Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Directx 11

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Directx
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 22, 2009 2:19:58 AM

Hello. Is directx 11 going to be that different form directx 10. Also when does directx 11 release???
What is so good about directx 11?
Leave your comments :) 

More about : directx

a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 2:22:30 AM

1. yes of course

2. It should be out this fall/winter

3. hardware tesselation/optimizations/ all that great stuff that M$ puts in. Trust me, it should be noticeably better
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 2:33:40 AM

1 yes
2 Oct 22nd?
3 CS, tessellation,MT, easily upgradable, a lil more eye candy, possibly alot more performance, depending on game and gfx card arch
Related resources
July 22, 2009 2:36:43 AM

uncfan_2563 said:
1. yes of course

2. It should be out this fall/winter

3. hardware tesselation/optimizations/ all that great stuff that M$ puts in. Trust me, it should be noticeably better



Thanks dude. Will put of building new pc and wait for it.
Will AMD or NVIDIA make the gpu or will there be a whole bunch of them???
a c 107 U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 3:14:45 AM

You'll find out latter like the rest of us.
July 22, 2009 3:19:50 AM

megamanx00 said:
You'll find out latter like the rest of us.


I love that you waste your time by putting that on this thread.
Maybe you did a little research. I didnt because i wanted to get a group answer.
a c 130 U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 7:46:55 AM

jdelsignore911 said:
Thanks dude. Will put of building new pc and wait for it.
Will AMD or NVIDIA make the gpu or will there be a whole bunch of them???


AMD/ATI will be first to market with them, by quite a while if reports are to be belived. The idea is that the cards launch at the same time or very close to Oct 22 when W7 launches, im guessing the DX11 update for Vista will be in the same time frame as well.
Waiting to see whats what is the best bet this close to a new launch.

Mactronix
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 10:54:41 AM

jdelsignore911 said:
Thanks dude. Will put of building new pc and wait for it.
Will AMD or NVIDIA make the gpu or will there be a whole bunch of them???


They both will have DX11 but it is expected that AMD will be the first to launch. It is unknown at this point what kind of quantities we can expect but AMD generally stays away from paper launches so I expected plenty of them. Hopefully low to mid to high ranges all around the same time as well.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 12:04:49 PM

I waited on upgrading from my 3 8800GTX ACS3 cards for this, BUT as you can see there arent that many directx 10 games out compared to directx 9 and there will be even less directx 11 games in the beginning and could be months before you see them (or one you like) to get released to test your new hardware and OS.

But on the same note its good to get the latest and greatest if it doesnt break your wallet so you are preparered once these are available.

The other question about the release of directx 11 video cards will be what level of video cards will be released 1st, low, mid or high end cards.

I havent read anything on that yet, maybe someone else here has but you may not want to get the 1st wave of directx 11 cards until you find this out.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 1:31:19 PM

DX11 games will pop up quicker then dx10 games. Many working titles now by devs.
Well i hear nvidia is releasing there fastest card yet then mid/slower. Ati im not sure.
a c 236 U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 1:33:45 PM

jdelsignore911 said:
Hello. Is directx 11 going to be that different form directx 10. Also when does directx 11 release???
What is so good about directx 11?
Leave your comments :) 


this subject has been posted and discussed several times already. Learn to to use search.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 1:50:41 PM

I heard a rumor awhile back that ATIs top card may not be out til next year. Thats the x2 card Im sure. Rumor comes from a good source, same one that said the arch layout meant 800 shaders on R7xx series. Lets just say hes a w1zard at predictions
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 2:07:51 PM

well i can't begin to understand why they would release the enthusiast cards last. It is us tech savvy people active in the graphics market that will know that DirectX 11 is out first, and we're gonna want our cards. Its not like some average HTPC user is going to run out and get they're low end card the day its released. But we would get the high end stuff. *tisk *tisk
a c 130 U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 2:19:12 PM

Last i heard was that the top single chip card would be first with the next down card coming soon after, So like 4870 then 4850 with the 4830 type cards a few months later then as JDJ said X2 cards quite a bit later.
Im speculating that they are doing it this way to optimise the use of the chips. They can bin off the lower performing chips and cream off the exceptional ones for either a 4890 type card or just save them for the x2 cards. This way they would have plenty of chips for the main performance (not enthusiast) cards and mainstream cards while building a stock of chips for the slightly lower end cards like the 4770 or even 4670 cards. This would mean they dont release a card people cant find to buy like the 4770.
just me speculating but it makes sense to me.

Mactronix
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 2:28:02 PM

Ive been thinking about this since I read it, it was just a comment made, nuch like his other one about the 800 shaders.
If nVidia comes late to the party, which it seems it may, at that point, ATI has a lil wiggle room to tweak their highend card. This could be a scenario as to why, but who knows. The x2 didnt show til almost 8 weeks later from the 4870, so it also follows precedence
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 2:29:42 PM

^^ LOLO different words, same meaning, heheh.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 2:51:51 PM

uncfan_2563 said:
well i can't begin to understand why they would release the enthusiast cards last. It is us tech savvy people active in the graphics market that will know that DirectX 11 is out first, and we're gonna want our cards. Its not like some average HTPC user is going to run out and get they're low end card the day its released. But we would get the high end stuff. *tisk *tisk



Normally when a company is going to release thier flagship card ex: 4890x2 or lets say the up coming 5000 series, they have to do several tests to it (benchmark, torture, driver issues, longevity test, etc... to make sure there are as few flaws as possible. You dont want to spend 400.00$+ on a video card and have it crap out on you. So this is normally the reason why they are released last.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 2:54:59 PM

hmm yeah thats true but i was assuming that the cards would be done by the time of the first release. you bring up a good point
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 2:57:31 PM

invisik said:
DX11 games will pop up quicker then dx10 games. Many working titles now by devs.
Well i hear nvidia is releasing there fastest card yet then mid/slower. Ati im not sure.


First off, there are no DX10 games (Stormfront excluded). All are DX9 games with a few DX10 features. And the only game I know of with upcoming DX11 support is GRID.

Remember, there was a wave of DX10 games when Vista came out, and people complained about the lack of a clear difference (Crysis) or performance. DX10 has actually done fairly well, when you consider the fact that the dominant OS on the market can't even use it...

DX11 will follow the same exact path. A few DX9 games will feature DX11 support, while the majority of titles will remain DX9 + DX10, largly due to all the DX10 hardware still on the market.

Either XP dies, or DX9 stays with us. Its that simple.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 3:01:41 PM

but xp will die. it just will. People buying computers after 2006 all have Vista and well, when most consumers pc's just need like another stick of memory, they get a new computer. I think with the average end users pretty much being forced to upgrade, xp will die out soon.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 3:11:40 PM

Any patched DX10 game is a candidate for being DX11 as well. It doesnt have to be from the ground up, and already having the DX9 path covers xp as well
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 3:22:54 PM

As long as Win 7 is the opposite of Vista (so far so good), we will be ok.... If it comes out to be a clone in the longrun then we will be doomed. Specially when MS stops supporting XP, so we will have to cross our fingers and hope for the best...

To this date I have been using XP Pro and DX9 over whatever Vista and DX10 has to offer, IMO the eye-candy does not justify the horrible OS issues that I have encountered using Vista. Bill Gates and his interns better get it right this time or else as far as gaming is concerned the console market will bury PC gaming forever.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 3:44:16 PM

OvrClkr said:
As long as Win 7 is the opposite of Vista (so far so good), we will be ok.... If it comes out to be a clone in the longrun then we will be doomed. Specially when MS stops supporting XP, so we will have to cross our fingers and hope for the best...

To this date I have been using XP Pro and DX9 over whatever Vista and DX10 has to offer, IMO the eye-candy does not justify the horrible OS issues that I have encountered using Vista. Bill Gates and his interns better get it right this time or else as far as gaming is concerned the console market will bury PC gaming forever.


Jaded much?

Vista really isn't nearly as bad as everyone seems to blindly assume. Besides legacy support issues I prefer it infinitely to XP, and have had not had a probelm with it in years. Seven is much the same as vista, if you dislike vista I can't see you enjoying seven as teh look and feel are very similar..

I mean, you can hate an OS all you want, that is perfectly fine.. But just because you don't like it doesn't equate it to the 'death of pc gaming.'
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 4:01:07 PM

I know! everyone just approaches Vista with a negative thought and assumes its bad. I like Vista....
July 22, 2009 4:02:09 PM

ct1615 said:
this subject has been posted and discussed several times already. Learn to to use search.


Why did you waste your time stating that. I didnt look and probably should have.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 4:13:32 PM

why did u waste your time saying that jdelsignore911...
July 22, 2009 4:18:38 PM

Good point :)  Ok lets stop now
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 4:53:15 PM

I guess I have been using old-school OS's more than you guys have been using Vista...If you agree that Vista is better/more stable/less problematic than Xp then i would have to repect your opinion. I have been in the IT industry for more than 15 years and as far as compatibilty goes Vista has been horrible, a crash here a crash there, gets to a point that you just go back to what works with out a hitch..... On top of that I guess I never got used to Vista as far as all of the changes that were made... IMO Vista is just an IMITATION of a MAC OS that went bad.....Some might disagree but I gave up when I switched from XP to Vista on all my company's PC's later to figure out that I was having 5 times more the trouble tickets with Vista as opposed to the more stable XP. I ended up wiping out more than 200 hard drives and reinstalling XP and everyones headaches dissapeared. Maybe some use Vista for games only and have 0 issues, on the other hand some need an OS for more than games and thats when the problems arise.

Sorry for the semi hi-jack, just had to get that off my chest....lol
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 5:17:07 PM

OvrClkr said:
I guess I have been using old-school OS's more than you guys have been using Vista...If you agree that Vista is better/more stable/less problematic than Xp then i would have to repect your opinion. I have been in the IT industry for more than 15 years and as far as compatibilty goes Vista has been horrible, a crash here a crash there, gets to a point that you just go back to what works with out a hitch..... On top of that I guess I never got used to Vista as far as all of the changes that were made... IMO Vista is just an IMITATION of a MAC OS that went bad.....Some might disagree but I gave up when I switched from XP to Vista on all my company's PC's later to figure out that I was having 5 times more the trouble tickets with Vista as opposed to the more stable XP. I ended up wiping out more than 200 hard drives and reinstalling XP and everyones headaches dissapeared. Maybe some use Vista for games only and have 0 issues, on the other hand some need an OS for more than games and thats when the problems arise.

Sorry for the semi hi-jack, just had to get that off my chest....lol


At work I have issues with vista with certain national instrument products that pre date the OS. But this isn't vista at fault, it is poor drivers for legacy products. I have never had an issue with the OS at home or work if everything I'm using on it was made after the release. I understand that many have to use some older daqs and whatnot, so do I. But I never considered it a negative on microsoft, they can't be accountable for making every single driver. When I got used to how it works, and updated my slightly older things I have never looked back. Though I'm sure it irritates people not having 100% backwards compatability, which I think is the reason most hate it, but nothing lasts forever.

There will always be a learning curve though, the average joe will have to learn any new os to prevent issues. There are some fundamental things that are done a tad differently in vista than XP.. It seems to confuse a lot of the user base who is used to win 95 through xp.

Just seems to me there are SOO many people that just hate vista for the wrong reasons.

Anyway, sorry for going off topic. I don't realyl ahve anything to add to dx 11.. There have been dozens of threads on it.
a c 130 U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 5:57:29 PM

I really wish people would stop with this rubbish about Vista, Vista now performance wise in games is near as makes no difference the same as W7.
However Vista when it was first released was where gaming is concerned a complete and utter disgrace. As a general OS it was fine but for gaming forget it.
Microsoft's main selling point to the masses was DX10 (definatly aimed at gamers then) which meant for most people.
1. A new DX10 capable GPU
2. More Ram
This on top of the cost of the OS just made it a ridiculous expense to see some different looking smoke and some nice reflective shiny water. Oh yes and play the games slower. That's why people had a downer on Vista people who used it for work or business should have had far fewer issues than gamers but still the UI differences were at best annoying.

W7 on the other hand needs well not much as far as a far bigger user base are concerned, most people have a DX10 capable GPU probably running on XP, W7 is already noticeably faster at gaming than XP even when running on 2GB Ram which again lots of people already have. So the cost of upgrading the average XP machine to an all singing all dancing DX10+ machine is around £50 as far as I'm concerned whats that $40 ?
Thats why IMHO XP is going to go the way of the DoDo more quickly than people think ( Im not having a pop gamerk316 your entitled to your opinion, this is mine :)  ) Guess time will tell. Im not the most savy around the UI but W7 has given me zero issues when using it as far as navigating files installing/uninstalling things etc.
Hopefully im correct and this will speed up the adoption of DX11 as well.

Mactronix
July 22, 2009 6:15:53 PM

the word from ATI is the cards are going to surprise everyone including nvidia
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 6:17:23 PM

well surprises are good but i hope its a good surprise.
a c 130 U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 6:41:34 PM

rangers said:
the word from ATI is the cards are going to surprise everyone including nvidia


Another reason why they don't need to rush out the X2. When they release the next gen equivalent of the 4870 they should have the fastest most feature packed GPU going. Then they may or may not but I'm guessing they will, have the option of how they release the enthusiast cards, basically decide clocks etc as and when, if there is more performance there then they can raise the clocks or keep them modest and really raise the clocks on a special edition or some such. Another healthy dose of speculation on my part i know but it really looks like the tables have shifted full circle. Pretty soon we will see if AMD/ATI are any better than Nvidia when they have the top end sewn up.
Will they stick to the good performance at a reasonable cost business plan or will they prove to be no better than Nvidia and try to bleed us dry to get the best GPU's ?
Time will tell guys and girls

Mactronix
July 22, 2009 7:01:43 PM

uncfan_2563 said:
well surprises are good but i hope its a good surprise.

Yeah really
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 7:29:07 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Any patched DX10 game is a candidate for being DX11 as well. It doesnt have to be from the ground up, and already having the DX9 path covers xp as well


But i ask again: what reason would a company have to patch a game after the fact? This means getting the staff back together (who are often on other things by then) and more money needed to sustain operations on the game.

And my DX9/XP point stands. We still have plenty of games releasing DX9 only, and thats because its easier for devs to ignore DX10 altogether, especially since we can still push DX9 some more. Also remember, you are ignoring the hardware aspect: Who wants to pay money to add features maybe 1% of the market can even use?

Finally, most people don't even buy new PC's if its just RAM, even the cluless ones. If anything, they stick with their PC's for too long. The majority of users have PC's they feel are fine, and see no reason to upgrade. That means XP will still have share.

Prior to Vista, every new OS had a reason to be switched to: 3.1->95 was speed and the removal of DOS as the limiting factor, 95->98 was speed and stability, and 98-XP (ME doesn't count; it was that bad) was to unify the 9x/NT lines. A DX update isn't enough to get people to switch to Vista, and making its replacement as fast as the OS from 10 years ago isn't the best selling point to get people to switch either.
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 7:59:39 PM

well while i disagree with you on XP staying around for as long as you say it will, you have a very strong point with there being no reason to switch really. Can anyone tell me a premier feature in Win7? (excluding enthusiast things like DX11 and stuff of the sort)
a b U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 8:29:57 PM

IMO Win 7 is a revamped version of Vista(major fixes) and yes paired with DX11 it should be a solid OS. As far as XP goes it will be here for years to come, but will not be supported for long....I just hope everything goes as smoothly as planned. I did have high hopes for DX10 back when it came out, but when I put 2 pc's side by side with almost the same hardware (1 with XP Pro, other had Vista Ultimate) as far as the eye-candy it was not what I had expected.....
a c 236 U Graphics card
July 22, 2009 9:15:41 PM

rangers said:
the word from ATI is the cards are going to surprise everyone including nvidia


they said the same thing about the Radeon HD 2000 series....and they where correct ;) 
July 22, 2009 10:40:32 PM

yes they where well of with that one, but that was early in the 2900s development they weren't so ballzy this late on
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 2:41:26 AM

I dont know the particular final cohesion/product/smoothness on each segment of patching DX10 to 11, but neither do you. If each segment blends, or works with the others, calling in the whole team is a moot point. Some are already doing this, tho its prerelease, but others are patching to it , so there must be some ease/low cost benefits involved, or it simply wouldnt be being done.
As to xp, its a dead end, and moving away from every trend in HW we see today. It has very very limited MT support, the 64 bit version is a disaster, it cant support the higher functions we will be seeing in OpenCl very well, and of course DX11. All these things are where were going, despite what the devs want, so again, its moot. If a dev wants to sit on his thumbs and not advance into this direction, its to his downfall, and may have to move from a AAA scenario, to a lower game house IMHLO.
Theres always going to be bottomfeeders, and if they dont change, others will, and it just may be where they end up.
W7/DX11 already has alot of traction, being preceded by Vista and HW, ummmm since they havnt made a DX9 HW since 06. The vast vast majority of pcs sold since middle of 07 have been DX10 compatable etc etc. xp is dying, even in the enterprise sector, withing a year or so, itll happen there as well
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 2:51:20 AM

“What I do expect to be an opportunity for AMD in the second half of the year is our introduction of DirectX 11-compatible products, in effect, a new product stack. We expect to be out ahead of our competition and we think that it will have a positive effect on our mix and hence our ASPs in the back half of the year,” said Dirk Meyer, chief executive officer of Advanced Micro Devices.

“The new DirectX 11 stack I referenced will be in 40nm, and clearly that will give us an opportunity to kind of regain the high ground even more substantially and hence improve our mix in ASP and hence margins,” the head of AMD claimed.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/200907221556...

So, it appears theyll have a full distrubution of available cards, tho, it doesnt rule out a late x2 enthusiast product, as the current R8xx equivilent 4870 is rumored to be between the 4870x2 and the 295, which would place it in high demand, as the fastest single gpu as regards to core, and leaves lots of room for price point
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 3:01:50 AM

I agree, but like I said I just want Bill and his interns to get it right this time. Would you agree that XP never had the issues that Vista has? When was the last time you saw someone saying that they had a hard time with XP? NEVER it has never happen, its a fact that Vista was not properly coded, everyone knows this, and you know why this happens in the first place? Well its a no-brainer.. Of course all of MS executives were in the bahamas drinking coladas and beer with Bill instead of paying attention to making sure the development of the new OS was finalized properly....And again I am no uber-geek but there are MILLIONS of Window users that are not happy with the Vista outcome...With all the money spent on MS it is absurd that we have to deal with this crap just cause of pure lazyness.....IMO there will never be an OS as stable as XP...it just will never happen again..... Money talks bs walks......that's just the way of life.....And if nobody steps up to the plate.. we will endup with a semi-complete OS. Why do you think MAC's dont crash? Of course there is a reason for that... Peeps that are invoved in making sure it won't crash are paying attention to what is causing the crash in the first place....Not like MS execs that are paying attention to Ferrari's and woman!!!!!

heh... had to get that off my chest...... paid way too much money to MS to have them do this to society!!!! its just not fair..... 55 Billion dollar man with a crappy OS...and on top of that he didn't even create it, he stole it from his BUDDY!!!!
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 3:22:38 AM

Early promises were later dropped in xp, see active x. Early adoption of xp was tough as well. The further we get away from legacy, the more problems well see, and Vista was by far the biggest jump yet, while in W7, it isnt as much.
Enterprise wise, its a much larger problem than for home users, and thats where the gamings at anyways. Adding enterprise tho, overall, also would help Vista/W7.
Heres the biggest thing I think people are forgetting when they say how well xp came in.....compare it to what? What OS had anything near xp to offer at the time? It was a call to arms, and everyone jumped aboard, thus adaption and adoption was quick.
Not so with Vista, as we had....xp, and it wasnt the jump away from legacy we saw with Vista, and sprinkle in a ton of DRM on top
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 3:27:47 AM

In all what im trying to portray here is the fact that we are not getting our moneys worth. Look at it this way.. If you go on newegg, XP home, YES XP HOME is sold for 89.99$ dollars for a single install. Now that is the biggest ripoff of all time not because its an MS product, but because it is an OLD OS!!!! Vista took over and there is absolutely no excuse to sell an OS for almost a bill, If Vista Home is 109.99 why pay 89.99 for XP home??? Well Bill is smart since he knows that users might buy either he will never lower the pricing until WIN 7 comes out... Now if that is not monopoly then i do not know what is.....Its like Ring-around-the-rosie..... hey you want stableness go with my XP, or if you want some mnodern looking OS go with my Vista HOME CRASH EDITION!!!! Either way i keep gettin rich!!!!!! Its all BS and as long as Windows rules the word as far as computing goes this will never end.....

Ok, now i am calm and ready for some CoD4................
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 3:34:08 AM

LOL cool, now go kill something will ya?
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 3:39:54 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Early promises were later dropped in xp, see active x. Early adoption of xp was tough as well. The further we get away from legacy, the more problems well see, and Vista was by far the biggest jump yet, while in W7, it isnt as much.
Enterprise wise, its a much larger problem than for home users, and thats where the gamings at anyways. Adding enterprise tho, overall, also would help Vista/W7.
Heres the biggest thing I think people are forgetting when they say how well xp came in.....compare it to what? What OS had anything near xp to offer at the time? It was a call to arms, and everyone jumped aboard, thus adaption and adoption was quick.
Not so with Vista, as we had....xp, and it wasnt the jump away from legacy we saw with Vista, and sprinkle in a ton of DRM on top


I agree, its just that LEGACY should not be the excuse, everyday someone comes up with a program that works with a current OS, meaning for every person that does this there should be someone who makes sure it will work. There has to be a medium here, we just cant let software cripple an OS just cause of the LEGACY excuse. I dont know i might be wrong here but it is just frustrating at times. My XP laptop (ACER ASPIRE ONE) has never and I SAY NEVER HAD A CRASH, ISSUE, NOTHING!!!! And it was 300.00$ bought at WALLMART 6 months ago....On the other hand I purchased a DELL XPS 1530 gaming laptop with VISTA HOME CRASH EDITION just to see what it would be like to play CoD4 and Crysis, and of course for my office, and to my surprise 1 week into using it just to surf the web, it cant see the wiresless connections available... I have 6 routers at work and nothing... i reboot and it sees all 6 routers....15 min later it crashes for no reason.... BSOD just by uploading a video to youtube... i troubleshoot and nothing.. after 2 weeks I returned the laptop and got a new one.. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A 2,500$ piece of hardware here....2 weeks into the new laptop..the same exact issue... IM DONE WITH VISTA and DELL......That is my issue with MS....
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 3:42:37 AM

Sorry guys, its just not fair, too much money spent and dont feel like i got my moneys worth....like i said I might be wrong but my ACER ASPIRE ONE has not givin me 1 issue so far, I love it and it will be buried with me when I die....
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 3:43:24 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
LOL cool, now go kill something will ya?


heh, just givin ya something to read... that's all....
a c 130 U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 8:17:16 AM

@ gamerk316,

As to your first point,that's exactly what the makers of Dirt 2 are doing so as JDJ says it must make economic sense or they just plain wouldn't do it.

Your second point raises the question that if you are correct how did we ever get to DX9 in the first place ? And as to the hardware aspect well ATI have had a tessellation unit on their cards for ages now and if that's not adding hardware people don't use then what is ?

Your third point is a fair one but where W7 differs from Vista is that there is no reason to go for a downgrade to XP when you buy a new PC like people did with Vista so as far as new sales go there should be a faster up take which will ease XP out of the market.
Now as far as upgrading is concerned let me ask you this. Put yourself in the position of what is probably the main user base at this moment in time. You have a PC with a DX10+ capable GPU a decent C2D or a X2 of around 2.4Ghz and around 2GB Ram.(that's pretty much the average PC about now).
I'm in the UK so I will use UK pricing. I have tested with the RC and I make at least 9% performance gain just by the use of W7 over XP, that was in crysis at high settings and others may find different granted, other games made more. Now at £45.99 pre-release price that's a third what a GPU upgrade would cost me and it gives me DX10 which certainly makes Crysis and Warhead play completely differently Warhead more so. I also now have the access to any DX11 benefits my Dx10.1 card may or may not get. Wouldn't you agree that's not a bad upgrade for the price ?

I think i covered your other point in point three,

Mactronix
a b U Graphics card
July 23, 2009 12:00:08 PM

To be fair, XP hadn't taken off until after 2003 (98SE/ME still had 30% market share up until around late 2004). Thats 4 years for XP shares to get above the magic 75% point where companies see more costs trying to include the lower standard as opposed to simply ignoring it.

XP is in far better position now then 98SE ever was. For one, XP still has the highest market share. Secondly, most people see no reason to switch FROM XP. People keep forgetting, every home OS prior to and including XP had major reasons why you wanted to switch; in Vista/7, there are very few reasons, and even a few reasons not to switch (loss of hardware accelerated sound via directsound, for instance).

Finally, the average PC is still equiped with a 2.x Pentium 4 with a GeForce6 series GPU. I know, you like to think everyone runs a duo with a 8800GT minimum, but thats simply not the case. So for most people, upgrading from XP simply isn't an option, and at the same time, the cost needed to make a PC run well with Vista makes upgrading, in these peoples eyes, not worth the cost.

I'll say it again: No manager in his right mind will allow a program to be developed that isn't XP compliant. As such, any DX effects beyond 9.0c will be addons to the base DX9 engine, holding back the API a great deal. Likewise, with the amount of gamers who are equiped with DX10 hardware, DX10 simply won't vanish (and may slowly take off).

DX11 will come out when the majority of OS's can't use it, and where 90% of the population won't have compatable hardware. And yet some people expect it to take off from day 1. Please people, DX11 will be just like any DX: A two year transition phase (and thats assuming XP users switch to 7, and from what I'm seeing, that won't be happening as much as expected).
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!