Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

PC gpu less powerful than a console's?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 23, 2011 2:38:04 AM

Hi,

I dont really know in what category the question fits but here it is.

I am amazed by the graphical details of new CONSOLE games like uncharted drake's deception, L.A noire, BF3, Crysis, Gears of war 3, God of war 3 etc.

What i dont understand is that how come consoles' dx9 gpus (e.g ps3 gpu geforce 7800 ) are able to show such remarkable shading details (seemingly shader 4.0 or 5.0 quality in latest uncharted ), motion blur effects and process other graphical effects which, if rendered on PC, would require a modern gpu like geforce 560ti to do the same.

maybe i am missing something here but what i can imagine is that my 7800GT on PC would not be able to run uncharted or god of war 3 with same quality and speed as they do on a ps3. I am sure the game would not even start. Like Metro 2033 would not start on my ati 1950 Pro which was faster than a 7800GT. Although metro 2033 looks great on Xbox360. And Metro last light is coming for PS3 which has some sick graphics which would easily devour a single poor GTX 560 ti while still manage to show its colors on consoles.

This really bugs me. Even if the games are a tad toned down on consoles why cant we tone down all the modern games and run them on our old DX9 gpus? or is it some gaming industry conspiracy that they want us to buy new gpus every year?

I want to clear my mind on this one. All that i stated above is my opinion which might be wrong. Please respond with your thoughts. Welcome!

More about : gpu powerful console

a c 201 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 2:44:05 AM

Its amazing what you can do when you know exactly what GPU it will be running on, you can optimize your software for it and compile it in the optimum way for all the nuances of the hardware, while PC games must be written in a way that is friendly with a variety of hardware. Its also important to note that most games on consoles are running at much lower resolutions, many 360 and PS3 games are only 720p which is much easier on a GPU than running a PC game at 1920x1200, only about 40% as many pixels for the console to deal with.


You can tone down games to still run them on your old DX9 GPU, its called 1280x1024 resolution and lowest settings for many games, but ones with DX10 only you are out of luck, but if they keep providing backwards compatibility there is little incentive to upgrade and software gets stuck in a rut where it can't move forward or it risks alienating its customer base so they try to only alienate a few at a time so people upgrade and they still make money. You will notice there are no DX11 only games out yet, they all have a DX10 or DX9 path to support older systems so i would say we still tone them down to run on old GPUs.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 2:48:26 AM

Exactly as stated above. Software was written to look good on exactly that hardware.
Related resources
October 23, 2011 2:51:38 AM

thats because todays most of the pc games are console optimised . Also the console API is more optimised than the pc's . The game companies think that they lose a lot due to pc piracy. But they are ignoring the illegal downloading of console games. So the game developers optimise the games for only consoles not for pcs. So we get a good pc game with a crap graphics even we have more horsepower than the console.
a c 172 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 2:52:58 AM

I dont know what console's you are looking at, but my PS3's graphics are poop compared to my PC, and I dont have a very high end PC. One major thing that is lacking in console games is TEXTURE DETAIL and DRAW DISTANCE. These are kept to a minimum to speed things up and save RAM, which consoles have a lack of. And as said above, games are coded directly for the hardware, no need to go through direct X, load the game on top of windows, virus scanners etc. and no need to code the game to work on 100 different types of video cards and cpu's, which all makes the PC less efficient.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 2:58:13 AM

I was just given an xbox 360. (my friend knows I would never buy one) Even compared to my 5770 the 360 looks bland and blocky.
October 23, 2011 3:06:51 AM

what about uncharted shader details? in the latest installment? i can see the details on the face of drake. I can imagine a console gpu might not be powerful and things need to be toned down but how come it show off even a pixel which looks like it comes straight from shader 4.0 model?

I dont own a ps3 or xbox. i have a good pc. but i have seen gameplay videos of uncharted and GOW 3 and they look stunning! i dont know how dull can they look in real if they look jawdropping in gameplay videos.

@hunter315
and Witcher 2 was a pc exclusive at first and it doesnot support dx9. it needs 8800GT minimum. If u lower the settings the game starts to look crap but still this crap doesnot work on a dx9 gpu.
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 3:09:23 AM

Yeah, consoles games basically run at 720p(and often not that) at graphical settings that would equivalent to medium/low on PC.
a c 201 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 3:13:32 AM

Its amazing how much better things look when you scale them down to the size of a youtube video, and are they actual game play or prerendered cutscenes? Cutscenes are always of higher quality as they aren't rendered on the spot and take very little GPU power to show. Once you expand those games across a 50" TV and they are only running at 1080P at best they have to be much grainier than a PC running at 1080P on a 24" screen, the pixels on the TV are just so much larger.

Shader models are a standardized model so that games know if a card has X shader model it can do Y, but with consoles you know what console it is so you already know exactly what it can do, and can use interesting combinations of commands to get higher quality graphics out of a weaker card that wouldn't be doable for something made to run on multiple different cards. Almost all of the higher level commands in the newer versions of directX are simply automated routines that execute many simpler commands that would be hard for a person to code in repeatedly, never underestimate what can be accomplished with simple commands and a lot of creativity.


Edit: As for the comment about witcher 2, allow me to sum it up this way, "Oh noes, my beautiful brand new game requires that i have a card newer than four years old! Oh nooooooo!!!!" Seriously, if you are planning to run brand new games and you are still 2 versions of DirectX behind because you have a 4 year old card thats a different problem all together than optimization. The latest steam HW survey shows only 21.24% of gamers using a system that does not support at least DX 10, thats a fairly small number and new games likely don't affect most of them.
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
October 23, 2011 3:17:43 AM


jyjjy said:
Yeah, consoles games basically run at 720p(and often not that) at graphical settings that would equivalent to medium/low on PC.


Even if u scale down mafia 2 to 640x480. it still would not work on dx9. new games dont even start on dx9 because they need shader model 4.0. Crysis 2 utlized dx9 and still it wont run on a dx9 gpu. later the dx11 patch came through and the game looked even prettier. But the game was still pretty on dx9 and all the time i was thinking it was dx11!

so if dx9 could do so better why other games which look less polished than crysis 2 demand a dx10 or dx11 card. so i am guessing uncharted and GOW3 detail can be produced on a pc dx9 gpu if written specifically for pc? Atleast as a test?

Edit:
@hunter315
i have a GTX560ti, 8Gb ram, corei5 2500K. but i just wanted to know why certain games looked so good on dx9 and others would the same on a higher dx version.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 3:17:45 AM

If we had PC games that were as optimized as consoles games were today on a high-end PC(580SLI) the graphics would be at Avatar level quality. Maybe one day soon.......
October 23, 2011 3:27:49 AM

Swolern said:
If we had PC games that were as optimized as consoles games were today on a high-end PC(580SLI) the graphics would be at Avatar level quality. Maybe one day soon.......


Is a pc exclusive game not a game optimized for pc? if yes then some pc exclusive games have been out and they did not look any special. if pc's can do avatar then its a shame we dont even have a demo which we can run to test our GPU capability. i have tried 3D mark latest version but ofcourse its not avatar quality.

but if games will not be specifically written for pc , it means we will forever be upgrading our gpus. dx10,dx11, possibly dx12, dx13 and at the same time not taking full advantage of their powers.. thats amazingly disturbing.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 3:56:49 AM

henrytowns said:
Is a pc exclusive game not a game optimized for pc? if yes then some pc exclusive games have been out and they did not look any special. if pc's can do avatar then its a shame we dont even have a demo which we can run to test our GPU capability. i have tried 3D mark latest version but ofcourse its not avatar quality.

but if games will not be specifically written for pc , it means we will forever be upgrading our gpus. dx10,dx11, possibly dx12, dx13 and at the same time not taking full advantage of their powers.. thats amazingly disturbing.


It's specific to PC, but there are endless numbers of PC configurations and architect types so it is impossible to fully optimize like the console have done with only two specific types. Plus they have had 6+ years to work on and perfect their graphical engine and code on one or two specific systems. My GTX 590 graphics still looks way better though. :D 
a c 201 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 3:56:55 AM

You will never have games optimized for PC hardware, thats why hardware abstraction layers and APIs like directX exist. It keeps programmers from having to compile 200 different versions of their code so it supports all the hardware combinations. DirectX comes with overhead in itself, and in the drivers that convert the DX commands into hardware level commands for the cards, but your only other alternative would be recompiling every game every time you made a hardware change which would take weeks for each one. Consoles don't have drivers, APIs or hardware abstraction layers because there is only a single hardware combination for each console so it can be compiled directly into code for the hardware rather than code that will be converted by another program into hardware instructions at runtime.


If they were to optimize a game for PC it would only work on a very few very specific hardware combinations(a dozen at most), any deviations from that would cause errors, but the lack of the drivers needing to convert to instructions would probably net another 10% onto the performance.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 4:17:04 AM

would it even be possible to "optimize" a game for a pc without completely bypassing Windows, which itself has to accommodate many different hardware configurations.
October 23, 2011 4:20:56 AM

henrytowns said:
if yes then some pc exclusive games have been out and they did not look any special.

You seem to forget that Crysis came out 4 years ago that was just released on console a few days ago, and even after an extra 4 years of learning the consoles inside and out, they still can't make it look as good.
Games like Crysis are an example of a good PC exclusive. Another one is Witcher 2; yes, it was released on consoles, but have you ever seen comparisons? My 6950(soon to be 2 6950's) can make that game look a billion times better than on console, AND it's just directx 9.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 4:33:17 AM

^yes Witcher 2 at max settings with uber-sampling @ 60 FPS is absolutely gorgeous, if u can run it.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 4:40:52 AM

KingOtaku said:
You seem to forget that Crysis came out 4 years ago that was just released on console a few days ago, and even after an extra 4 years of learning the consoles inside and out, they still can't make it look as good.
Games like Crysis are an example of a good PC exclusive. Another one is Witcher 2; yes, it was released on consoles, but have you ever seen comparisons? My 6950(soon to be 2 6950's) can make that game look a billion times better than on console, AND it's just directx 9.

While your point is valid, keep in mind many people believe that Crysis 1 was a very inefficiently programmed game which makes the thought of a well-programed Crysis scary :D 
a c 217 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 4:44:23 AM

henrytowns said:

@hunter315
and Witcher 2 was a pc exclusive at first and it doesnot support dx9. it needs 8800GT minimum. If u lower the settings the game starts to look crap but still this crap doesnot work on a dx9 gpu.


I'm confused. The Witcher 2 is a Dx9 exclusive game. That is all that is supported. Where did you read it's not Dx9?
October 23, 2011 4:46:54 AM

uncfan_2563 said:
While your point is valid, keep in mind many people believe that Crysis 1 was a very inefficiently programmed game which makes the thought of a well-programed Crysis scary :D 

True...I guess that might not have been the best example! Regardless, there are plenty of games that are made for PC and look great. I mean, go on youtube and search "Robbaz Comparison" to see the dozens of games that look gorgeous on PC
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 4:59:39 AM

jyjjy said:
Yeah, consoles games basically run at 720p(and often not that) at graphical settings that would equivalent to medium/low on PC.


No joke most gams list it and even the bargain bin at the local big box and most of them were 1080P. ( I didn't buy any)
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 5:03:28 AM

KingOtaku said:
True...I guess that might not have been the best example! Regardless, there are plenty of games that are made for PC and look great. I mean, go on youtube and search "Robbaz Comparison" to see the dozens of games that look gorgeous on PC


Oh there is no bout that PC graphics look amazing and can topple any console game. But if optimized like consoles are then the graphics would blow our minds. I would pay top dollar for just one game optimized for my 590 and my specific PC setup. Top dollar I tell you!! :bounce: 
October 23, 2011 5:22:21 AM

Swolern said:
Oh there is no bout that PC graphics look amazing and can topple any console game. But if optimized like consoles are then the graphics would blow our minds. I would pay top dollar for just one game optimized for my 590 and my specific PC setup. Top dollar I tell you!! :bounce: 

Not JUST a dollar, but a TOP dollar! That's like...worth a billion times a normal dollar, right?
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 5:25:39 AM

spentshells said:
No joke most gams list it and even the bargain bin at the local big box and most of them were 1080P. ( I didn't buy any)

Console games that run at "1080p" are upscaled after actually being rendered at a lower resolution.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 5:28:31 AM

I play alot of dirt (2 and 3) on PC, and while I was at futureshop one day i decided to try it on the xbox360 on a full HD tv.
First thing I noticed, the edges were very jaggedy, looked like there was definitely no anti-aliasing being used.
2nd thing I noticed was the frame rate... it was seriously hampering the gameplay compared to my PC which runs it at 50-60fps, this was probably close to 30fps.

Same two above problems I noticed while playing GTA4 at a friends house on his PS3, it was so laggy I couldnt even play it, 20-35 fps it seemed. Another game I play alot of is Street fighter 4, besides taking several times longer to load on my xbox than on my pc, it is much less smooth even from far when compared to playing it on pc.

I own an xbox360, play halo, and various games now and then. I connected it to my computer monitor to play halo once, and at the same distance that I sit to my PC games I played halo reach. It looked absolutely terrible, like several times crappier than on my 42" tv and sitting far. Both were running at 1080p (actually tv is only at 1080i...)
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 5:53:51 AM

jyjjy said:
Console games that run at "1080p" are upscaled after actually being rendered at a lower resolution.

I find it hard to believe gears of war was upscaled.
But i don't know much about it.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 6:20:30 AM



I looked at that page and what I saw was this.

Some games let the GPU handle the scaling to 1080p directly from the arbitrary resolution. e.g. MotoGP 06, PGR3, ESIV:o ...

Kinda sounds like it varies on the game.

The smiley was on that website.
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 6:26:43 AM

You need to scroll down for the list of rendering resolutions.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 6:33:20 AM

amirp said:
I play alot of dirt (2 and 3) on PC, and while I was at futureshop one day i decided to try it on the xbox360 on a full HD tv.
First thing I noticed, the edges were very jaggedy, looked like there was definitely no anti-aliasing being used.
2nd thing I noticed was the frame rate... it was seriously hampering the gameplay compared to my PC which runs it at 50-60fps, this was probably close to 30fps.

Same two above problems I noticed while playing GTA4 at a friends house on his PS3, it was so laggy I couldnt even play it, 20-35 fps it seemed. Another game I play alot of is Street fighter 4, besides taking several times longer to load on my xbox than on my pc, it is much less smooth even from far when compared to playing it on pc.

I own an xbox360, play halo, and various games now and then. I connected it to my computer monitor to play halo once, and at the same distance that I sit to my PC games I played halo reach. It looked absolutely terrible, like several times crappier than on my 42" tv and sitting far. Both were running at 1080p (actually tv is only at 1080i...)


yeah and it's really something that hits you once you quit playing your console for a while and the lack of any AA in most console games starts to make your eyes hurt. You've got to know what's out there to pick up on console graphics being a lot worse, I for one have a ton of friends who can't tell the difference. It's not really there fault and they're not stupid, I just don't like them as much now :p 
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 6:38:14 AM

uncfan_2563 said:
yeah and it's really something that hits you once you quit playing your console for a while and the lack of any AA in most console games starts to make your eyes hurt. You've got to know what's out there to pick up on console graphics being a lot worse, I for one have a ton of friends who can't tell the difference. It's not really there fault and they're not stupid, I just don't like them as much now :p 



hahah yea, I hadn't touched my xbox in a while, mostly because it sounded like it was dying - which it has now damn that red ring nonsense. So when I went back to it everything was crappy to me.

Another really really good example I can come up with is call of duty, i played it on ps3 full 1080p graphics lol my friend played it up so hard, he boots it up and it just looks like crap. When I laughed he shows me borderlands, and portal 2 both of which Ive also played on pc, and both of which I laughed at too. Next day I showed him crysis (a pretty damn old game now) on my pc along with some others.

Long story short I built him a pc the day after. And keep in mind all I have is a 6850... nothing fancy at all.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 7:15:19 AM

I guess if you are 12 yrs old and Mom and Dad are buying your stuff.... XBOX is fantastic!
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 7:45:36 AM

uncfan_2563 said:
yeah and it's really something that hits you once you quit playing your console for a while and the lack of any AA in most console games starts to make your eyes hurt. You've got to know what's out there to pick up on console graphics being a lot worse, I for one have a ton of friends who can't tell the difference. It's not really there fault and they're not stupid, I just don't like them as much now :p 


Lol. Show them BF3 when it comes out. I played the PC beta at highest settings and was gorgeous. Then I played it on ps3 and I said WTF! it looked horrible compared to PC, I would compare it to a downgrade from PS3 to PS2. And PC ultra settings won't be available until Oct 25 at 0200am. I'll be there. My BF3 is already downloaded and waiting. Dammit hurry up!
October 23, 2011 1:17:22 PM

bystander said:
I'm confused. The Witcher 2 is a Dx9 exclusive game. That is all that is supported. Where did you read it's not Dx9?


Sorry. i checked now its dx9. but i had guessed it was dx10 because the minimum requirement was 8800GT which is a dx10 card. http://gamesystemrequirements.com/games.php?id=1006

so i thought if it was dx9 they must have listed 7800GT or 1950pro or something.

so THIS is what confuses me and thats why i posted the question! that if DX9 still can do wonders why we have dx10, dx11 and it is continuing without taking full advantage of dx9! why new games are coming up and they dont run on an old DX9 gpu? they need PS version 4.0 and stuff. and no dx9 gpu has PS 4.0. they all have 3.0. i did not try witcher 2 myself on a dx9 gpu but it has glitches on the 1950 pro. http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/975399-/59191450
Should it not render smoothly on a low setting? or atleast when in a tent and there is less animation to render?

if crysis 2 can produce such graphical detail on dx9 why other games which look the same demand a dx10 or dx 11gpu. like Mafia 2. ofcourse that is because they use some features of dx10. but then again why not put develop in pure dx9 and dont make us buy new gpus every year? we should only need a more powerful dx9 gpu for most games and not a new dx10 or dx11 gpu for every other game coming out.

I know dx10 and dx11 can do wonders but really there are a few games which truly utilize them. i played crysis 2 thinking it looked so beautiful BECAUSE it was dx11 only to realise it was dx9! i think we are just forced to buy newer gpus.


a c 217 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 4:09:21 PM

henrytowns said:
Sorry. i checked now its dx9. but i had guessed it was dx10 because the minimum requirement was 8800GT which is a dx10 card. http://gamesystemrequirements.com/games.php?id=1006

so i thought if it was dx9 they must have listed 7800GT or 1950pro or something.

so THIS is what confuses me and thats why i posted the question! that if DX9 still can do wonders why we have dx10, dx11 and it is continuing without taking full advantage of dx9! why new games are coming up and they dont run on an old DX9 gpu? they need PS version 4.0 and stuff. and no dx9 gpu has PS 4.0. they all have 3.0. i did not try witcher 2 myself on a dx9 gpu but it has glitches on the 1950 pro. http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/975399-/59191450
Should it not render smoothly on a low setting? or atleast when in a tent and there is less animation to render?

if crysis 2 can produce such graphical detail on dx9 why other games which look the same demand a dx10 or dx 11gpu. like Mafia 2. ofcourse that is because they use some features of dx10. but then again why not put develop in pure dx9 and dont make us buy new gpus every year? we should only need a more powerful dx9 gpu for most games and not a new dx10 or dx11 gpu for every other game coming out.

I know dx10 and dx11 can do wonders but really there are a few games which truly utilize them. i played crysis 2 thinking it looked so beautiful BECAUSE it was dx11 only to realise it was dx9! i think we are just forced to buy newer gpus.


I'll try to break this down for you.

Currently, there are no games which require more than Dx9. All the games which offer Dx10 and Dx11, also offer a Dx9 version at the same time. This is done so that people with older hardware and Windows XP can play the game.

They choose to create DX11 games because they have some special effects which cannot be done effectively with previous versions. They can also use DX11 to improve performance with the same visual effects.

The minimum requirements to play a game is not always about what shader model they use, it's more often an indication of how much power is needed to play the game smoothly.

Some day in the future, you'll find the dev's finally abandon Windows XP and when that day comes, the minimum DX version will increase to DX11 or what ever the vast majority of people have available to them.
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 7:20:38 PM

henrytowns said:
i think we are just forced to buy newer gpus.
I don't know what you are talking about. No one is forcing you to buy a new GPU. As far as I'm aware the number of major games that require anything above DX9 can be counted on one hand. It sounds a lot like you are stating a problem that doesn't exist "they force us to by new cards!" then complaining that it isn't actually true. Very odd.
a c 217 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 7:59:01 PM

jyjjy said:
I don't know what you are talking about. No one is forcing you to buy a new GPU. As far as I'm aware the number of major games that require anything above DX9 can be counted on one hand. It sounds a lot like you are stating a problem that doesn't exist "they force us to by new cards!" then complaining that it isn't actually true. Very odd.


Are there any games that "require" anything above Dx9. I'm not aware of any.
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 8:08:25 PM

Just Cause 2 is the most notable. There's also Stormrise, Renegade Ops and Shattered Horizon.
October 23, 2011 9:28:04 PM

jyjjy said:
I don't know what you are talking about. No one is forcing you to buy a new GPU. As far as I'm aware the number of major games that require anything above DX9 can be counted on one hand. It sounds a lot like you are stating a problem that doesn't exist "they force us to by new cards!" then complaining that it isn't actually true. Very odd.

well i had a 1950 pro and i used to play all my dear games on it and one day one by one all good games started to die on it. metro 2033, just cause 2, Chronicles of Riddick dark Athena (if i remember correctly) etc. mostly because of shader problem. what i wrote up there meant that developers dont fully utilize dx9 and use some of the features of dx10 and dx11 which end up games requiring a good gpu. but if they do a really good job they can optimize the game for dx9 and still make it good.

one good example is Dirt 2. i did not imagine it would ever work on my x1950 pro. but to my surprise, it worked on max settings on 1280x1024. with 4xAA. Now i have a GTX560ti and all games seem to work ok. but crysis 2 was my surprise. it looked stunning and yet it was DX9 which makes me wonder why some games that dont have a good gameplay or story still has some dx10 or dx11 elements. The developers thus force us (IMO) to buy a newer gpu only for little bells and whistles while offering nothing great in return.
October 23, 2011 9:28:55 PM

bystander said:
I'll try to break this down for you.

Currently, there are no games which require more than Dx9. All the games which offer Dx10 and Dx11, also offer a Dx9 version at the same time. This is done so that people with older hardware and Windows XP can play the game.

They choose to create DX11 games because they have some special effects which cannot be done effectively with previous versions. They can also use DX11 to improve performance with the same visual effects.

The minimum requirements to play a game is not always about what shader model they use, it's more often an indication of how much power is needed to play the game smoothly.

Some day in the future, you'll find the dev's finally abandon Windows XP and when that day comes, the minimum DX version will increase to DX11 or what ever the vast majority of people have available to them.

thanks for the explanation! now i am faced with the same question again. how to mark the topic as solved? this happened the last time as well. i could not do that. when i edit the topic in my first post and submit it tells me i aint allowed to do that.
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 10:20:38 PM

henrytowns said:
well i had a 1950 pro and i used to play all my dear games on it and one day one by one all good games started to die on it. metro 2033, just cause 2, Chronicles of Riddick dark Athena (if i remember correctly) etc. mostly because of shader problem. what i wrote up there meant that developers dont fully utilize dx9 and use some of the features of dx10 and dx11 which end up games requiring a good gpu. but if they do a really good job they can optimize the game for dx9 and still make it good.

one good example is Dirt 2. i did not imagine it would ever work on my x1950 pro. but to my surprise, it worked on max settings on 1280x1024. with 4xAA. Now i have a GTX560ti and all games seem to work ok. but crysis 2 was my surprise. it looked stunning and yet it was DX9 which makes me wonder why some games that dont have a good gameplay or story still has some dx10 or dx11 elements. The developers thus force us (IMO) to buy a newer gpu only for little bells and whistles while offering nothing great in return.

An x1950 is ancient. You can't expect a 5 year old card to play all current games. If that is what you are complaining about your expectations are simply unreasonable. As the DX stuff just because you can make a game look great on DX9 doesn't mean you can't continue improving things. What game designers focus on is up to them. Card manufacturers just try to make the best technology they can currently produce available.
So... yeah, you are going to need a new video card at least every 5 years. If you consider that unfair then... I don't know what to tell you but it's no reason to object to the existence of DX10 and DX11. They are there to give developers more options. You mention Crysis 2 which is perfect example. It looks great in DX9 but there is also a DX11 patch which adds "bells and whistles" as you put it. If you don't consider them worthwhile then don't use it but a lot of people think it adds to the game and the additions wouldn't be possible if we were still stuck on DX9.
October 23, 2011 10:48:58 PM

jyjjy said:
An x1950 is ancient. You can't expect a 5 year old card to play all current games. If that is what you are complaining about your expectations are simply unreasonable. As the DX stuff just because you can make a game look great on DX9 doesn't mean you can't continue improving things. What game designers focus on is up to them. Card manufacturers just try to make the best technology they can currently produce available.
So... yeah, you are going to need a new video card at least every 5 years. If you consider that unfair then... I don't know what to tell you but it's no reason to object to the existence of DX10 and DX11. They are there to give developers more options. You mention Crysis 2 which is perfect example. It looks great in DX9 but there is also a DX11 patch which adds "bells and whistles" as you put it. If you don't consider them worthwhile then don't use it but a lot of people think it adds to the game and the additions wouldn't be possible if we were still stuck on DX9.

thanks for the explanation! ofcourse i love new improvements and DX11 is most welcome. Dirt 2 looked fabulous on it and Crysis 2 as well with the new patch. i just was complaning against many new developers which produce average games which dont work on any DX9 gpu and look very mediocre with "fewer"bells and whistles justifying higher gpu requirements . Like u said how developers use it is up to them. So i understand that.

The discussion has drifted to other direction a little but my basic question has been answered. (i am trying to mark it as solved but cant!)
Thank you all. :) 
a c 104 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 10:59:49 PM

(i am trying to mark it as solved but cant!)

You could ask a moderator i believe.
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 11:07:24 PM

You started this as a discussion thread, not a question thread so there is no solved/best answer.
a b U Graphics card
October 23, 2011 11:07:58 PM

Shoulda been closed after the first post. :pfff: 

And I see the forum's as buggy as evah too, trying to load extraneous junk! :sarcastic: 


jyjjy said:
You started this as a discussion thread, not a question thread so there is no solved/best answer.


I don't even see why there's a discussion option anymore, it's pretty much only Q&A around here.
!