• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

DX10/Nvidia Drivers: XP?

X

XothicX

n00b
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
11
I'm making the move to the 8800GTX soon, but am unclear as to the DX10 situation with XP.

Is DX10 needed for the card to run even if on a DX9 system?

I've seen [H] do GPU reviews with DX10 cards using DX9... so I'm assuming it would work fine?

If you do install DX10 on XP for the card, how do you go about it? Does it cause any problems?

I've seen some say you have to install DX10, but from certain [H] reviews I've seen, they used DX9c.

As for Nvidia, which driver(s) are the best to use right now?

I haven't used an Nvidia card in a few years, so I'm bit behind the game.

Any info appreciated, thanks.
 
You cannot install DX10 on XP period. DX10 is ONLY for Vista.

A DX10 card is backwards compatible with DX9 and probably DX8 and DX7.
 
That's what I thought, though in some reviews of the GTX, I've seen people say "make sure you know how to install DX10 on XP"... though from what I've seen/heard here, you don't need it (and can't install it) to run a DX10 card on XP.

So I'll get the same performance, just w/o the benefits of DX10 for whatever games use it then, I'm assuming?

Also, aside from what the best Nvidia drivers are (which I'd like to know), what is a good monitoring tool for Nvidia cards for heat etc.?

Is it built into some type of Nvidia control panel?

Thanks again.
 
DirectX 10 will most likely NOT be fully-functional on Windows XP, ever.

There are various projects currently working on, trying to, correct me if I am wrong, reverse engineer? the DX10 API so it will function on Windows XP, but I would say, just go to Vista.

Sure, you lose performance in DX9, and probably the full capability of DX10, but the emulation? of DX10 to Windows XP couldn't be much better.

DirectX 10 is NOT aviable on Windows XP.
DirectX 10 is ONLY aviable on Windows Vista.
DirectX 10 cards can run DirectX 9, DirectX 8, DirectX 7, and so on games.
DirectX 9, 8, 7, and so on, can not run DirectX 10.
 
The best solution for Dx10/Dx9 games, is to run a dual boot system. One side for VISTA, one for XP. However, at this point in time, given the total lack of Dx10 games, the only thing a Dx10 card can offer is Dx9 performance in XP. I imagine that will change over the next few years. But until that time, I would only consider the best card available that runs Dx9 games at their best. This would include the 7900 series cards and the 8800 cards. But it all depends on your budget. The 7xxx cards are going for great prices, but they will only be good for the next year or so, but who knows. People are still using AGP!

Also, check out guru3d.com. It's entirely devoted to video cards from drivers to vid card utilities to hard ware. [H], guru3d & NVNews.net are my favorite sites for vid card info.
 
DX10 is about to make its debut. Company of Heros has been patched for DX10. Call of Juarez , BioShock, Lost Planet, Crysis, UT3, etc. will all have DX10 support. At this point, it is time to go Vista and DX10, as you will begin to lose out more and more very quickly in just the next few months.
 
heatlesssun said:
DX10 is about to make its debut. Company of Heros has been patched for DX10. Call of Juarez , BioShock, Lost Planet, Crysis, UT3, etc. will all have DX10 support. At this point, it is time to go Vista and DX10, as you will begin to lose out more and more very quickly in just the next few months.
Click to expand...

Not to be argumentative, but it is good to see a few titles that can support Dx10. However, with the possible exception of Crysis, all are Dx9 games patched to Dx10. I think, potentially, by next year this time, we may start to see some true Dx10 games that may really start to take advantage of the new API. I'll patiently wait until that time frame. However, I may upgrade to a Dx10 vid card sooner rather than later. My motivation for that is increased performance with my current collection of Dx9 games at highest quality & resolution settings.
 
Sailindawg said:
Not to be argumentative, but it is good to see a few titles that can support Dx10. However, with the possible exception of Crysis, all are Dx9 games patched to Dx10. I think, potentially, by next year this time, we may start to see some true Dx10 games that may really start to take advantage of the new API. I'll patiently wait until that time frame. However, I may upgrade to a Dx10 vid card sooner rather than later. My motivation for that is increased performance with my current collection of Dx9 games at highest quality & resolution settings.
Click to expand...

along with some true DX10 cards :p
 
Sailindawg said:
Not to be argumentative, but it is good to see a few titles that can support Dx10. However, with the possible exception of Crysis, all are Dx9 games patched to Dx10. I think, potentially, by next year this time, we may start to see some true Dx10 games that may really start to take advantage of the new API. I'll patiently wait until that time frame. However, I may upgrade to a Dx10 vid card sooner rather than later. My motivation for that is increased performance with my current collection of Dx9 games at highest quality & resolution settings.
Click to expand...

You're actually wrong. Crysis, UT3, Lost Planet, Bioshock and Call of Juarez will all be natively DX10... the only one being patched to DX10 is CoH, and that's done and out there already.
 
Sailindawg said:
Not to be argumentative, but it is good to see a few titles that can support Dx10. However, with the possible exception of Crysis, all are Dx9 games patched to Dx10. I think, potentially, by next year this time, we may start to see some true Dx10 games that may really start to take advantage of the new API. I'll patiently wait until that time frame. However, I may upgrade to a Dx10 vid card sooner rather than later. My motivation for that is increased performance with my current collection of Dx9 games at highest quality & resolution settings.
Click to expand...

Patched are not, the DX10 path will be there, and my point was that you won't be able to run it without Vista and a DX10, and over time you'll start to miss more and more eye candy.

Dual path DX9/DX10 games will be around for a while. It will be a while before the first DX10 only game arrives. But I don't think that a game has to be exclusively DX10 to take full advantage of it.
 
@heatlesssun

I agree with you. However, I'm holding out until that "gotta have" Dx10 game is out. With the exception of CoH, none of the titles mentioned are my cup of tea. I do appreciate where games like Call of Juarez or Crysys are taking vid graphics though.
 
Sailindawg said:
@heatlesssun

I agree with you. However, I'm holding out until that "gotta have" Dx10 game is out. With the exception of CoH, none of the titles mentioned are my cup of tea. I do appreciate where games like Call of Juarez or Crysys are taking vid graphics though.
Click to expand...

That makes perfect sense. I'm a shooter fan myself, so obviously Crysis is THE game this year, but the initial reviews of BioShock sound intresting so I'll probably pick that up.

I'm not an RTS fan, but I got CoH with my 8800 Ultra and went through some of the training sessions under XP/DX9 and Vista/DX10 and the DX10 is definately better looking. Have you compared them yourself yet? Curious what you think.
 
This is just to shake up the XP DX10 ain't gonna happen thing...

If DX10 is never gonna be supported in XP, then why does the June release of DX have a .inf file for DX10 for XP?

This is directly out of "d3dx10_34_x86_xp.inf"

[Version]
Signature = "$Windows NT$"
AdvancedINF = 2.0

[SourceDisksNames]
99 = %DiskName%,"JUN2007_d3dx10_34_x86.cab",0,,-1

[SourceDisksFiles]
d3dx10_34.dll = 99
D3DCompiler_34.dll = 99

[DestinationDirs]
DefaultDestDir = 11
DirectX_SysWOW64 = 10,SysWOW64

[x86_Install]
CopyFiles = DirectX_System

[x64_Install]
CopyFiles = DirectX_SysWOW64

[DirectX_System]
d3dx10_34.dll
D3DCompiler_34.dll

[DirectX_SysWOW64]
d3dx10_34.dll
D3DCompiler_34.dll

[Strings]
MSFT = "Microsoft"
ExceptionClassDesc = "DirectX JUN2007"
DiskName = "DirectX JUN2007 cab"


And this is out of "June2007_dxdx10_34_x86.inf"

; ---- Common sections ----
[Version]
Signature = "$CHICAGO$"
AdvancedINF = 2.0
Provider = %MSFT%
SetupClass = BASE

[Strings]
MSFT = "Microsoft"


; ---- Windows 2000 ----
[4.09.00.0904.00-4.09.00.0904.00_Win2K]
NumberOfFiles=6
Size=1503 ;approximately total file size (Size * 1024 bytes)
CopyCount=2
d3dx10_34_x86_xp.inf, x86_Install


; ---- Windows XP ----
[4.09.00.0904.00-4.09.00.0904.00_WinXP]
NumberOfFiles=6
Size=1503 ;approximately total file size (Size * 1024 bytes)
CopyCount=2
d3dx10_34_x86_xp.inf, x86_Install


; ---- Windows XP 64bit ----
[4.09.00.0904.00-4.09.00.0904.00_WinXP@64]
NumberOfFiles=6
Size=1503 ;approximately total file size (Size * 1024 bytes)
CopyCount=2
d3dx10_34_x86_xp.inf, x64_Install


; ---- Windows Server 2003 ----
[4.09.00.0904.00-4.09.00.0904.00_Srv2K3]
NumberOfFiles=6
Size=1503 ;approximately total file size (Size * 1024 bytes)
CopyCount=2
d3dx10_34_x86_xp.inf, x86_install


; ---- Windows Server 2003 64bit ----
[4.09.00.0904.00-4.09.00.0904.00_Srv2K3@64]
NumberOfFiles=6
Size=1503 ;approximately total file size (Size * 1024 bytes)
CopyCount=2
d3dx10_34_x86_xp.inf, x64_install


; ---- Windows XP Version 2003 and beyond ----
[4.09.00.0904.00-4.09.00.0904.00_WinNT]
NumberOfFiles=6
Size=1503 ;approximately total file size (Size * 1024 bytes)
CopyCount=2
d3dx10_34_x86.inf, x86_install


; ---- Windows XP Version 2003 and beyond 64bit ----
[4.09.00.0904.00-4.09.00.0904.00_WinNT@64]
NumberOfFiles=6
Size=1503 ;approximately total file size (Size * 1024 bytes)
CopyCount=2
d3dx10_34_x86.inf, x64_install


So say what you will.. maybe DX10 will never really come to XP.. but then why in the world is Microsoft making .inf files for it? No to mention Win2k is also mentioned in the .inf files.
 
I wont upgrade to Vista and DX10 unless AVP3 would pop up and require it.
 
So say what you will.. maybe DX10 will never really come to XP.. but then why in the world is Microsoft making .inf files for it? No to mention Win2k is also mentioned in the .inf files.
Reply With Quote
Click to expand...

That's interesting. M$ would be covering all bases in this instance, considering the lackluster sales of VISTA, both in th US and abroad.

@heatlesssun

I'm not an RTS fan, but I got CoH with my 8800 Ultra and went through some of the training sessions under XP/DX9 and Vista/DX10 and the DX10 is definately better looking. Have you compared them yourself yet? Curious what you think.
Click to expand...

If you are asking if I compared the XP vs VISTA performance of CoH, no I have not. I have not purchased VISTA yet. And probably will not probably over the next year or so. All I do is game, watch movies & rip/burn music/movies with my pc, not to mention overclocking/benching & forum whoring. At this point in time, VISTA doesn't offer much to me. XP/SP2 runs perfectly fine. I just do not get installing an operating system that wants to use more hardware resources than most games. At least with a game, I'm getting some gratification out of it. But a 3D desktop? :eek: I have no use for that.

Whatever flavor of VISTA I do get, I will most decidedly turn off all the fluff so that it functions as an operating system should. In the background, using minimal resources, as a conduit for all other software to make use of my high end hard ware.
 
Sr7 said:
You're actually wrong. Crysis, UT3, Lost Planet, Bioshock and Call of Juarez will all be natively DX10... the only one being patched to DX10 is CoH, and that's done and out there already.
Click to expand...

Call of Juarez has been available in Europe since late last year and is a native DX9 game. I know there is a DX10 demo for this game, but it was a DX9 game first, so I would say it's patched to DX10. Lost Planet is a Xbox360 port that is also patched to DX10.
 
Sr7 said:
You're actually wrong. Crysis, UT3, Lost Planet, Bioshock and Call of Juarez will all be natively DX10... the only one being patched to DX10 is CoH, and that's done and out there already.
Click to expand...

I feel that we should be a little more specific. It is very innacurate to say all those games are "natively DX10" this early in the life cycle of DX10. These games have been made far enough in advance that they have been potentially able to incorporate DX10 renderers into their releases, but they are also far enough along in development, that it doesn't necessarily mean there will (or will not) be any visual differences.

1. Lost Planet is a natively DX9 game (runs on the Xbox360) with both a DX9 and DX10 version on the computer. There are no different visual effects between the two computer versions, DX10 is only used for purported "efficiency" reasons. Theoretically, this would allow you to run at higher settings at the same frame rate, but the game is a console port and we all know how well that goes.

2. The UT3 devs have said that UT3 will have both DX9 and DX10 renderers, but aside from minor efficiency improvements the only DX10-specific effect announced yet is anti-aliasing. This does not mean they won't add some DX10 visual effects later, but the general idea seems that they want to keep things "fair" between versions for game balance reasons. If one renderer could display something that another couldn't, your view of the game could actually be obscured by have the DX10 version, for example. So what we've seen *so far* of it has been DX9, but they might add some things later.

3. I am not aware if any shots of Crysis have been released where it was running in DX10 mode, but I would certainly expect CryTek to take advantage of those features eventually, given how much they love the eye candy.

My opinion is that it is wrong to call those games "natively DX10" -- that term should be saved for games that have been built from the ground up with DX10 as the basic expectation and visual ideal, and where they only have an extra, simple, different-looking DX9 renderer or even no DX9 mode at all. I think that they are sort of a "transitional" step between 9 and 10.
 
To the OP, 8800GTX cards will run any game currently out for purchase. Most of those games will run maxed out in graphics and look spectacular. For instance, GRAW 1 runs smoother and more graphically refined on 1 card than it did when I had 7900GTX in SLI.

There are some games out now that have been patched for DX 10 effects. They require 2 things, VISTA and an 8000 series video card, period.

Yes, Crysis will play out DX10 in all its glory, and be able to run on a DX 9 platform, just not as pretty. There are some short videos out somewhere showing the Crysis game in DX10 and DX9.

Me, I have 2 hard drives in dual boot, one Vista and one XP, because I have some games that will never run as well on Vista as they did on XP.

Short answer, the 8800GTX kicks major butt in DX9 and I expect the same in full DX10.
 
GwarGor said:
Call of Juarez has been available in Europe since late last year and is a native DX9 game. I know there is a DX10 demo for this game, but it was a DX9 game first, so I would say it's patched to DX10. Lost Planet is a Xbox360 port that is also patched to DX10.
Click to expand...

I'm running Call of Juarez on my Windows XP system.. so yes, I would say CoJ is definitely a native DX9 game which will provide a DX10 patch.
 
capable heart said:
I feel that we should be a little more specific. It is very innacurate to say all those games are "natively DX10" this early in the life cycle of DX10. These games have been made far enough in advance that they have been potentially able to incorporate DX10 renderers into their releases, but they are also far enough along in development, that it doesn't necessarily mean there will (or will not) be any visual differences.

1. Lost Planet is a natively DX9 game (runs on the Xbox360) with both a DX9 and DX10 version on the computer. There are no different visual effects between the two computer versions, DX10 is only used for purported "efficiency" reasons. Theoretically, this would allow you to run at higher settings at the same frame rate, but the game is a console port and we all know how well that goes.

2. The UT3 devs have said that UT3 will have both DX9 and DX10 renderers, but aside from minor efficiency improvements the only DX10-specific effect announced yet is anti-aliasing. This does not mean they won't add some DX10 visual effects later, but the general idea seems that they want to keep things "fair" between versions for game balance reasons. If one renderer could display something that another couldn't, your view of the game could actually be obscured by have the DX10 version, for example. So what we've seen *so far* of it has been DX9, but they might add some things later.

3. I am not aware if any shots of Crysis have been released where it was running in DX10 mode, but I would certainly expect CryTek to take advantage of those features eventually, given how much they love the eye candy.

My opinion is that it is wrong to call those games "natively DX10" -- that term should be saved for games that have been built from the ground up with DX10 as the basic expectation and visual ideal, and where they only have an extra, simple, different-looking DX9 renderer or even no DX9 mode at all. I think that they are sort of a "transitional" step between 9 and 10.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
Im surprised nobody has mentioned Directx 9.0L. Its supposed to be directx10 for XP... google it to read more.
 
Take your pick:

1) this

or

2)this

I really hate using anything called the Inquirer as a reliable source. But who knows? Both quips are dated to October 2006.
 
Sailindawg said:
Take your pick:

1) this

or

2)this

I really hate using anything called the Inquirer as a reliable source. But who knows? Both quips are dated to October 2006.
Click to expand...

The first link is a copy of the Inq story from Oct 16th where they thought DX9L was DX10 for XP. Then the second link was a story posted the day after where they corrected the original story and clarified the opposite was true, DX9L was DX9 for Vista.
 
Sailindawg said:
Take your pick:

1) this

or

2)this

I really hate using anything called the Inquirer as a reliable source. But who knows? Both quips are dated to October 2006.
Click to expand...

You should have went with you first instincts here....DX9.0L is DX9 for Vista and not DX10 for XP(There will be no DX10 for XP!). The Inquirer is not a reliable source of information. Sure every now and then they get something right, but most of the time(IMO) they're wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top