Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

YES, Far Cry 2 is DirectX 10.1

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 17, 2008 3:01:37 PM

"A new driver to support it

Our sources have just confirmed that Far Cry 2 will be a DirectX 10.1 game. We know that Nvidia has its eye on this game and that it likes it as much as it liked the original Crysis back in October 2007 but they couldn't prevent the developer to put the DirectX 10.1 support.


ATI will shortly release a hotfix driver that should boost the performance of this game of Radeon HD 4870 X2 significantly and we our sources are confident that this driver should be enough to beat Geforce GTX 280 in this game.

The game should launch on Tuesday in North America and of Friday in Europe while some of the press already got their hands on this savanna shooter. DirectX 10.1 support in such a significant title is a great victory for ATI and we wonder if this implementation will give ATI some additional performance over Nvidia’s DirectX 10 supporting GT200 family"

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

good news for the ones that went with the 4870/4850

More about : cry directx

October 17, 2008 3:16:40 PM

Ha, lets see what will all nVidia fanboys now tell when they are against an ATI optimized game ;) 

I am eagerly awaiting tuesday
October 17, 2008 3:20:03 PM

Does that include me with my hd 4670 ?
Related resources
October 17, 2008 3:21:54 PM

does it only count for 4870x2 or also for the 3650 mobility?

good news for ATI ( they finaly get what they ask for, dx 10.1)

October 17, 2008 3:23:24 PM

yes and yes to the above two posts
October 17, 2008 3:33:24 PM

cyber_jockey said:
Does that include me with my hd 4670 ?


All ati cards that are HD 2XXX or newer. So yes. your 4670 is DX 10.1 compliant
October 17, 2008 3:39:53 PM

actually, is it not the 3XXX or newer?
October 17, 2008 4:00:16 PM

spuddyt said:
actually, is it not the 3XXX or newer?

yea.... sry
October 17, 2008 4:10:01 PM

w00t :D 
well I have oced 4850 and q6600@3.4ghz :D 
I wonder if ati cards will get better fps than nvidia ones since they dont have 10.1 :p 

Maybe farcry2=ati crysis=nvidia
October 17, 2008 4:25:54 PM

Its nice to see NVIDIA lose this one.

There is no doubt NVIDIA has been pressuring companies to not provide 10.1 Support.

Make a better product, don't ask software companies to intentionally make their software worse.
October 17, 2008 4:26:08 PM

and it'll look nicer too! :D 
October 17, 2008 4:35:46 PM

Only one thing for me to say... Excellent news.
October 17, 2008 5:12:14 PM

ok ok ok ati fanboy lololol

well i got both Nv and ati card ... so not a fanboy .. but before talking about the game .. why you not wait to see if DX10.1 really change something ingame ... image quality and perf ... ya it will support DX10.1 .. but .... we will see
October 17, 2008 5:28:08 PM

So it comes out on Tuesday. I was supposed to get my Antec P182 today. I hope I get it before Far Cry 2 is released and hopefully be here by the 22nd. I'll just have to dream about Far Cry 2 until then.. :( 
October 17, 2008 5:35:52 PM

so, pretty much free antialiasing for the masses, that is of course the ATI masses.
October 17, 2008 5:38:59 PM

how much aa? 4x 8x? :p  msaa?
October 17, 2008 6:01:29 PM

HTDuro said:
ok ok ok ati fanboy lololol

well i got both Nv and ati card ... so not a fanboy .. but before talking about the game .. why you not wait to see if DX10.1 really change something ingame ... image quality and perf ... ya it will support DX10.1 .. but .... we will see


I think most of us are basing our opinion on the DX10.1 patch that existed for a short time for Assassins Creed. When AC came out, AMD cards didn't run it as well as the comparable Nvidia cards. When the 10.1 patch came out, performance went up quite a bit. (didn't pass Nvidia as I recall, but the cards became equals.) Nvidia didn't like this, and the patch magically got pulled.

Seeing as Nvidia doesn't support 10.1, AMD is the only one who can benefit from this. If the 4850 and the 9800GTX+ are close, support for 10.1 might put the 4850 on top.

Quote:
so, pretty much free antialiasing for the masses, that is of course the ATI masses.


I don't follow this at all. 10.1 doesn't support "free" AA. (at least as I know it.)
October 17, 2008 6:06:50 PM

this news will only put more pressure on nvidia, not unless they get it removed with the first patch al-ah Assassins Creed, way to hold back game development
October 17, 2008 6:09:39 PM

4745454b said:
I think most of us are basing our opinion on the DX10.1 patch that existed for a short time for Assassins Creed. When AC came out, AMD cards didn't run it as well as the comparable Nvidia cards. When the 10.1 patch came out, performance went up quite a bit. (didn't pass Nvidia as I recall, but the cards became equals.) Nvidia didn't like this, and the patch magically got pulled.

Seeing as Nvidia doesn't support 10.1, AMD is the only one who can benefit from this. If the 4850 and the 9800GTX+ are close, support for 10.1 might put the 4850 on top.

Quote:
so, pretty much free antialiasing for the masses, that is of course the ATI masses.


I don't follow this at all. 10.1 doesn't support "free" AA. (at least as I know it.)



get ur facts right first Assassins Creed came out it was dx10.1 and the patch removed it
October 17, 2008 6:38:43 PM

All I can say is... Roh Roh
October 17, 2008 6:58:59 PM

What i mean by free AA is the rumored 'free 4Xaa' associated with DX10.1, which I beleive either lets there be no hit for 4xaa, or very litte at all. I am sure there are other benefits of 10.1 as well tho.
October 17, 2008 7:16:33 PM

So, the next person who says DX10.1 doesnt matter........ No matter how hard you try, progess wont and shouldnt be held back. Now... on to tessellation and DX11. Its never wise to back up older ways and to put down new ways, without really considering them. I suspect there ll a bump over these numbers http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,663817/Reviews/Far_C... And, for those that cant wait http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,663985/News/Far_Cry_... The new hotfix will available soon.
October 17, 2008 8:24:00 PM

conflicting information from pcgameshardware
October 17, 2008 8:25:51 PM

Dunno about anti aliasing, but in Assassin's Creed dx 10.1 had a major impact on performance due to the reduced drawing passes. It was able to do various post processing effects in one pass where for example dx 10 or 9 needed several passes to get same effects done. If this is the case with Far Cry 2 as well, then ati owners should be in for a treat!
October 17, 2008 8:27:39 PM

Meh,

I'll pass on Far Cry 2 since the DRM install limit is 5.

Yes!!! Another win for the legitimate gaming consumer!!! [/sarcasm]
October 18, 2008 1:02:57 PM

actually, can somebody tell what's the big diffrence between 10.1 and 10?
October 18, 2008 1:29:24 PM

jaguarskx said:
Meh,

I'll pass on Far Cry 2 since the DRM install limit is 5.

Yes!!! Another win for the legitimate gaming consumer!!! [/sarcasm]


Will it be available on steam??? If so, no worries for me! I am running steam all the time, great program, auto patching, game management, high speed DLs.
October 18, 2008 3:12:06 PM

It's why ive gone ATI over Nvidia. Shame on Nvidia for not having dx10.1 and trying to get games to only support the old hardware Nvidia has. I also don't like the fact Nvidia doesn't work as well on LCD TV/monitor and no support for powerstrip :( 
October 18, 2008 3:13:57 PM

*sigh* Why do companies screw over paying customers with DRM? Its like they want me to not buy their game.
October 18, 2008 3:36:43 PM


From what i heard you get 5 installs but if you uninstall the game completly you get that install back. Its the secure rom stuff that has me worried. Spore embeded something in the OS didnt it ?
Question.
Is it true that these security features install themselves when you first play/activate the game, and that a no DVD crack if used from theh get go would mean that they didnt install ? Just something i heard on the wind, dont know how true it is.

Mactronix
October 18, 2008 3:38:40 PM

DRM does not stop torrenting games. A quick .EXE crack removes the DRM... Not very different to before DRM was present. to StrangeStranger: Its funny that the community in your post called DRM Digital Restriction Management, when it is really Digital Rights Management...
October 20, 2008 12:26:15 PM

NewLCD123 said:
It's why ive gone ATI over Nvidia. Shame on Nvidia for not having dx10.1 and trying to get games to only support the old hardware Nvidia has. I also don't like the fact Nvidia doesn't work as well on LCD TV/monitor and no support for powerstrip :( 


Is it NVIDIA's fault M$ changed the specs after NVIDIA was almost done with the 8000 series design? I don't even see the diffrence between DX9 and DX10, i sure don't see it between DX10 and DX10.1.
October 20, 2008 2:13:52 PM

gamerk316 said:
Is it NVIDIA's fault M$ changed the specs after NVIDIA was almost done with the 8000 series design? I don't even see the diffrence between DX9 and DX10, i sure don't see it between DX10 and DX10.1.


I think you are slightly confused about what went on with Nvidia and M$. Basically when DX10 was first developed for release it was pretty much meant to be what DX10.1 should be (people are still bleating trying to get some specs altered).
Nvidia threw a wobbly because their cards couldnt support it and so the spec was dumbed down to suit their cards. ATI had developed a DX10 compliant card (2 series) and so the performance was hindered by the cards having to run a differant spec to what had been expected. They carried on developing the cards and are now reaping the rewards of that persiverance. When DX10.1 turned up for AC Nvidia its rumuored (not sure of facts, legal stuff etc) got it pulled due to the swing in performance towards ATI it caused. Now its here for another game and Nvidia currantly has nothing that can run it. So who is to blame for that ? Im guessing they may release a DX10.1 card soon but i dont know.
So if ATI were aware that there was the need to make a DX10 capable card and did, then why didnt Nvidia ? Trying to say its all M$'s fault dosent add up with the facts im afraid.

Mactronix
October 20, 2008 11:23:40 PM

Right. The original DX10 spec called for a tessellation unit, among other things. Nvidia cards don't have one, so that got pulled from the spec. (10.1 does require it I believe.) I honestly don't mind them dumbing wanted DX10 down to delivered DX10, as it keeps the competition alive between AMD and Nvidia. What I don't like is Nvidia throwing their weight around forcing companies into not releasing DX10.1 games. The way its meant to be played is for us to keep pushing forward, not waiting for a player to catch up.
October 21, 2008 12:18:45 AM

"Sources have confirmed that three DirectX 10.1 games should launch in the next few weeks. One of them, as we reported is Far Cry 2, the first and probably the most important one, and the next two should be unveiled in the next few weeks.


Many cool games will launch in the next three to four weeks and among them two will have DirectX 10.1. we believe that ATI could have put more drive into DirectX 10.1 but ATI sells better than Nvidia due to superior performance of its cards.

When it comes to price / performance, ATI wins against Nvidia in almost every segment and even when it comes to features ATI leads with DirectX 10.1 adoptance, Display port and some other not so important things, which make a good sales point as the competitor didn't have them.

We will try to get the names of the remaining two for you. "

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

thought i would copy this for some that seem to lazy to click on the link
October 21, 2008 12:39:10 AM

Its like DX10.1 supposedly doesnt bring anything because nVidia said so. Well, nVidia is losing right now too arent they? AND they dont have DX10.1 either do they? And as we will see, the performance difference will be noted in all the reviews soon, so, either believe or continue to believe nVidia, or believe M$ and the devs. Finnaly we can say DX10.1 DOES matter, and it IS selling point, and people who bought nVidia cards cause they believed nVidia and others, and want to play these games, well 2nd place isnt too bad, but in a field of 2, its still last
October 21, 2008 12:56:06 AM

yes i know from past experience what its like to buy something and later regret that buying decision , so it will hurt all the one's that believed dx10.1 would not matter
October 21, 2008 1:32:08 AM

4745454b said:
What I don't like is Nvidia throwing their weight around forcing companies into not releasing DX10.1 games. The way its meant to be played is for us to keep pushing forward, not waiting for a player to catch up.


Definitely not forcing but don't plan on seeing an NV sponsored DX10.1 title. Through sponsorship, NV has leverage to do strange things like persuade against DX10.1 patches. What I don't like are those who don't know about what Mactronix is talking about. DX10 should have never rolled out as it did. Inhibiting the advancement of technology is something right out of the dark ages. It all sounds like a strange conspiracy theory because it is tough to swallow that it can still happen. I wouldn't blame one side or the other... I would really like to see the exchanges between MS and NV though.

gamerK, please let us all know how you were able to analyze the difference between DX10.1 and DX10......??
October 21, 2008 2:18:13 AM

Heres what we do have http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007/03/03/optimi...

"So now let’s discuss how our DX10 plan has evolved.



In Aug and Sept, as we lacked DX10 hardware at all (much less production quality hw) we realized we couldn’t simul-ship with Vista in Jan 2007 since we believed we needed at least 6 months with production quality hw. Getting early hw in Oct, and production hw at the G80 launch in early Nov meant at a minimum May 2007for release of DX10 support; given a 6 month schedule and a perfect world.



However, as FSX Launch occurred Oct 17 and we began to get feedback from the community we realized we needed a service pack to address performance issues and a few other issues. So we started a dialog with the community and made a commitment to delivering a service release. The work on SP1 and DX10 is being performed by the same team of people (the Graphics and Terrain team) and thus delivering SP1 has delayed DX10.



Given the state of the NV drivers for the G80 and that ATI hasn’t released their hw yet; it’s hard to see how this is really a bad plan. We really want to see final ATI hw and production quality NV and ATI drivers before we ship our DX10 support. Early tests on ATI hw show their geometry shader unit is much more performant than the GS unit on the NV hw. That could influence our feature plan.'

As we all know, given what earlier DX10 was to be and include, and seeing that ATIs cards were NOT running better than the eventual DX10, M$ call hurt ATI, but like was said earlier, since ATI stuck with the full compliance/DX10 REAL model, they now "already" have DX10.1, which there wasnt ever going to be.

October 21, 2008 2:27:49 AM

Oh, and like DX10.1 isnt important as far as nVidia is concerned, their early release of G80 was NOT DX10 compliant, as weve seen, but was what M$ went with because nVidia didnt include what we now know as DX 10.1.

So once again, nVidia did the pooch, and was temporarily sued for being non DX10 compliant when G80 and Vista was first released. Sure G80 ran great, but it wasnt a DX10 card. Imagine what it wouldve been like if we had DX10.1 then, or free AA? M$ screwed themselves in the gaming community chosing this path, as no one wanted Vista, especially since it was supposed to bring DX10 with all its goodies, but half of them werent there on arrival
October 21, 2008 3:24:08 AM

SpinachEater said:
Definitely not forcing but don't plan on seeing an NV sponsored DX10.1 title. Through sponsorship, NV has leverage to do strange things like persuade against DX10.1 patches. What I don't like are those who don't know about what Mactronix is talking about. DX10 should have never rolled out as it did. Inhibiting the advancement of technology is something right out of the dark ages. It all sounds like a strange conspiracy theory because it is tough to swallow that it can still happen. I wouldn't blame one side or the other... I would really like to see the exchanges between MS and NV though.

gamerK, please let us all know how you were able to analyze the difference between DX10.1 and DX10......??

all right, if you want to be semantic, put pressure on microsoft to put out a watered down version of dx10 just like they put pressure on assassins creed developers to remove dx10.1 with a patch, holding back game development in the process and on top of all that they where pissing of intel and forced intel into a partner ship with ati to get dx10.1 game's out.
October 21, 2008 3:41:19 AM

I think from what we do know is that M$ knows what they did, and allowed nVidia to run away with it. Thats why we have M$ themselves coming out and saying DX10.1 isnt important, or in other wordes , CYA. nVidias just sat back and made money on this, M$ lost money as did ATI. But now its a different story. As all these games get released, the gap in performance will only get wider between ATI and nVidia in DX10.1. Games they may have won in, ones that favor their arch wont do so on DX10.1, and theyll either tie or lose now. When Vista was released as a DX10 OS, it was a lie, and thats why gamers disdained it. Its nice having the DX10 eye candy, but for the most part, it comes at a high cost. IF they has made a REAL DX10, as it supposed to be, those same games would have done 20% better, and everything wouldve gone better for everyone. Now its M$ trying to recoup from the Vista debacle, and with any DX10.1 game, its nVidia losing only more
October 21, 2008 3:46:58 AM

I had a bit of a laugh about all this. When the 6xxx and x8xx series came out, many were crying foul at ATI because the x8xx series didn't support SM3. It's not nearly as bad because they were still DX9 compliant, and its not like the 6 series were monster performers with SM3 enabled. Still, its odd to see Nvidia claim then that they were better because they support the "current" tech, only now to claim, "we'll get around to it."
October 21, 2008 4:00:13 AM

Unfortuanately, theres been alot of hollow words coming from nVidia lately. Their naming schemes, their DX10.1 support, all the rumors of a G350 etc, the "value of their cards" and on and on. This is nVidias perfect storm, how they fair we wont know until May of next year
October 21, 2008 4:26:40 AM

So anyone hear about that FarCry2 coming out? Fire propagation yeah?
October 21, 2008 4:52:55 AM

if its true that it costs nvidia 260$ to make a 260 they must be making a loss on every one sold
October 21, 2008 6:03:41 AM

We know a bit about whats happening to them, partners are leaving. Does anyone know if this is the partners idea, or Nvidias? I'm not sure why they are leaving, just that they are. If this "storm" keeps up, Nvidia will have to do something fast.
October 21, 2008 6:57:34 AM

SpinachEater said:
Definitely not forcing but don't plan on seeing an NV sponsored DX10.1 title.


What like.... FartCry2 ? http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_twimtbp_gameslist.htm... :whistle: 
BTW supposedly nV is even going to bundle the game also. So their plan to keep people from buying an AMD/ATi card to play FartCry2 is to give you an nVidia graphics card when you buy the game... err wait it's the other way around.

Let just hope that the game doesn't suddenly develop bizarre unfixable 'bugs' that require the DX10.1 support to be remove in a patch. :evil: 
October 21, 2008 12:53:53 PM

Evil plan TGGA, but feasible, lol.

Well, it's good to see that ATI's tech is paying off. I just hate when the tech has to go by hand with the CEO's money-rants and backs them down (or in some aspects, just plain kill a "good-tech").

On the DRM subject. Maybe Ubisoft is going to play it smarter than EA on this one. I mean, hopefully they'll say on big flashy letters on the box: "This game contains a root kit for DRM" and explains it on the back, lol.

It has 5 installs on 3 different PCs, and if you "correctly" uninstall one copy, you get the install "back" to you (or the game key). If they can make SecuROM un-installable, they can go for a sure-shot sale. Besides, all the DX10.1-starving ATI crowd has it's eyes on this title for obvious reasons, so that's a double selling point to this game.

Ubisoft better not screw up on this one.

Esop! XD
!