Everyone is waiting on everyone else. Microsoft wants people to have DirecX 10 cards on the market so that their is an installed base already, but nVidia and ATI want Vista to be on the market in order to justify the effort they need to put into it. Now with Vista delayed to January or beyond, no one is feeling any pressure to release a DirectX 10 graphics card. Real DirectX 10 games are probably even farther behind since the target audience with both Vista and a DirectX 10 compatible graphics card is very small for the forseeable future.so where looking at the last few months of this year or the first few months of next year, thats pretty far away a directx 10 card is my next upgrade.
Everyone is waiting on everyone else. Microsoft wants people to have DirecX 10 cards on the market so that their is an installed base already, but nVidia and ATI want Vista to be on the market in order to justify the effort they need to put into it. Now with Vista delayed to January or beyond, no one is feeling any pressure to release a DirectX 10 graphics card. Real DirectX 10 games are probably even farther behind since the target audience with both Vista and a DirectX 10 compatible graphics card is very small for the forseeable future.so where looking at the last few months of this year or the first few months of next year, thats pretty far away a directx 10 card is my next upgrade.
Try google, that is my answer for everything.
sorry but as always intel is stretching the truth, well a fair bit. yes it support dx10 and SM 4.0 im sure :roll: but it will nevere actually get a dx10 game of the ground.
if it does i'll eat my hat but considering it says it willl compare to a x1300. what is the point in making it.
will prices be similar to 7900GT for directx 10 cards? will there be like 8900GT and will directX10 by how much better?
this R800 or R600, what is this? should i wait till sept for it? i'm waiting for nvidia 570sli boards. i guess getting 2 7900gt's is pointless.
How much better will directX10 be? is everything at this point just speculation?
yes but you cannot compare the number of shader between this gen of hardware and unified shaders. so the r600 doesn;t have 8 more shaders than the 1900. the r600 can have all its shader for pixel shading or all of them for vertex or any combination it wants.
considering it could be 6 moths until both makers card are out and a winner found IMO their is no point on waiting that long.
That's a good point. In addition, you're not going to want Vista until all most of the release bugs are worked out, which could be anywhere from 6 months to a year after it's release. Then, add to that the number of games and developers who will actually have games that use DX10, and it's hard to justify waiting that long to buy a card. Buying a 7900GT or an X1800XT now is probably the best option.Well anyone knows that a new card will pefiorm better than the previous gen. Didn't think it needed be said since it already was.
It's just I see people suggest waiting for DX10 cards, "like it was the holy grail", to people, like me , who are looking for suggestions on new builds. It's not really explained that DX10 won't even be in use for a while and that you need Vista. Not very helpful to the uninformed who need a system now. I was going to wait on my system until I figured out I didn't really need to.
All current DX9 cards will run DX10, and Vista fine, just won't use latest graphical features.
I wonder why they didn't call it DirectX 9.1? DX9.0c could have probably been called DX9.1 too, considering it released a new SM. I always thought it was Microsoft favouring ATI for being their XBox 360 partner. By calling it DX9.0c instead of DX9.1, ATI's R420 series doesn't look quite so behind feature-wise.There will be a new version of DX9 released with Vista however, called DX9L.
Getting back on topic, does anyone know what DX9.0L adds?