I wanna ask you guys something - whats the real benefit of DX10 over DX9 ???? What I understand, is that its more pixels per calculation because of the way the programming is handled (ie. more efficient so you can get better graphics for the hardware). With Core 2, it seems like our CPUs can do anything these days.
If a game is programmed to do a lot of calculations, and you have the chip to do it, then it should look nearly as good. I've seen the Crysis demos, and the DX9 looks nearly as good as the DX10 versions. Yes there is a diffs with repect to some lighting and cooler explosions, but if you look at DX9, the way objects move is similar because they are programmed to do so. The chips can handle it. Those physics visualizations are cool not because of DX10, but because the game is programmed to do them. My chip can do them (and DX10 cant hurt to help it along), but its damn close enough.
I think CPU capacity over ran the need for DX10, and thats why we havent seen mass adoption. When games/visualizations become so intense that our chips cant handle it and the calcs need to be more efficient, then DX10 will really come into play.
We havent even hit capacity limitations with Conroe. What about the new Quads dropping to $266 in July - everyone will get one. I think DX10 has a much longer time frame to go before we really need it. My $0.02.