DX10 cards and games question

[Mutley]

I saw this review:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2007/01/03/bfgtech_geforce_8800_gtx_watercooled/5.html

It is the 8800, 550GBP worth, water cooled etc etc. Anyway, the review shows Company of Heros, all maxxed out, it runs at 32fps average.

The system is really nice, Duo 6600, 2gb DDR. What worries me is 32fps isn't something I would be "Wow" about, ok, COH on full graphics is defiantly amazing at 32fps but what will it be like for Crysis? Crysis is a lot more advanced and demanding, so do DX10 cards run DX10 games faster than DX9 games?

Just something I was concerned about because I would of thought Crysis would be lower FPS than COH on the same setup and 32 isn't a huge number.

 

[Reaktor4]

Yeah DX10 is supposed to run much faster than DX9, 8 times faster (yeah right) IIRC. Crysis would run well on that system probably, its supposed to be very well optimised, plus their aa and resolution were very high on those benchmarks..

 

[NeptuneUK]

Nobody knows for certian, mutley, seeing as the DX10 games are not out! Sorry!

 

[giant384]

umm the game was playing at 1920x1200 with AA 16 and AF 16 so im not surprised it would run slow.

 

[Cole]

Yay the 8800 dx10 drivers arn't even here yet. I'd just wait till ATI's graphic card.

 

[giant384]

Yay the 8800 dx10 drivers arn't even here yet. I'd just wait till ATI's graphic card.

why would it matter dx10 doesn't do anything right now. also there is no such thing as a direct x 10 driver only the windows vista driver for support for the 8800s;which is not released yet.

 

[Asus]

With any tech device that is high priced and before it's time, you might want to wait and see exactly how it performs (as a DX10 card) and how the competition is before diving in.

 

[Cole]

why would it matter dx10 doesn't do anything right now. also there is no such thing as a direct x 10 driver only the windows vista driver for support for the 8800s;which is not released yet.

If you want to be a nit picking biotch then your right there is no dx10 driver, however... Vista fully supports both Dx9(L) and Dx10. Some drivers for Vista support Dx9(L) while others support both Dx9(L) and Dx10. So therefor you can say, hey this has a Dx9 driver but not a Dx10 driver!

It does mean a little, for example...the people making games for idk.. Dx10?

And I just said the last statement you said.

 

[giant384]

If you want to be a nit picking biotch then your right there is no dx10 driver, however... Vista fully supports both Dx9(L) and Dx10. Some drivers for Vista support Dx9(L) while others support both Dx9(L) and Dx10. So therefor you can say, hey this has a Dx9 driver but not a Dx10 driver!

It does mean a little, for example...the people making games for idk.. Dx10?

And I just said the last statement you said.

the drivers support direct x 9 and direct x 10 but none of them support 8800s which is the only current dx10 card that was my point.

 

[The Brick]

Yeah DX10 is supposed to run much faster than DX9, 8 times faster (yeah right) IIRC.

Uhhhh..... huh?


Source?

Well even when you have a valid source I still wouldn't believe it... perhaps like 1.1 times as fast.

 

[DreamThrall]

Uhhhh..... huh?

Source?

Well even when you have a valid source I still wouldn't believe it... perhaps like 1.1 times as fast.

I'm too lazy to find a source, but the reason is this:

For at least the last 2 versions (DX8 through DX9), DirectX has included backwards compatibility for previous versions of DX. This included keeping versions of the old DX libraries, which means lots of overhead. DX10 is supposed to be so completely different from the old DX, from what I understand they started (mostly) from scratch, which is why DX10 isn't backwards compatibly. That means it doesn't have the last several years of crap dragging it down, and MS can use all sorts of new tricks they've learned about developing over that past several years as well.

Or, to put it another way:

So imagine there's this guy. He joins the circus and learns some acrobatic tricks. (DX7). Then he learns how to compete very well in the circus eating contest (DX8), but he still does acrobatics, except he gets fat from eating so much. Then, he gets even better at the eating contest, and wins at it. He still is doing acrobatics, but he's a lot fatter now (DX9) so it takes a lot of effort for him to do what he does. After that, he decides he doesn't want to do acrobatics or the eating contest, gets a liposuction, and joins the Olympic ski team. (DX10).

The idea is that the Olympic skier would be able do the same thing much faster than the really fat acrobat *or* do it just as fast but require much less effort.

Bit of a sketchy analogy I guess, but you get the idea.

 

[The Brick]

That's a really nice marketing speech.

 

[DreamThrall]

That's a really nice marketing speech.

I hope they use it.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

Even though CoH's is running at 32FPS at the moment, it has been mentioned that there is a DX10 patch that can be used once Vista is released. This would probably mean that CoH will take advantage of SM4.0 (its only using SM3.0 at the moment) providing broader and effiecient instructions, instancing 2.0 (reducing CPU overhead, increaing performance), etc.

 

[Reaktor4]

Uhhhh..... huh?


Source?

Well even when you have a valid source I still wouldn't believe it... perhaps like 1.1 times as fast.

I cant remember where i read it. Google for it and youll probably find the source. I dont really believe it either.

 

[3ssence]

Even though CoH's is running at 32FPS at the moment, it has been mentioned that there is a DX10 patch that can be used once Vista is released. This would probably mean that CoH will take advantage of SM4.0 (its only using SM3.0 at the moment) providing broader and effiecient instructions, instancing 2.0 (reducing CPU overhead, increaing performance), etc.

That's 32 fps at 1920 x 1200, with 16 x aa and 16 x af, i'd say that's pretty damn good performance as it is !!

 

[DEATH eVADER]

It would be brilliant for me.

 

[Killing2Live]

I believe that DX10 will be much faster than the previous versions of DirectX maybe not 8 times as fast, but a very noticeable improvement. I read it somewhere also but do not remember either but they hit it right on about how they are reducing the overhead.