DX10 - Any good?

Which is funniest?

  • Crying Stewie

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Singing Peter

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • A-ha Chris

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Skidding Joe

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Smelly Stewie

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Naked Stewie

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,626
Best answers
0
I was wondering if anyone here has tried out DX10 yet. I have my computer set-up to dual-boot XP and Vista (/brag), and it looks like all I'll be using Vista for is DX10, because I'm really not an instant fan of the flashier interface. CoH just had a patch for it, and Call of Juarez gets a patch for it soon (June 12?), and Crysis and BioShock are coming with it later in this quarter. I know how Crytek is whoring DX10 as the be-all end-all of PC gaming, but can anyone not being paid to say it's good give any comment?
 
New Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
858
Best answers
0
I watched the video comparison to DX9 to DX10 for CoH and honestly the only difference is barely noticeable, but it is noticeable.

The lighting is increased, some texture differences, but above all it looked the same however call of jaurez..

http://www.gametrailers.com/umwatcher.php?id=65695

I still don't think that is a real comparison mainly cause i played the games demo last year in high and mine looked like the DX10 so i think the player just toned the graphics down, but what do i know.

This is the COH comparison, unless it is faster or something i still see hardly a difference.
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=20119&type=wmv&pl=game

Only thing i see DX10 will have a effect on in the near future is Conan, and crysis.
 
New Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 29, 2003
Messages
4,765
Best answers
0
I watched the video comparison to DX9 to DX10 for CoH and honestly the only difference is barely noticeable, but it is noticeable.

The lighting is increased, some texture differences, but above all it looked the same however call of jaurez..

http://www.gametrailers.com/umwatcher.php?id=65695

I still don't think that is a real comparison mainly cause i played the games demo last year in high and mine looked like the DX10 so i think the player just toned the graphics down, but what do i know.

This is the COH comparison, unless it is faster or something i still see hardly a difference.
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=20119&type=wmv&pl=game

Only thing i see DX10 will have a effect on in the near future is Conan, and crysis.
A game that was originally build for DX9 will not look that much better in DX10 if a patch is made for it. It's more or less a small eye candy patch. A game that's made for DX10 will look a whole lot better because it's capable of doing much more.

DX10 can do everything that DX9 could, but DX10 does the DX9 stuff better. And thus, because DX10 is much faster at shader calculations, people who make games can make much more shader intensive graphics. In the long run, this means DX10 will make for much prettier games. (Crysis being a good example)
 

sub

Active Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
5,961
Best answers
0
I don't understand why we need DX10. It just seems like a way of getting PC gamers to spend more money on **** they don't need. The 360's graphics are more than good enough and that's running DX9.
 
Cunning as Zeus
Banned
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 23, 2003
Messages
6,079
Best answers
0
It's called progress.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,626
Best answers
0
A game that was originally build for DX9 will not look that much better in DX10 if a patch is made for it. It's more or less a small eye candy patch. A game that's made for DX10 will look a whole lot better because it's capable of doing much more.

DX10 can do everything that DX9 could, but DX10 does the DX9 stuff better. And thus, because DX10 is much faster at shader calculations, people who make games can make much more shader intensive graphics. In the long run, this means DX10 will make for much prettier games. (Crysis being a good example)
I was reading about some of what these unified shaders can do, and it looks like some pretty neat stuff. It can do pretty much anything its programmed to, and change what is done by the individual pipelines on the fly. It should be able to take over some of the things that were usually given to the CPU to do, like physics calculations. They can also be programmed with C, so it's alot easier for programmers to start using GPUs for stuff like [email protected] or rendering.
 
New Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
254
Best answers
0
My answer would be a yes. New features, old features but much more (handy with particles) and the whole gpgpu crap.
 
New Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
146
Best answers
0
As much as it pains my anti-Microsoft heart to say it it looks like DX10 will actually be really good, and a huge step up from DX9..... that hurt so much to say...

however, I'm a bit annoyed that it's made for vista only and it does seem to come as a downside that a whole market of gamers are going to be cut out of the loop now as I for one don't have a pc powerful enough for vista and hence won't be able to play any new gen games

In conclusion? It's a big leap for gaming and an even bigger leap back for the average pc gamer in the long run
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,626
Best answers
0
I'm not ticked off that Vista comes with DX10. Not at all. I am, however, right ****ing pissed that DX10 comes with Vista. Seriously, it's such a bloated piece of ****. Once I can turn off all the retarded idiot proofing on it, it might be okay. But until then, I can tell already that it's going to drive me up the wall whenever I have to DX10.

I tried to delete Movie Maker (because I wanted to install the DX10 demo for Lost Planet and it wouldn't let me put it on my main partition, the one that boots XP with some 260 GB to spare, and I didn't have room on the partition sized only to fit Vista) and the computer told me it might affect the program's operation and stopped me. No ****ing **** it will affect it's operation, I'm deleting it for ****s sake. It didn't just warn me though, it completely blocked me from getting rid of a worthless application I will never use (which was taking up more than 100MB). It also wasn't listed in the add/remove programs window, so I couldn't get rid of it there either. Maybe I missed something, as I was in something of a hurry, but just that it completely stopped me from deleting it...

Edit: Oh, idea. I can boot XP and delete it right out from under Vista's nose. Teach those ****ers...
 

sub

Active Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
5,961
Best answers
0
I woulda tried to delete it in safe mode (im assuming vista still has safe mode)
 
New Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 29, 2003
Messages
4,765
Best answers
0
As much as it pains my anti-Microsoft heart to say it it looks like DX10 will actually be really good, and a huge step up from DX9..... that hurt so much to say...

however, I'm a bit annoyed that it's made for vista only and it does seem to come as a downside that a whole market of gamers are going to be cut out of the loop now as I for one don't have a pc powerful enough for vista and hence won't be able to play any new gen games

In conclusion? It's a big leap for gaming and an even bigger leap back for the average pc gamer in the long run
If your PC can't even handle Vista, you shouldn't worry about nog being able to use DX10 in XP or whatever OS you use. It probably wouldn't matter anyway. If your pc can't handle Vista, it won't handle any DX10 intensive graphic games. And the new gen game will probably also be DX9 compatible for atleast the next year. Not many people have the money to upgrade their PC to a Radeon HD or Geforce 8 series for the DX10 compatibility.
 
New Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 29, 2003
Messages
4,765
Best answers
0
Nope DX10 can only be run in Vista, not XP. Someone might somehow make a patch for XP or DX10 so it will run, I don't know.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,626
Best answers
0
DirectX 10 is only for vista with xp isnt compatible?
soory my english
pd:see http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/pcs/directx-9-vs-directx-10-worth-upgrading-to-vista-for-243099.php
No, to have use DX 10, you need both Vista and one of the latest generation GPUs.

Yeah, I guess it depends on the game to see what kind of improvements we'll see. There will also no doubt be a period where the software development catches up to the hardware. Games made for DX10 will be a start, but that GPUPU stuff is mostly stuff that can't be seen in screen shots, and I wonder if any of that is around yet.

Should I ever get this demo running, one of the things I'm looking to check out is motion blur. A couple years ago I said to myself that it would make everything look so much smoother. Now I'll get to find out if I was right.

Edit: Maybe I spoke too soon... http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/
 
New Member
Joined
May 14, 2003
Messages
904
Best answers
0
DX10 has been written from the ground up, completely separate from any of the previous DXs (as in no compatibility with them, that's why Vista needed DX9L) for the sole purpose of efficiency. Almost anything you see out right now (as in released) that says "DX10" on it is basically a hack job. The performance is going to suck on these "DX10" demos because they're made purely to be able to be listed as "DX10", and not for anything beneficial. Look out for Crysis (or UT3), one of the first games that'll actually use it for performance, while at the same time throwing in extra visuals because of that performance gain (so, for free, basically).

If you want detailed info on the very reasons DX10 will be good, go google it. I'm not typing up all of it in my own words.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
5,216
Best answers
0
Crysis in DX10 is stunning from the video's i've seen.

Then again, it looks pretty amazing in the DX9 video's i've seen of it too, leading me to believe it is in fact Crysis and not DX10 that is worthy of the glory. Seeing as there's no purely-DX10 titles out there, and little hardware that supports it, it's way too early to judge.

If someone showed me a video from a PS1 game, a PS2 game and a PS3 game, I could easily tell them apart and say which was which, I doubt I could do that with DX9 and DX10 unless they were running side by side.
 
New Member
Joined
May 14, 2003
Messages
904
Best answers
0
Crysis in DX10 is stunning from the video's i've seen.

Then again, it looks pretty amazing in the DX9 video's i've seen of it too, leading me to believe it is in fact Crysis and not DX10 that is worthy of the glory. Seeing as there's no purely-DX10 titles out there, and little hardware that supports it, it's way too early to judge.
First of all, let me reiterate that DX10 is for efficiency, not so much image quality ["DX10 has been written from the ground up ... for the sole purpose of efficiency"]. And yes, while Crysis is both a DX9 and 10 game, the latter of the two will not be a lacking addition, like so many of the current "DX10" games are (Call of Juarez, Company of Heroes, and so on). Any extra visuals you may see in the DX10 mode on Crysis (smoking blown back via sound/explosions, more soft shadows cast by foliage, etc) could probably be recreated using DX9, but it just may not have been as efficient to do, or maybe the developers just want to throw in some extra goodies for the DX10 crowd. Who knows? The fact is, I doubt there will be a huge dividing difference, image quality-wise. Instead, the division will be in the performance.

*Edit* Eeek, mistook former for latter.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
5,216
Best answers
0
Ah I wasn't aware of that. All the DX9/10 videoes i've seen have been HDR-overkill and shading frenzies, I assumed that was the big difference. None of them included benchmarks to show differences in performance.

That'll hopefully put the 'Vista sucks for games' argument to rest once the DX10 titles start rolling out.
 
New Member
Joined
May 14, 2003
Messages
904
Best answers
0
Ah I wasn't aware of that. All the DX9/10 videoes i've seen have been HDR-overkill and shading frenzies, I assumed that was the big difference.
Nah, both 9 and 10 are overkill on HDR. The only real difference that I've noticed was what I said in the previous post: when the big spider monster roars, all the smoke near it is pushed back in the DX10 video, but not the 9. And in the jungle, the only real difference I noticed was better shadows from foliage.

I think it's easy to say, though, that either version is going to look absolutely amazing.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top