Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

DirectX 10 capable Intel G965 chipset mainboard released?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
August 29, 2006 3:09:07 AM

Quote:
Guys, Is this real? Check it out here:
quote]

I gave a quick scan but didnt not see anywhere where it mentioned DX10. I saw a spot when it said 10x for USB ports.
August 29, 2006 4:17:21 AM

Surprising…..humm Intel never confirmed this officially. If this is true…Why is GMA3000 cannot run most DirectX 9 games like HL/Farcry etc? In most of benchmarks IGP950 outperformed GMA3000. 8O
September 4, 2006 10:25:29 PM

Yeah it doesn't mention anything about DX10. Plus what are you talking about? What does a mobo have to do with DX10? DX10 cards will still be PCI-E so any mobo will be compatible with DX10 cards. DX10 (i think) will only work with Windows Vista OS. As long as your mobo has a PCI-E slot(s) you'll be fine.
September 4, 2006 11:06:32 PM

The GeforceFX 5200 *supported* all directx 9.0 features.

It was too slow to use them 99% of the time.

Just because its a directx10 part doesnt mean it is a decent one :D 
a b V Motherboard
September 5, 2006 12:22:50 AM

Quote:
Yeah it doesn't mention anything about DX10. Plus what are you talking about? What does a mobo have to do with DX10? DX10 cards will still be PCI-E so any mobo will be compatible with DX10 cards. DX10 (i think) will only work with Windows Vista OS. As long as your mobo has a PCI-E slot(s) you'll be fine.


Exactly! WTF does a mobo have to do with DX10?!?! Was just gonna say the same thing...

Quote:
they havent mentioned dx10 but are implying the support by supporting all of the vista stuff

Just because Vista eye candy is implied doesn't actually mean that the GMA 3000 is DX10 compatible...FUD...

By all accounts, the GMA 3000 is the much hyped and poorly integrated graphics solution that's been floating around the news lately...what really funny, is the link to why DX9 games don't work with GMA 3000 is the exact reason why GMA 3000 is nothing other than the latest in onboard crap graphics, I can see Dell GMA 3000 machines rolling into my office within the year, whoopee! I can also see the Dell commercials with the tag line of "Dude, you're getting a Vista machine!" :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
September 5, 2006 7:22:38 AM

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32643

Read above:

It says in summary:

-All programmable shading is handled in unified execution units, codenamed "GEN4 EU". Fixed function subsystems "call" those units.
-All programmable ALUs are scalar to maximize usage efficiency. That means they work on a single component at a time, not vectors.
-Triangle setup and related operations are also done in the EUs. In traditional architectures, a special-purpose unit would exist for it.
-Fog and alpha testing are implemented as parts of the pixel shader, which is expected of all DX10 architectures.
-Math functions (EXP, LOG, SIN, etc.) are implemented in a 16-way "Mathbox" external unit with both full and partial precision.
-Taylor expansions are sometimes faster than the Mathbox, because they don't require values to be in such specific bounds.
-The geometry shader is already used to implement some OpenGL functionality, including wireframe rendering.
-The pixel shader works on blocks of 16 pixels. It is unknown whether that is also the case for vertices and primitives.



Quote:
actually those benches you posted at this link are for 945 vs 965
but 965 has not matured yet
please post the 965 benches that are full featured


I would, but there isn't. There's a newer one based on 14.24 drivers though(rather than 14.21): http://www.pconline.com.cn/diy/evalue/evalue/main/0608/...

On the 14.24 notes it only mentions Q965 chipset for bug fixes, etc. Whether the driver really only affects the Q965 chipset or also the G965 is not known. Q965 is a G965 with disabled graphics features, with similar specs to GMA 950 in paper, but performance suggests otherwise.

Q965 benchmarks: http://www.pconline.com.cn/diy/evalue/evalue/main/0608/...

Driver version is unknown, I suspect its 14.21 drivers.

Quote:
By all accounts, the GMA 3000 is the much hyped and poorly integrated graphics solution that's been floating around the news lately...what really funny, is the link to why DX9 games don't work with GMA 3000 is the exact reason why GMA 3000 is nothing other than the latest in onboard crap graphics, I can see Dell GMA 3000 machines rolling into my office within the year, whoopee! I can also see the Dell commercials with the tag line of "Dude, you're getting a Vista machine!"


Actually, GMA X3000 is more advanced functionally than any GPUs out there now. The drivers don't support any of the mentioned features in the GMA X3000, well... maybe the unified pipeline and that's it. Full support for hardware T&L, vertex processing, pixel shader, is gonna look a lot different.

Enabling software VS3.0 support on GMA 950 improved scores on 3dmark06 by nearly 2x compared to GMA 900 which only supported software VS 2.0.

We shall see, and I eagerly await.

One thing is for sure, if unified shaders are requirement for DX10, GMA X3000 meets them hand down. More than required are unified in this generation, even down to video processing.
!