Is there a game that actually uses Direct X 10 to make the game look significantly better?

[quadomatic]

Just wondering, but has there been a game that ACTUALLY USES DX10 to improve visuals significantly? Every game I can think of that has DX10 support has had any significant improvement in visuals that are worth the cost in loss of performance for having to use Vista.

 

[Maximilian]

Not really no.

 

[ibex333]

No. Haven't seen a single one.

 

[quadomatic]

Then why bother using Vista? XP will run games better than Vista can all the time.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: quadomatic
Then why bother using Vista? XP will run games better than Vista can all the time.

nice! thinly veiled Vista bashing thread ftw!


:roll:

 

[arredondo]

Exactly. Vista = the worst software purchase I've ever made considering XP runs just fine.

 

[quadomatic]

I never said Vista was bad...I actually want to use it just to see. I wasn't sure if there was a benefit to using it for gaming. Just figured I'd find out.

But yeah, could've phrased that more kindly. My apologies.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: quadomatic
Then why bother using Vista? XP will run games better than Vista can all the time.

Really it dosent matter, as long as you have the hardware for vista it will be fine, DX10 is a gimmick IMO, maybe it will play a bigger part in the future i dont know...

 

[skace]

DirectX features are always slow to adopt.

However, Stalker has a pretty nice list of DX10 improvements.

 

[quadomatic]

Originally posted by: skace
DirectX features are always slow to adopt.

However, Stalker has a pretty nice list of DX10 improvements.

9.0c didn't take that long to adopt, but that was probably fueled by consoles like XBOX 360 coming out, and then games being made for 360 and ported to PC.

I feel like we won't see any DX10 stuff till console's GPUs can do those kind of shader effects.

 

[acheron]

Lord of the Rings Online supposedly looks better with DX10. I don't have Vista so I haven't tested it myself.

 

[natebigdawg]

Lord of the Rings Online looks fantastic with DX10! It definately has the best enviroments of any MMO. Friends that I have shown it to really notice the difference between DX9 and DX10. It does cause a performance hit but there are other game optimzations that need to be done and I would not just blame Vista as the culprit

 

[AdamK47]

Call of Juarez. Good game. Not great, but good. I enjoyed it.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: acheron
Lord of the Rings Online supposedly looks better with DX10. I don't have Vista so I haven't tested it myself.

I have Vista64 and Lotro, it does look really nice, but the performance hit hurt. I loved the shadows in forests.

 

[Elcs]

Originally posted by: quadomatic
Then why bother using Vista? XP will run games better than Vista can all the time.

Vista 64 is a superior gaming platform to Windows XP and has been for several months.

Hellgate: London, no matter what the shortcomings of anything gameplay related of the game, DX10 looked a hell of a lot better than DX9 and DX9 looked good.

Played DX10 on my 8800GT and it didnt really have the power, so I generally gamed at DX9. Retrospectively played it on my HD4870 on DX10 mode and it was just jawdropping @ 1920x1080 on my 42" HDTV.

 

[mancunian]

Originally posted by: quadomatic
Then why bother using Vista? XP will run games better than Vista can all the time.

Not true.

This rig runs Crysis/Crysis Warhead better in Vista 64 than XP, much better. It also runs every other game I have (about 30) better than XP with one exception, and that exception is GRID.

 

[MarcVenice]

Stalker indeed has a nice list of dx10 features you won't get with dx9. Think of god rays, volumetric smoke, hell, just look at this: http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=...K086SU&feature=related

You'll need a beefy videocard though, gtx260 or HD4870 at the very least for resolution of 1680*1050 and up...

 

[quadomatic]

Hmmm. So I have 1 copy of Windows Vista Ultimate Retail edition left. Should I sell it on eBay, or should I buy 4 GB of ram (only have 2 slots for RAM, would have to buy 2 sticks of 2GB) and keep it?

 

[AdamK47]

Company of Heroes

 

[Spike]

Company of Hero's and Stalker: Clear Sky both showed very definite visual improvements when using DX10. Crysis as well though I know that only from screen shots since I always ran it in DX10 and never actually tried DX9.

Are those differences worth buying and installing a new OS? Definitly not though I do love my Vista 64.

 

[quadomatic]

Originally posted by: Spike
Company of Hero's and Stalker: Clear Sky both showed very definite visual improvements when using DX10. Crysis as well though I know that only from screen shots since I always ran it in DX10 and never actually tried DX9.

Are those differences worth buying and installing a new OS? Definitly not though I do love my Vista 64.

Crysis's "DX10" effects all work in XP, except for a couple subtle shader effects. They just chose to disable them in DX9.

I already have a copy of Windows Vista Ultimate Retail. Should I keep it (which would then require me to buy some ram since 2GB isn't going to cut it) or should I sell it?

 

[rh71]

for future-proof, I'd keep it and do the 4gb ram.

 

[MarcVenice]

I'd sell the retail version though, and buy a OEM home premium version AND 4gb of ram

 

[Spike]

Originally posted by: quadomatic

Originally posted by: Spike
Company of Hero's and Stalker: Clear Sky both showed very definite visual improvements when using DX10. Crysis as well though I know that only from screen shots since I always ran it in DX10 and never actually tried DX9.

Are those differences worth buying and installing a new OS? Definitly not though I do love my Vista 64.

Crysis's "DX10" effects all work in XP, except for a couple subtle shader effects. They just chose to disable them in DX9.

I already have a copy of Windows Vista Ultimate Retail. Should I keep it (which would then require me to buy some ram since 2GB isn't going to cut it) or should I sell it?

I was not aware of using the DX10 features in XP for Crysis, wonder if you can do that with the other games?

As for your vista copy it's really up to you. If I had a stable XP build and was enjoying my gaming then I would not bother. Since I was building a new rig anyway in January I went with vista 64 to get the most out of my 8GB of ram, I seriously doubt I would have installed it otherwise if was just sticking with my old pc. If you are not building a new pc then just save your copy or sell it (assuming it's a boxed retail copy), it does not really matter. Personally I would just hold onto it until I was going to build a new pc or it was time to re-install the os anyway.

All that being said if you did want to install Vista now I would not worry too much about only having 2GB of ram. My HTPC runs an old Opteron 165 @ 2.52, 2GB DDR-400 and a 9600GSO using Vista ultimate 32 and it games just fine. It takes what seems like ages to startup and the media center is a little laggy but otherwise performs great. I have done a fair bit of COD 4, CoH, Bioshock, WiC, and UT 3 and all run very well considering the old hardware. I can max out CoD 4, UTS, and CoH and come close on the other two and have completely smooth frames... though thats at only 1366x768.

There have been several times DDR 400 has gone on good sale but I just have not seen the need to upgrade it yet. Now, this is my HTPC and so it's not my primary rig. If I was using this all the time I might find more issues with only 2GB but at this point I'm happy.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Spike
I was not aware of using the DX10 features in XP for Crysis, wonder if you can do that with the other games?

I'd have to go back and verify again (which I don't feel like doing), but last I checked people claiming they can get all the DX10 features of Crysis in DX9 are mislead.