BF2S Forums Good news for DX 10

Yes fucking win!

Just don't forget that this news is coming from the Inq., so best take it with a grain of salt...or even an entire salt lick.

nice

Bananaman wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Just don't forget that this news is coming from the Inq., so best take it with a grain of salt...or even an entire salt lick.

True, but most of it's news that was fake was about how good AMD was. But still in speculation, we just have to wait.

Actually Vista is a memory hog, ask anyone who used RC1.

Supporting 4GB of RAM should help out a bit in the memory department.

Money. Windows XP by now uses a lot less resources. Remember how Microsoft said Vista would use less RAM? Thats right people, we have been lied to.

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35110

Looks like you don't need vista for DX 10 DX 9L is just like DX 10, but its for windows XP. /Win

Hopefully, I'd like to hear from MS. Directx 9.l is what you are refereeing to. What it means is you will be able to play the DX10 games but I don't think you will get the DX10 effect.

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35110

Looks like you don't need vista for DX 10 DX 9L is just like DX 10, but its for windows XP. /Win

Hopefully, I'd like to hear from MS. Directx 9.l is what you are refereeing to. What it means is you will be able to play the DX10 games but I don't think you will get the DX10 effect.

Yes thats what I'm saying.

Word .

Actually DX9.L is not DX10 for XP they were wrong on that account (go figure, wouldn't expect much out of the Inq.) There is another article on their site detailing it is just an improved DX9 and has no DX10 anything.

and a day later this article was published: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35140


UNFORTUNATELY, we were wrong about DirectX 9.0 L.

We managed to confirm the existence of DirectX 9.0L but it won't be a DirectX 10 for Windows XP. It will be the other way around. It is a faster version of DirectX 9.0 that will run under Vista only.

Last edited by jsnipy (2006-10-22 18:07:25)

DX10 is a whole new ballgame over DX9. Many of it's "advanced" features will only be available on DX10 compatable cards running Vista and will not work in XP.

ryan_14 wrote:

Can we just download DX10 like we did with DX9?

No, because if you read the link i posted your going to need hardware thats so different that the whole way the instructions are handled are  a complete 360 from how DX is now. DX10 is going to make games More realistic than you can imagine with the way its going to handle instruction sets and shaders. Honestly its going to be like playing a HDTV movie.

The hardware is going to be very expensive and buggy the first round, so if i were anyone, id wait till atleast the second or third revision of the cards and wait till they work the bugs out before wasteing the coin. Specially if they are going to have the expected heat issues there talking about.

Oh and OpenGL is going to be a thing of the past. Vista wont have native basic support (so bye bye COD unless you have Nvidia cards and drivwers for it)  ATI wont have OpenGL support neither, according to my report during beta testing of the RC1 beta driver. OpenGL games will Execute, but will look lifeless, any changes to vidio in the games settings will not take effect because of the lack of support.

Now TAHT sucks.

Last edited by <[onex]>Headstone (2006-10-22 18:22:26)

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Just don't forget that this news is coming from the Inq., so best take it with a grain of salt...or even an entire salt lick.

True, but most of it's news that was fake was about how good AMD was. But still in speculation, we just have to wait.

Actually Vista is a memory hog, ask anyone who used RC1.

While I personally have no doubt that Vista is going to be more of a resource hog than any previous incarnation of Windows (seriously, anyone who believes any succeeding version of Windows will have a smaller footprint than the previous version is just plain crazy), I also think that it's not entirely fair to compare a pre-release of something as complex as an OS to a very mature version of it.  Yeah, it's supposed to be feature complete and recompiled without debug stuffs.  Still, it was expected from performance of XP RCs, that performance would be a little worse than Win2k, but aside from the god awful UI, it wasn't that much worse, (if at all) and in some areas performance did increase a tiny amount, for whatever it's worth.

Anyway, I do not expect that DX 10 functionality will be available to XP users, because it's the single biggest motivator to get people to move to Vista they have in their arsenal.  It's been said that many corporations will hold off on Vista, because they're unsure if it's going to screw them over for one reason or another... And where's the Money for MS?  Businesses.  Most businesses and professionals need Microsoft Office, because everyone else use it.  Even if a few people are aware of the alternatives, people are still going to trade files that need Word or Excel, or Powerpoint, so anyone in a position to use those files basically needs to keep updating their Office suite.  MS doesn't make a lot of cash preloading Dells or HPs with XP, but they make a killing on peripherals applications.

They're taking Archimedes on his word, I feel, however DX 10 is going to be the lever--to move people.  How many titles will require DX 10 after Vista gains momentum?  Crysis and Spore are going to be huge, and many gamers will need to upgrade if they can only be played on Vista  We can bet that most games released after that point will need DX 10.  How many people run illegal copies of windows?  They'll all need to upgrade if they want to play newer titles, and MS's stock prices will go nowhere but up once the ball is rolling.

Frankly, it would be stupid of them to give XP users an excuse to not move on.

RoofusMcDoofus wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Just don't forget that this news is coming from the Inq., so best take it with a grain of salt...or even an entire salt lick.

True, but most of it's news that was fake was about how good AMD was. But still in speculation, we just have to wait.

Actually Vista is a memory hog, ask anyone who used RC1.

While I personally have no doubt that Vista is going to be more of a resource hog than any previous incarnation of Windows (seriously, anyone who believes any succeeding version of Windows will have a smaller footprint than the previous version is just plain crazy), I also think that it's not entirely fair to compare a pre-release of something as complex as an OS to a very mature version of it.  Yeah, it's supposed to be feature complete and recompiled without debug stuffs.  Still, it was expected from performance of XP RCs, that performance would be a little worse than Win2k, but aside from the god awful UI, it wasn't that much worse, (if at all) and in some areas performance did increase a tiny amount, for whatever it's worth.

Anyway, I do not expect that DX 10 functionality will be available to XP users, because it's the single biggest motivator to get people to move to Vista they have in their arsenal.  It's been said that many corporations will hold off on Vista, because they're unsure if it's going to screw them over for one reason or another... And where's the Money for MS?  Businesses.  Most businesses and professionals need Microsoft Office, because everyone else use it.  Even if a few people are aware of the alternatives, people are still going to trade files that need Word or Excel, or Powerpoint, so anyone in a position to use those files basically needs to keep updating their Office suite.  MS doesn't make a lot of cash preloading Dells or HPs with XP, but they make a killing on peripherals applications.

They're taking Archimedes on his word, I feel, however DX 10 is going to be the lever--to move people.  How many titles will require DX 10 after Vista gains momentum?  Crysis and Spore are going to be huge, and many gamers will need to upgrade if they can only be played on Vista  We can bet that most games released after that point will need DX 10.  How many people run illegal copies of windows?  They'll all need to upgrade if they want to play newer titles, and MS's stock prices will go nowhere but up once the ball is rolling.

Frankly, it would be stupid of them to give XP users an excuse to not move on.

Heres something to read, specially about Vista activations and all the good and bad things about it.

http://www.overclockers.com/tips01049/