Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

DX10 FOR XP!

Last response: in Windows Vista
Share
November 8, 2006 10:38:41 PM

:D  Vista is not needed for DirectX10

More about : dx10

November 8, 2006 11:03:07 PM

This was debunked long ago... NO DX-10 for XP.
November 9, 2006 5:33:44 PM

DX 9L. Not the same.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
November 9, 2006 9:58:23 PM

Quote:
:D  Vista is not needed for DirectX10


DirectX10 games will run only on Vista, but Vista will run earlier versions of DirectX.

A new API for Vista only called DirectX9.0L is planned to improve Vista's performance of DirectX9 games

Quote:
Note that DirectX 10 won't be compatible with earlier DirectX versions, and it won't be released for Windows XP. For backward compatibility with current games and hardware, Microsoft plans to include DirectX 9L in Windows Vista.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/community/gaming....

Fuzzy
November 9, 2006 10:25:58 PM

Visit TIGERDIRECT look up 8800 series read under directX10 :lol: 
November 10, 2006 12:13:17 PM

Read above post. you can have a DX10 card in XP but you won't be able to use any of the DX10 features and optimization.
November 10, 2006 2:12:42 PM

And that is why I ain't buying a Dx10 card until January :) 
November 10, 2006 9:18:42 PM

I wanted to get a DX10 card yesterday to start testing. A friend of mine showed me the link to by the 8800 on newegg yesterday via PM. But I thought better of it. My 7950GX2 will probably out perform it in a DX9 enviroment. I'll wait till about Feb. before I start to buy and test DX10 cards.
November 20, 2006 6:11:13 AM

Nono, 8800 far outperforms all 7xxx cards even in DX9.0

I think there's something about this even on the tomshardware homepage.

speu
December 3, 2006 12:17:47 PM

No DircetX 10 for WinXP

Only Direct 9n but Direct 10 can play the old games
December 8, 2006 2:58:57 AM

Quote:
I wanted to get a DX10 card yesterday to start testing. A friend of mine showed me the link to by the 8800 on newegg yesterday via PM. But I thought better of it. My 7950GX2 will probably out perform it in a DX9 enviroment. I'll wait till about Feb. before I start to buy and test DX10 cards.


The GeForce 8800 will outperform two of the 7950's in SLI with a single card, even in a DX9 enviroment and by a sizable margin too I'll add.
December 16, 2006 4:26:19 AM

Most sensible people will probably wait until the R600 benchmarks before looking at making a firm decision on which DX10 card to buy.
November 18, 2007 5:06:51 AM

speedemon said:
:D  Vista is not needed for DirectX10

Where did you read that?
December 12, 2007 3:56:38 PM

Not supported by MS though. Just some good Engineer doin some Slop N Chop. I went to vista, and with a few optimizations it does all the crap XP does. Without 100+ fixes/patchs, yet. I believe some time during 2008 Vista will be > XP. It's that or you can wait another ~4 years for another OS to come out. Which would be equilvent to running 98 right now.
March 17, 2008 5:03:12 PM

actually bildo123 your wrong, its not even close to like running win98 instead of xp, the difference between xp and vista is the same then win 98 and winME, and i have to say i skipped ME as well(with good reason), there is absolutely no advantage of vista besides DX10, and as most of us don't use a legal copy of windows anyhow , really what does it matter if MS supports the solution or not, i rater use a good/reliable/non-annoying OS and DX10 install manually, then running that vistaME on my PC, even if i would run vista just for the games i would as secondary boot, so i would not have to deal with it
March 17, 2008 10:06:26 PM

siiix said:
actually bildo123 your wrong, its not even close to like running win98 instead of xp, the difference between xp and vista is the same then win 98 and winME, and i have to say i skipped ME as well(with good reason), there is absolutely no advantage of vista besides DX10, and as most of us don't use a legal copy of windows anyhow , really what does it matter if MS supports the solution or not, i rater use a good/reliable/non-annoying OS and DX10 install manually, then running that vistaME on my PC, even if i would run vista just for the games i would as secondary boot, so i would not have to deal with it


First, Tom's forums does NOT support piracy, real or implied. That's for other websites. So unless you're looking for a ban...

Second, ME was DOA. Vista is recovering and doing much better in the support department over the last year.

Is a good/reliable/non-annoying OS one that is about to get it's third SP and 100s of patches?
March 18, 2008 9:17:05 PM

xp is just as well supported, xp is an amassing well working OS and fast

vista is even then slower if i strip it down to bare minimum, not much slower but still who want to be even a little bit slower

but not annoying? did you ever used vista, is pure hell
in person i have to yet meet a person who do not agree on this

i disabled like endless amount of annoying features, like asking 5 times if you sure that you sure that you like to click on that icon... but there is so many more complete idiotic annoying features, that do nothing else but make your life hell

and again where is the advantage of vista with current hardware

i guess besides dx10 the only other advantage i can think of, will be when we start to have more then 2gig ram, but currently i'm fine with 2gigs
March 19, 2008 1:42:35 AM

Vista is working great now. This Vista bashing is based on hearsay and old data! On a new machine Vista screams. If Vista is making your life hell there is something seriously wrong, with you.
March 19, 2008 2:08:01 AM

Man, I'm running vista and there is nothing wrong with it. It's better in my opinion, looks better too. Runs just fine. In fact I even ran it for a little while on an Athlon XP 2800+ with 1 gb of ram. Ran fine.
March 20, 2008 3:48:56 PM

siiix said:
xp is just as well supported, xp is an amassing well working OS and fast

vista is even then slower if i strip it down to bare minimum, not much slower but still who want to be even a little bit slower

but not annoying? did you ever used vista, is pure hell
in person i have to yet meet a person who do not agree on this

i disabled like endless amount of annoying features, like asking 5 times if you sure that you sure that you like to click on that icon... but there is so many more complete idiotic annoying features, that do nothing else but make your life hell

and again where is the advantage of vista with current hardware

i guess besides dx10 the only other advantage i can think of, will be when we start to have more then 2gig ram, but currently i'm fine with 2gigs


I think its time you get your A+ cert so that you can understand how to work around a windows environment. Did I have to disable a bunch of stuff after a fresh install of Vista? Yea, Did I ever have to do it again? Na. It's a one time done deal if you do it right. I've been using Vista since November of 07, And I love it, even more so than XP which I previously used for 5+years. Most people that complain its slow is because there systems are simply weak, ranging from 512Mb-1GB RAM and a CPU thats more than likely a single core under 2Ghz 'rating'. Lets face it we are now in the stage of gaming where the games themselves can hit windows 32-bit limit of addressing, only 2GB for one process. Supreme Commander being one of them. I played Hellgate London when it came out and that would use about 1.5GB. This was tested in XP and Vista and Vista did use a bit more RAM but none the less they both used almost 2GB just for the game itself in SC. Not only that why don't you go buy Vista, you can get Retail Home Premium for about $100 now :kaola: 
March 21, 2008 11:26:49 AM

well i guess we live on a different planet, i'm not saying its unstable or complex

what i say its :
annoying
designed if every user would be an idiot
and slightly slower then xp

i might add its even slower if i use starskin + real desktop added to xp
with makes xp look better (by light years) then vista with out 3rd party add-on's

i'm atech and i have 7 computers at home and 4 of those have vista, the ones that are important and skilled user use have xp, the ones in the guest room and kids computer have vista

and this with reason: vista is harder to mess up, slightly easier to install (like i said designed with the idiot user in mind), so its perfect for such things where a lot of people or the clue lass mess with it (waiting room, guest room, internet cafe, kids pc, ...)

but guys you cant be serious if your a seriously using your tweaked PC for work and gaming and IF MS would release an official DX10 for XP you would still use vista ???!!!

i would even PAY for an official DX10 patch fro XP, in fact right now i would even pay $100 i just dislike vista so much

i just like to poit out that its not difficulty to use but annoyance, i feel offended its designed so dumb
March 21, 2008 12:00:33 PM

why cant we edit messages?!?

anyhow i wanted to add that this unofficial DX10 seems not work very well , as of yet no one reverse engineered DX10, they just made a few new subrutines and try to insert the DX10 dll's in to xp

in my experience so far its very unstable as for what works and what gives you a dll error, majority of DX10 applications still run on DX9 or they give me an error

there is a company who is selling patches for the most popular games, but each patch only works with 1 specific game and they $20 each (with the patch DX10 games on PC's with DX10 cards but xp will fun on DX10) .. so kinda expensive on the long run
March 21, 2008 12:26:15 PM

siix, You are perfectly entitled to your opinions, and to be honest I don't care what they are and won't be bothered arguing about it. Suffice to say, if you don't like Vista then don't use it.

By way of correction to some of your statements:

DX10 is *not* a superset of DX9c. It is a completely different set of API's which have to be specifically programmed to. The two versions of Direct X are not directly compatible, and will not be "reverse-engineered". There was some effort to create a port for XP, but (1) the effort of translating the two consumes more resource than just running the software and (2) that project has been abandoned anyhow. So understand that this is NOT a patch~able item. Therefore, if you gave any of your money to that company selling patches for games, please be advised that you have been ripped off.

Instead, what is happening is that Vista includes a version of DX9 called 'Direct 3d 9Ex' - This is a modified API which uses the WDDM (Windows Display Driver Model) and allows Direct3D 9 applications to access some of the features available in Windows Vista such as cross-process shared surfaces, managed graphics memory, prioritization of resources, text anti-aliasing, advanced gamma functions, and device removal management.


As pointed out above - I suggest you return to your A+ certification classes.


{Message edited just to show that messages can be edited}
March 21, 2008 12:42:59 PM

siiix I have a feeling you're not going to like any MS OS developed after XP. I might even go so far as to throw OSX in there as well. I can't speak to Linux but OS are going to be more user friendly with each edition.

March 21, 2008 3:01:11 PM

If M$ didn't put DX10 with Vista only, no one would buy that Shi*%y OS.
March 24, 2008 2:26:55 PM

cisco said:
If M$ didn't put DX10 with Vista only, no one would buy that Shi*%y OS.


Question:How long and what did you do during your time with using Vista?

Well, all I can say is I have absolutely no problems what so ever with Vista and the word is Vista 64 really shines. But time will tell and we will see what happens when that time comes.
March 24, 2008 3:03:52 PM

vangvace said:
siiix I have a feeling you're not going to like any MS OS developed after XP. I might even go so far as to throw OSX in there as well. I can't speak to Linux but OS are going to be more user friendly with each edition.



Maybe true. Even the new Leopard system is different. It's like a cross between Mac and windows. Before anyone bashes me and says I don't know what I'm talking about, I work for a school district as a tech, and almost everything we do is Mac, but I have also been using Windows for about 10 years. That said, in Vista you are able to bring back a lot of things. You can change the start menu and what not to the windows xp style, and really in functionality, it's not that much different, just a few more things. I mean think about how people used to make fun of XP for a fisher price style interface. Lol. Now everyone wants to bash vista. Man, ya gotta live with it, it's actually a quite nice OS once you learn your way around it.
March 25, 2008 2:31:19 PM

ohiou_grad_06 said:
Maybe true. Even the new Leopard system is different. It's like a cross between Mac and windows. Before anyone bashes me and says I don't know what I'm talking about, I work for a school district as a tech, and almost everything we do is Mac, but I have also been using Windows for about 10 years. That said, in Vista you are able to bring back a lot of things. You can change the start menu and what not to the windows xp style, and really in functionality, it's not that much different, just a few more things. I mean think about how people used to make fun of XP for a fisher price style interface. Lol. Now everyone wants to bash vista. Man, ya gotta live with it, it's actually a quite nice OS once you learn your way around it.


Exactly, and eventually once time rolls on the bashing will slowly fade away and everyone will love it and then M$ will release another OS which will get bashed etc etc repeat :heink: 
March 25, 2008 9:04:42 PM

So ito sum up , do the Alky project etc actually fully make direct x10 in XP? or is it just some hacks to do some of the functions and change the Version no to appear as if DX10 is installed.
March 26, 2008 3:42:47 PM

Luke69 said:
So ito sum up , do the Alky project etc actually fully make direct x10 in XP? or is it just some hacks to do some of the functions and change the Version no to appear as if DX10 is installed.


I'm going to vote B) Some hacks
March 27, 2008 1:59:31 AM

bildo123 said:
Exactly, and eventually once time rolls on the bashing will slowly fade away and everyone will love it and then M$ will release another OS which will get bashed etc etc repeat :heink: 


Lolz :D  I couldn't agree more ... Well, for me it would be depend on your need ... I'm using XP32 on my desktop, for gaming and day to day works, and Vista32 on my laptop. Both have their strength and weaknessess. The advantage of XP is any current applications is compatible with XP (that's my reason of still using XP). But then will come a time where all applications will compatible with Vista and no backward compatibilities. Time goes ... :sarcastic: 
August 25, 2008 1:59:20 PM

Think the chaps that love Vista are missing a point. Yes with powerful system vista is fine. but XP is even better. I have 2 gig ram 6750 cpu and an 8800GTS and do not want vista.
I am waiting for the next ms os. I am typing this on Linux. Many PC mags have tested vista against XP and XP always wins.
MS know that if they put DX10 onto XP vista has no advantage at all.
les s face it, the great MS got it wrong, or perhaps they got it right, but with XP.

Don't worry bout DX10 it pretty much just reduces your frame rate. The fact is games such as COD4 in DX9 already look fantastic.

All the first DX10 cards are not man enough to run DX10, just like the first DX9 cards in their time. Buy the time DX10 cards match DX9 cards for frame rate, the new MS OS will be out. Then I will upgrade my XP box.
:D  :D 
August 25, 2008 2:28:19 PM

Your answer:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302495,00.a...


Quote:
It's clear that driver issues in Windows Vista have been largely ironed out, as the five to 10 percent performance drop compared to Windows XP is virtually gone. In fact, the only test out of these three in which Vista didn't match its predecessor was in the pre-SP1 World in Conflict result......


If you were expecting a huge drop in performance as your eyes scanned from the XP to the Vista results, well, surprise! As many a tech analyst predicted, Windows Vista's gaming performance conundrum has largely been solved, and it was mainly due to early graphics drivers.

In fact, I'd been planning to run a few other gaming tests, but the results from these were so uninteresting that further work didn't seem merited. Love it or hate it, Vista is performing far better than it used to.

Game performance, it seems, has been exorcised from your concern when choosing a Microsoft operating system. That leaves a few other factors, of course: stability, responsiveness, eye candy, price, DirectX version, and a few other odds and ends.

It took about a year and a half, but the performance gap between Vista and its forerunner has finally evaporated.




http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_nvidia_windows_...
August 25, 2008 9:33:56 PM

So we can expect dx9 frame rates in dx10 games right. Frame rates is the most important when playing games, not eye candy.
Took DX9 years to match DX7, which is why dx7 was often an option in games.
For most of us DX9 became the option of choice on cards like the 6800. Not really that long ago. Until then I opted for DX7 due to frame rate. So for me having DX9 on full is still new, so still looks really good.
August 25, 2008 11:16:29 PM

Falcon, DX 10 is optional in Vista. It's there when you need it. Frame rates the same as DX 9? I doubt it but that's irrelevant when you exceed a certain rate. Last I checked there was little out there for it worth the trouble. So you make some good points about it's relevance "at the moment". Time will likely change that. The newest GPUs are plenty powerful for it though. Lot has changed since first gen DX 10 cards. For gamers buying new PCs now Vista is the way to go and Vista 64 at that. Vista 64 is hot! Pushing XP for gamers at this point is so 2007. LOL Seriously, Vista 64 is the way to go for gamers. If you already have a nice XP rig there is no hurry to upgrade but the next MS OS is just going to be Vista 2nd edition. No great new improvements will be forthcoming. The anti-vista hype is 99% FUD at this time. Don't let the Mac guy con you.

BTW, PC magazines suck compared to serious PC sites. (with a few exceptions)

Don't put a lot of hope in the next Windows being different from Vista to any great degree. Vista IS the next gen MS OS. 7 will be based on it.
August 26, 2008 9:06:44 AM

FalconMaltese said:
So we can expect dx9 frame rates in dx10 games right. Frame rates is the most important when playing games, not eye candy.


I believe the comparison is between DX9 games using Vista and XP.

Your right though DX10 is much more GPU intensive than DX9 and as for Eye Candy, I've not seen one DX10 game that has impressed me so far. Crysis looks wonderful, but change it to DX9 and you'll see the difference is subtle.
August 26, 2008 2:18:04 PM

speedbird said:
I believe the comparison is between DX9 games using Vista and XP.

Your right though DX10 is much more GPU intensive than DX9 and as for Eye Candy, I've not seen one DX10 game that has impressed me so far. Crysis looks wonderful, but change it to DX9 and you'll see the difference is subtle.


Directx 10 was actually built to have LESS overhead and such than directx 9 and is not in itself more gpu intensive at all than directx 9. The problem lies in shoddy programming in gmes that have used it.
August 26, 2008 3:03:13 PM

*Carefully heaves threads dead remains back into the casket*

Thread necromancy is nasty! :kaola: 

In a nutshell however the difference between good systems in a Vista vs XP environment is moot.

*Pounds final nail on casket*
September 27, 2008 4:27:38 PM

Well I must be retarded because I have all dx10 enabled on XP thanks to the hard work of peeps that like XP, not that dx10 makes any HUGE diffrence but its nice to see the extra shadows smoke ect. For hardcore gamers like myself Vista is a big Boston Steamer fresh off the boat, too many video issues guess that is what happens when you release an OS to the public being the testers even with the service pack there is thousands of people with issues such as drivers vid drivers being stuck in a endless loop just google 'ATI driver stops resonding'. With that being said XP dx10 will only get better after all its just software so it will happen whether your ego believes it or not :cry:  And as far as MS supporting it , who cares if you need help from them then you need a frontal lobotomy :pt1cable: 

WinXP Service Pack 3
Intel Pentium D, 3.76 GHz
4 gigs DDR2
ATI Radeon HD 3870 512MB DDR4
Realtek HD Audio output 5.1 Surround at 280W RMS of power
Hard Drive Free/Total 980.27 GB/1941.16 GB
September 27, 2008 10:56:18 PM

I think you'll soon discover you most certainly do not have full DX10 support. You may have some effects of a DX9 game running in "DX10 mode"... but that would be about it. Yes, there is a difference.
October 21, 2008 2:35:36 PM

too bad the next m$ OS is based off the vista core
October 21, 2008 4:21:51 PM

crystal_tech said:
too bad the next m$ OS is based off the vista core



There is nothing wrong with the vista core - stop watching those Apple ads, they lie.
October 21, 2008 7:45:59 PM

WOW! All this negative Vista comments sounds like me before I discovered that driver issues were holding Vista back, once that was solved now Vista outperforms XP.

I sure as hell don't have any intentions of going back to XP and if I were loosing performance thats exactly what I'd do.

You guys low rating Vistas DX10 performance must be running low end hardware, it does take a descent machine to get the true performance from Vista.

Of course the same exact hardware performance senarios applied to XP when it was released, Remember?

If you're running a machine that barely runs XP stably, I surely wouldn't suggest installing any flavor of Vista on it, you'll be just asking for trouble.

However if you're already running a cutting edge machine and all your hardware is Vista ready, you're seriously missing out by not running Vista.

Heres a challenge for you;

If you're dual booting between Vista and XP on the same computer with exactly the same hardware, then post your benchmark screen shots to back your poor performance claims.

Make sure its the same computer now, you may just be blown away with what you discover.
October 22, 2008 11:41:10 AM

notherdude said:
There is nothing wrong with the vista core - stop watching those Apple ads, they lie.



If Apple didn't see Vista as a serious threat, they'd have never spent the money they did on their adds!

So they're just confirming Vistas viability with their fears.

As you very well know notherdude, I learned the hard way the performance gap had closed between Vista and XP, much to my shock!

But the difference is I admitted it, I didn't try to just forget my statements along with apologies to those I'd possibly offended.

So it will be interesting to see where this goes.

Have a great day man! Ryan
October 22, 2008 11:58:18 AM

Incog said:
Well I must be retarded because I have all dx10 enabled on XP thanks to the hard work of peeps that like XP, not that dx10 makes any HUGE diffrence but its nice to see the extra shadows smoke ect. For hardcore gamers like myself Vista is a big Boston Steamer fresh off the boat, too many video issues guess that is what happens when you release an OS to the public being the testers even with the service pack there is thousands of people with issues such as drivers vid drivers being stuck in a endless loop just google 'ATI driver stops resonding'.


Your DX10 claims are an illusion, and if your ATI driver stops responding in Vista, well thats an ATI problem and if I'm not mistaken ATI has resolved those issues by now, at least I know for a fact Nvidia has!

Vista is not the problem when you have driver trouble go to the source of the driver release, when your driver problems are history Vista runs great, so this BS you're spouting is just that BS, get your driver issues straight and Vista will shine out over XP!

Personally I don't care what OP/SYS you use, just make sure you prove your claims, since you seem to be the Vista attacker here, you sure don't seem to be changing the minds of those of us running Vista now and are thoroughly pleased with its performance, because we know the difference!

But have a nice day anyway man! Ryan
October 23, 2008 4:45:12 AM

It's funny how people can ignore all the facts that state that full DX10 is not even possible under XP. Even if it were, the performance would be much worse in XP due to all the DX10 calls being wrapped to DX9. A game running in "DX 10 mode" isn't the same as a true DX10 game. You get a few extra effects, but not the entire set of APIs.
October 23, 2008 3:24:15 PM

The funny thing is, I bet all the XP fanboys are gonna grab Windows 7, and brag how awesome it is and that skipping Vista was the best move they made. As mentioned before however its using the same kernel from Vista. So if all the XP fanboys really stuck to their guns (and weren't/are hypocrites) they would skip Windows 7, which I don't think is going to happen.
!