Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

DirectX 10.1

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
August 9, 2009 3:48:16 PM

I have recently got a pc with built-in ATI Radeon 4650 HD 1GB DDR2 which I think supports DX10.1

In DxDiag it only says DirectX 10, does this mean I only have DX10, and if I do how do I upgrade to DX10.1

More about : directx

August 9, 2009 4:00:56 PM

If youre running Vista with the current SP updates, youll have DX10.1
August 9, 2009 4:08:29 PM

I'm at Service Pack 1
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
August 9, 2009 4:21:34 PM

Youre good to go then
August 9, 2009 4:35:18 PM

HAWX Asassins Creed without the patch, a few others. Gotta love the devs, all in it for the monies. The new Batman Arkhum emodoesnt even allow MSAA on ATI cards without a workaround.
Just gotta lve TWIMTBP

PS And of course, no physx, thats overwith, only nVidia cards allowed from here on in
August 9, 2009 5:32:31 PM

^ unless you stick at drivers below 186.
August 9, 2009 5:41:42 PM

True, just that W7 allows for 2 drivers now, and then they end compatibility = dirty pool.
Even the original aigea cards wont work, not just the nVidia cards.
But, you can still use CUDA, if youre so inclined, but again, that may be just until enough ATI cards are being used by third parties, then they may cut that too.
Its says its open, well I guess their meaning of open is open to interpretation
August 9, 2009 6:01:24 PM

^ well CUDA can be ported to ATi cards so it's possible that if someone with a lot of $ and a highly skilled team behind them, we could get CUDA and therefore PhysX on ATi GPU's.
August 9, 2009 8:09:48 PM

No. Physx is SW blocked, whereas CUDA is not. I suspect something like that wouldnt be legal, but ya never know....
August 9, 2009 8:37:45 PM

Well im running an ATI card and downloaded a demo yesterday which installed Physx, so why did it bother if i cant use it ? Cryostasis uses it as well i beleive ?

August 9, 2009 8:43:17 PM

This is the latest drivers onwards. If you use older drivers youll be ok. If you dont, looks like that physx download is just taking up space
August 9, 2009 8:46:01 PM

If youre using the ATI card as the primary, and a nVidia card as secondary, from the new drivers onwards, physx wont work, its SW blocked from nVidia
August 9, 2009 9:03:59 PM

You may not be able to use it, but itll be there in case you ever remove all your ATI cards, and use only nVidia
August 9, 2009 9:20:43 PM

You know, nothing is stopping ATI from porting physX to their platform; M$ did get it ported to the 360 (which uses an ATI GPU I might mention), so theres no reason why they can't. Heck, why ATI doesn't is beyond me, as people are buying NVIDIA cards as secondaries just for PhysX...
August 9, 2009 9:30:40 PM

"Well for all those who have have used Nvidia cards for PhysX and ATI cards to render graphics in Windows 7...All that is about to change.

Since the release of 186 graphics drivers Nvidia has decided to disable PhysX anytime a Non-Nvidia GPU is even present in the same PC. Nvidia again has shot themselves in the foot here and showed they are not customer oriented. Since they are pushing Physx this will not win over any ATI fanboys with this latest decision.

Here is a copy of the email I received from Nvidia support confirming what they have done.

"Hello JC,

Ill explain why this function was disabled.

Physx is an open software standard any company can freely develop hardware or software that supports it. Nvidia supports GPU accelerated Physx on NVIDIA GPUs while using NVIDIA GPUs for graphics. NVIDIA performs extensive Engineering, Development, and QA work that makes Physx a great experience for customers. For a variety of reasons - some development expense some quality assurance and some business reasons NVIDIA will not support GPU accelerated Physx with NVIDIA GPUs while GPU rendering is happening on non- NVIDIA GPUs. I'm sorry for any inconvenience caused but I hope you can understand.

Best Regards,
NVIDIA Customer Care"

So this really confirms that PhysX will be doomed as an adopted API regardless how hard Nvidia pushes it as a result of action like this."

Its no longer available to ATI cards, period
August 9, 2009 9:33:40 PM

Why didnt nVidia do DX10.1 which is the name of this thread? Kinda ironic eh?
ATI has Havok, as does Intel. Once Intel fully eneters the gaming scene, CUDA and physx are dead, with opencl as another alternative thats bound to grow as well
August 9, 2009 9:41:44 PM

Think about it. If physx wasnt proprietary, this couldnt have been done to begin with. Thats the problem.
August 9, 2009 11:22:01 PM

I just dont understamd. Why should 1 company cow tow to another? This was doing fine until nVidia decided to cut it off, and its also being done with ageia cards too.
To act like its ATIs inability to do it, when they never asked, or to remove it, when ATI never asked, Id think youd have to ask nVidia as to why they cut it off, before assuming another company adopt an obviously proprietary thing.
Theres nothing from nVidia to do the same thing if ATI did such an adoption, similar to what we see with people having the ageia ppus and using ATI cards.
August 9, 2009 11:28:00 PM

HAWX Asassins Creed without the patch, a few others. Gotta love the devs, all in it for the monies. The new Batman Arkhum emodoesnt even allow MSAA on ATI cards without a workaround.
Just gotta lve TWIMTBP

PS And of course, no physx, thats overwith, only nVidia cards allowed from here on in

you forgot stalker m8 ;) 
August 10, 2009 1:57:53 PM

once dx11 go mainstream, is it safe to assume that sm 4.0-4.1-5.0 are the only options available? or we'd still see the benevolent sm3.0?
August 10, 2009 5:13:50 PM

Nivida just pissed me off,, they are wet farts to me now. I got an Ageia card for the mix and match possabilities, now it is all lost.
August 10, 2009 5:19:53 PM

FFS, we hav been through this, why the same *** gamer, they cannot just port it, you know it and I know it.

You also know that it is not the gpu acceleration that is used on the consoles.

As I said in my other post physx does not equal gpu acceleration. You know fine well how it works so stop trolling.

When did I mention GPU acceleration? I was mearly pointing out that there is no reason why ATI can't port PhysX over to their hardware. Heck, NVIDIA even offered to help in the process!

ATI refused to get involved, so NVIDIA cut them off. Sounds fair to me.
August 11, 2009 1:16:54 PM

I think AMD needs to block out nVidia gpus until they incorporate stream. I mean, ATI isnt holding them back from using it
August 11, 2009 5:18:45 PM

1+^ ahhhh, the power of streaming.... :) 
August 11, 2009 8:39:50 PM

They have CUDA; why do the need Stream?
August 11, 2009 9:31:30 PM

I think all the crap about why people dislike physx is for this very reason, and anyone that said this, is right.
It shows that nVidia cares as much as having ATI along as it does for DX10.1.
Oh wait, they used to care, thats it, now all the sudden they dont, but they must have enough to have put the block in their drivers
Another renaming scheme?
Sounds to me just like Assassins Creed, if you own a ATI card, and a nVidia card or ageia, dont download the patch LOL, cause it has nVidia stink all over it
August 12, 2009 7:47:17 PM

Nvidia are poo poo heads
August 14, 2009 11:01:05 PM

Hey Jaydee, why are you surprised?

Look at the history of Nvidia. They do nothing but piss everybody off, ATi, Intel, if they try to stop DX11 games development like they did with dx10.1, M$ and even their own fan boys through rebranding.

This is simply another chapter of the nvidia saga.

To the OP, if you are still reading this, you are dx10.1 ready. You might not be able to play at high settings, but you are ready.
August 15, 2009 8:14:26 AM

Let them get on with it i say i heard a whisper that LRB is coming along very nicley thank you, lets see where Nvidia are when ATI/AMD and Intel/MS start working together and leave then in the roadside.

August 15, 2009 5:46:55 PM

kinda off subject but what happened to intel's gpu they were making. dont even remember the name, started with an n?

any news on that? thought it was supposed to be released last year
August 15, 2009 6:04:53 PM

^ it's larrabee, and no-one really knows when it'll be released.

Can't wait for Intel to take nvidia out of the market, then we'll have only two company's to worry about in the CPU and GPU market.
August 15, 2009 6:36:25 PM

Helloworld_98 said:
^ it's larrabee, and no-one really knows when it'll be released.

Can't wait for Intel to take nvidia out of the market, then we'll have only two company's to worry about in the CPU and GPU market.

larrabee!! thankyou lol.

the article about larrabee was a bit of umm, intense reading but what i remember was that it will be based on a pentium dualcore arcitecture. should prove interesting... i hope that nvidia gets kicked out of the market as well, they seem to be going the way of the dinosaur...
August 15, 2009 6:50:35 PM

^ yeah it's based on Pentium MMX, and it has 32 or 24 cores running at 2GHz.

now if only it was x86-64.
August 15, 2009 7:11:18 PM

We shouldnt want nVidia kicked out, because in the long run, itll only hurt ATI.
Intel has massive amounts of monies to throw at R&D, even to the point of supporting a lower perf product, underselling it, and using its influence to alter the approach of PC gaming as we know it using the DX and opengl standards.
nVidia has alot of influence, and tho theyve already done this non standardized approach thru physx , they are just as reliant upon DX and opengl as ATI is.
The fact that the 2 , ATI and nVidia both hold to these standards will help insure future developement along these lines of standardisation, and make LRB, which is a very flexable jack of all trades and master of none type of component also adhere to those standards.
Architecturally, and with all of Intels backing, money, R&D etc, a radical change too quickly would have negative effects on both ATI and nVidia, and LRB would stand unopposed
August 17, 2009 6:54:58 AM

Having more companies in the pool is always better for the consumer in the long run. Just imagine having to buy your cpu and gpu from only one company.

They would be able to charge anything for it.

Stiff competition is always good for the consumers.