin".
 
Elledan said:
The cute part being of course that hardware tesselation has been supported by GPUs for a like a decade already, yet MSFT has refused to support it in D3D unlike OpenGL which has had it since before OGL 2.x.

It's like the programmable shaders thingy of DX11 which has been in OpenGL since the very beginning (GLSL).

Funny how MSFT propaganda/spin can make people believe anything old is new again :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't think that the person in this video from AMD is saying that hardware tesselation is a new idea, I think he's saying that with DX11 it will become mainstream.
 
Elledan said:
The cute part being of course that hardware tesselation has been supported by GPUs for a like a decade already, yet MSFT has refused to support it in D3D unlike OpenGL which has had it since before OGL 2.x.

It's like the programmable shaders thingy of DX11 which has been in OpenGL since the very beginning (GLSL).

Funny how MSFT propaganda/spin can make people believe anything old is new again :)
Click to expand...

Considering the hardware hasn't existed until now, once again I have to think you are speaking out of place.
 
I personally am rather opposed to the idea of a closed API like DirectX and PhysX. OpenGL is without a doubt more powerful, though from what I hear, sometimes more "difficult" and has many features that DX 11 supports, if not more. This is the kind of thing that makes it difficult to port or run on non Windows OSes. I know that's probably the idea, but I'd much rather have developers resist and use open APIs that are easy to implement cross platform. For every single forum, and every single game (and many applications) I've seen in recent history there's a FAQ or forum thread devoted to "Will there be a Mac or Linux version". In games using proprietary API, the answer is almost always a "No, there is no Linux or Mac support planned (or) Maybe sometime in the future" which of course rarely if ever comes to fruition. In games utilizing open standards, its often "Yes, we'll be making a Linux or Mac client shortly after release (or) We already have one in development and it will be released and beta-ed concurrently with the Windows client!"

The primary criticism people have about Linux (and to a lesser extent, Mac) I've found is that "It doesn't support XXXX" where "XXXX" is either a game, driver, or application (rarely, as most apps can be WINEd to work).

Its just good business to make your product appeal to as wide a population as possible. Part of WoW's domination is that it came with a Mac client. For a long time, World of Warcraft was the only AAA MMO available to Mac users! Before companies think of shelling out for a lot of MS branded development tools, they should think a bit about what they're giving up.
 
More powerful is subjective.

It wil likely be differences in programming skill.

I'd rather not have to install much more on my PC, and as Directx is already on there I'm happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top