DX10 graphic cards are already obsolete

[sirkillalot]

This sucks

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=41577

REPRESENTATIVES from the almighty Vole have been speaking at Siggraph over the last few days, and what they've said hasn't exactly lowered the blood pressure of many attendees.
Microserfs were there to espouse the greatness of DirectX 10.1, the next revision to the DX graphics spec, which is due to arrive with Windows Vista SP1.
Here's the thing. DX10 hardware - such as the GeForce 8800 or the Radeon 2900 - won't work with the new 10.1 features. The 0.1 revision requires completely new hardware for support, thus royally cheesing off many gamers who paid top whack for their new hardware over the last few months on the basis of future game compatibility.
But these gamers shouldn't fret too much - 10.1 adds virtually nothing that they will care about and, more to the point, adds almost nothing that developers are likely to care about. The spec revision basically makes a number of things that are optional in DX10 compulsory under the new standard - such as 32-bit floating point filtering, as opposed to the 16-bit current. 4xAA is a compulsory standard to support in 10.1, whereas graphics vendors can pick and choose their anti-aliasing support currently.
We suspect that the spec is likely to be ill-received. Not only does it require brand new hardware, immediately creating a miniscule sub-set of DX10 owners, but it also requires Vista SP1, and also requires developer implementation.
With developers struggling to justify including DX10 features in their games (see the recent comments by John Carmack and Mark Rein), they're going to be about as likely to further limit their product's market as they are to start developing NES games again. This is especially true given the incredibly limited benefits 10.1 is bringing to the party.
Simply put - if you're a developer, why bother with 10.1? Answers on a postcard, please. µ

 

[vonwombat]

Well, we already knew there won't be compatibility, but since they said 10.1 doesn't add too many things and devs won't probably use it much, it's no big deal. Anyway, if it's gonna be used on a large scale, this will probably happen when DX10.1 cards are affordable for anyone.

 

[Rolenio]

Gee. I was planning to buy a 8800gts next week. I think I'll buy another good old x1950xt instead and stay with dx9 for as long as I can.

 

[sailer]

Simply put - if you're a developer, why bother with 10.1? Answers on a postcard, please. µ

The last I read was that the HD 2900 Xt series cards were DX10.1 compatabile. Unless the information was wrong, that gives them a leg up on Nvidia at the moment. Other than that, Nvidia has still not solved some of the problems its cards have been experiencing under Vista and it may not be able to solve them, thus the need for a 8900 series cards. But since there are no real DX10 games out anyway, I don't see how it makes all that much difference. For the moment, either the 8800 or 2900 will give a performance increase over the DX9 cards. Maybe its better to think of the 8800 series cards as the last of the high performing DX9 cards, rather than real DX10 cards.

In the meantime, with AMD solving its debt troubles with Morgan Stanley, it might be a good buy on the market. I've been watching it and am getting close to gambling on a few hundred shares.

 

[andybird123]

since when is this "news", there have always been yearly refreshes to DX versions and new graphics chipsets every 12-18 months, the 8800's have been out for nearly a year, it's taken nearly a year for any DX10 games of any note to follow and by the time SP1 is out (with DX10.1) there'll be hardware out or hot on it's heels to support it, the fact that it will take another year or so for any games to make use of either is just par for the course

 

[vonwombat]

Will Bioshock classify as a real DX10 game or more like current DX10 patched games? I was wondering if it could be used to finally show if current high end cards perform well under DX10 or if the G92 will be the first real DX10 card.
Also, last time I looked, Crysis' devs stated that current cards are able to run the game well under DX10(not on maxed settings though). Well, I guess that regardless of the performance of current cards we still need to upgrade again soon for DX10.1.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

I wouldn't worry about it. Much Ado about Nothing, as we already discussed when it first came out;

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/244168-33-8x00-2x00-series-screwed-read

This is no different than the R8500 adding DX8.1, the GF6800 adding SM3.0, it'll be a while before it's implemented, and even longer before it's anywhere near required or a killer-app.

edited link to make clicky

 

[sirkillalot]

sailer
yep price is just about right i havent brought AMD for a while, im into apple at the mo, making money there on day trades and nvidia.

TheGreatGr apeApe and others .......
thanks i looked for the thread but couldnt find it.
yea im not to worried about it, its just that i upgraded my pc last week and got a 8800gtx but my friend will buy it from me when i come to upgrade again. It was still worth getting rid of my olddddd 6800gt plus with my new amd 6000+ i can finally play my games at max on my 24" dell lcd.

 

[emp]

Man.. no need to stress yourself over dumb stuff like this, just enjoy your card. DX10 games aren't even out yet (Those half-assed patch jobs don't count), so we really don't know if it even will be worth our time. It all depends on how you look things, either a half empty glass of water or a half full glass of water, I don't look at my card as a DX10 card, but rather as a graphics card with DX10 support for upcoming titles.

 

[RetiredChief]

sailer - Do not think they have Solved there debt, I think there just trading who holds the debt, May work out better, However ( I may be wrong, but right now I think they are seeing negative cash flow. The question may not be If their Proc is Better than Intel - Share holders ( not all heavy computer users) tend to care more about profit margins, inwhich case Intel may exert considerable pressure on that front.

 

[sailer]

Well Chief, I know they haven't solved their debt by a long shot, but they have decreased their interest payments and freed up some money that would otherwise be lost. Mainly I look to short term trading with AMD, going for gains of a few hundred dollars while playing the market bounce, not for holding long term. An example would be to buy 500 shares when its way down, watch it go up a dollar, and then sell for some fast cash. The current market looks pretty bad, but it also has some pretty good opportunities if you watch it and play it well. I do have some long term stocks as well. Stuff like AMD is gambling money to me.

 

[RetiredChief]

Sailer - Yes that's the way to go.

I'm a more long term holder. My best one is CSCO, Have 500 Shares paid $470, Current value about $13.6K. Bought 200 Shares for $7873 in 93, Splits gave me 900 shares - sold 400 shares for $7404. Should have sold it befor the bottom fell out ( was up to approx $54K ).

 

[sailer]

Yeah, wish my crystal ball could have predicted the fall a couple weeks ago. Then I could re-invest now and get nearly twice as many shares of most everything that I had then. Oh well, it should come back in the next few weeks. Oh the other hand, if it continues to go down, at least I'll have a lot of company among those who bemoan our looses. I am glad that I'm substantually deversified so that I'll survive one way or the other, and that I have no debts and own everything that I have.

 

[ZOldDude]

@ sailer,
I buy/sale AMD in lots of 1,000 shares and hate the fact that I can't cash in the CD due on the 28th of this month without a penalty or I would have bought another $40K worth this past Friday...it is up $1 today (Monday).

The overall drop in stocks in the past 2 weeks made everything worth less,but only if you had to sale them for some cash at the time.
Last Friday or today looks like the sweet spot to buy any stocks.
YUM is good anytime you buy it.

Well getting back to the topic...I don't know why DX10 is "obsolete" when almost everything is still DX9.
Vista is not even really needed to run things in DX10 anylonger anyhow nor is it needed to play or even "back up" the movies or software the it's DRM was ment to require/prevent .

Z

 

[jalek]

Any dictated "standard" that limits developers isn't likely to garner favor very quickly.

No sense in denying the obvious, they WILL comply eventually, but not everyone'll drop or change their in-house tools right away.

With Vista's reception so far there's really no rush for them to anyway.

 

[trooper1947]

Am I in the wrong site or forum ... is this the Morgan Stanley stock trader post ?? Plus the game gurus can't even release dx10 games yet .... why worry ? Will probably be 3 years to see any dx 10.1 games or programs that really benefit .

 

[ailgatrat]

Am I in the wrong site or forum ... is this the Morgan Stanley stock trader post ?? Plus the game gurus can't even release dx10 games yet .... why worry ? Will probably be 3 years to see any dx 10.1 games or programs that really benefit .

Where else is a gamer supposed to go to get stock tips and see rumors squashed like bugs??

 

[sailer]

Am I in the wrong site or forum ... is this the Morgan Stanley stock trader post ?? Plus the game gurus can't even release dx10 games yet .... why worry ? Will probably be 3 years to see any dx 10.1 games or programs that really benefit .

Try thinking of it this way. If AMD is doing really good or bad in the stocks, or Intel for that matter, its usually a reflection of how well they're doing in supplying good computer stuff to us geeky enthusiasts. Further, if AMD or Intel are doing really bad, it means that those of us who own their stocks won't be able to buy their cpus, or any other hardware for that matter. And if the stock market has a downturn, it really affects everyone in whatever job they have, or might get laid off from.

Back to the question of DX10.1, since nothing has been released as far as DX10 games anyway, adding a few things for DX10.1 doesn't change a whole lot from the game maker's viewpoint. Beyond that, just because DX10.1 is a new standard doesn't mean that games can't be developed that are only DX10. The DX10 games just won't use all teh available features of DX10.1, same as how so many games that are played on DX9 cards are only made to DX8 standards. DX10.1 doesn't limit games, it just allows games to be developed even further.

 

[vonwombat]

MS: DX 10.1 'Fully Supports Current DX 10 Cards'
Interesting...

 

[function9]

MS: DX 10.1 'Fully Supports Current DX 10 Cards'
Interesting...

It's a good thing most people cannot think anymore. Otherwise someone would be out of a job that has to do with pointing out the obvious.

 

[sailer]

Cool, Im still using my 7600GT and waiting for a reason to upgrade! Havent found one yet.

I know one good reason to upgrade at this time. I upgraded was that my old card bit the dust. Since I had to buy a card anyway, I went for a 8800 GTS. That should last the present computer until it curls up and dies of old age.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Try thinking of it this way. If AMD is doing really good or bad in the stocks, or Intel for that matter, its usually a reflection of how well they're doing in supplying good computer stuff to us geeky enthusiasts.

That kind of thinking doesn't work very well though for these markets.

The Pentium4 got slaughtered by the AMD offerings pretty much ever since the XP series launched, yet intel outsold them and out profited them. Now AMD is losing boatloads of money, but are selling more CPUs than ever before (in both desktop and mobile). The sale of the GeforceFX also go against what seems like a logical though of market performance versus real world value of their products.

Further, if AMD or Intel are doing really bad, it means that those of us who own their stocks won't be able to buy their cpus, or any other hardware for that matter.

I'm worried about driver support for the VPU market, that would be the big issue, but even if AMD goes belly-up the ATi portion would likely be spun off again as a sale item and remain viable (but a shadow of it's former self of course).

IMO, all this DX10.1 talk, is much ado about nothing and the annoying thing is even the people talking about it on places like DL.tv and such are talking about the SM3.0 change whereas in reality alot of this is puting into DX10.1 features that are optional now and of only slight improvement near term. The change IMO is more like DX8.1, which had the PS1.4 addition and while it sounded radical, and offered some interesting features when implemented in a game like Morrowind, even then, few people were saying 'dang wish I hadn't bought that Geforce 3/4' and instead bought the R8500. Heck I liked Truform more for that in Morrowind, than the shiny water effects.

There are many feature in DX10.1 that will be nice improvements, bt despite their beng no cap bits, it's still going to be a piecemeal implementation, because there's nowhere near the volume of users to force something like that into a game. By 2009 maybe we my see that, but even then, anyone who makes a game that is DX10.1 only and doesn't have a DX10.0 path as well is dumber than someone implementing a current DX10 game without at least a DX9.0X/9L/SM3.0 path. Maybe you won't be able to use 3Dmark08, but other than that this is far from the 'the sky is falling' scenario that so many people are promoting for page hits. I'm surprised by some of the people who are actually fuelling this hysteria.

If you want a wicked deal go out and buy a GTS-320, if you want great performance, then get a GF8800GTX/Ultra or HD2900XT, but don't worry about this stuff, by the time it matters, anyone who bought their cards a while back will already be upgrading, and anyone looking to buy now would be kicking themselves for not buying a cheap GTS-320. Now that being said, refresh cards (also DX10.0 only) would be coming shortly (compared to months ago) and THAT to me would be a bigger concernfor purchasing than DX10.1, and even then I'd say the GTS-320 is a good choice if you don't have PSU concerns.

Of course that's just my two frames' worth as usually and I could be totally wrong, but personally I thinik DX10.2 is da' Bomb.

PS, also if you're as pesimistic as some of us about the G80 and HD2900's DX10.0 performance, then who cares if it's DX10.0 or DX10.1 it can't play, they'll likely be playing the DX9.0C/SM3.0 path by the time DX10.1 games arrive anyways.

 

[sailer]

That kind of thinking doesn't work very well though for these markets.

The Pentium4 got slaughtered by the AMD offerings pretty much ever since the XP series launched, yet intel outsold them and out profited them. Now AMD is losing boatloads of money, but are selling more CPUs than ever before (in both desktop and mobile). The sale of the GeforceFX also go against what seems like a logical though of market performance versus real world value of their products.

Further, if AMD or Intel are doing really bad, it means that those of us who own their stocks won't be able to buy their cpus, or any other hardware for that matter.

I'm worried about driver support for the VPU market, that would be the big issue, but even if AMD goes belly-up the ATi portion would likely be spun off again as a sale item and remain viable (but a shadow of it's former self of course).

Yeah, I know I generalized a lot. Sometimes there's no predicting markets, sales, or share value. And with the markets doing bad across the board right now, I'm having to take a deep breath and concentrate on all those relaxing techniques to stave off panic. Just wish I had some extra cash to invest now that some stocks are going so very low. Of course, that's the gamble; will they go lower, or would they recover? Glad I'm out of spare cash at the moment.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Yeah don't get me started.
IMO alot of the fall and economic health (and Wall/Bay street health) relies on energy prices. We'll see, I just wouldn't invest more right now because alot of EBITDA - P/E calculations are starting to have more influence IMO, and I see alot of correction going on near term.