There has been alot said about DX10.1 here some facts.

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Sind

Originally posted by: Aberforth
Ping Pong DX 10.1 demo: http://www2.ati.com/misc/demos...demo-pingpong-v1.4.msi (if it doesn't install use a silent installation switch)

DX 10.1 does really improve the overall performance and image quality. In fact EA, Sega and Blizzard have agreed to make dx 10.1 games in the coming months.

You seem to be vary unfamiliar with a blizzard development cycle, chances are dx11 will be out before anything they implement into a new game.

What does DX11 coming out have to do with DX10.1. Dx10.1 is a part of DX11. To be 100% DX11 complaint you have to do DX10.1. NV needs a new arch to do DX10.1. IF you believe NV is going to get it perfect right away . Your sadly mistaken.

I didn't see anybody say anyone was going to do anything perfect anywhere.
What everyone can not just come out and say... is ... It is highly possible that devs will just jump to DX11 rather than code for DX10.1 as Windows 7 is not that far away. I have heard that MS is actually rushing it due to Ultra poor Vista absorption. Will Windows 7 be a nightmare as a result? Undoubtedly.

 

[Nemesis 1]

We do seem to be jumping over the fact that games are coming out. That well use some of what DX10.1 has to offer. The extent that developers use as far as DX10.1 capabilies.

Lets say that StarCraft takes advantage of the global ill. abilities offered with DX10.1 THE IQ would be fantastic. IF the game is good it could easily turn things upside in the way they presently think.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
We do seem to be jumping over the fact that games are coming out. That well use some of what DX10.1 has to offer. The extent that developers use as far as DX10.1 capabilies.

Lets say that StarCraft takes advantage of the global ill. abilities offered with DX10.1 THE IQ would be fantastic. IF the game is good it could easily turn things upside in the way they presently think.

What fact? List? Link? I mean, it would be kewl, but I don't see anything yet.

 

[Sind]

StarCraft 2 has been in development since May 2007. It typically takes Blizzard two years or more from start to release to get something on the market. If you would care to Google StarCraft you could inform yourself as to the current level of development it is at over a year later now. Diablo 3 was announced recently, 2008. Unless Blizzard has suddenly changed there design philosophy (polish, polish, fun, fun) don't expect to see Diablo until late 2009. I would be surprised if StarCraft 2 is released before Q3 2009. Do you honestly think the dev team working on StarCraft 2 has gone and re-implemented what they have done for dx10.1? Check out the StarCraft 2 FAQ page, it states right on it what level of DirectX is going to be used. Perhaps you should contact ATI and Blizzard to clarify this glaring error.

This whole dx10.1 is fluff, and reminds me exactly of the SM 2.0B and SM 3 arguments during the 6800, x800 era, it didn't matter. No developer is going to commit revenue suicide by catering solely to a current 35% user install base, and that isn't even talking about dx10.1 or dx10 specific cards of which the percentage is lower, without having an option to do relatively the same on the other, if they were going to even bother. Directx 10.1 cards have been on the market for just how long now? And how many games am I able to play on my 3870X2? Developers have had access to the spec well prior to the first release of a card supporting it, yet how many can I use now, almost a year later? 00000.

Show me this list of DirectX 10.1 games that will be released by December 31, 2008, heck I'll make it easy, August 15 2009 and the links to the developers websites where it mentions such, not agreements of nameless games that aren't even in development yet, and I will become excited. You also seem to think that DX11 will be shipping with Windows 7, indications are that it will be released prior, late 2009 early 2010.

I don't know why you are mentioning NV, you are touting the magnificent benefits of DX10.1, so where are they and when can I use them? I want links on specific games with release dates not FUD.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I didn't see anybody say anyone was going to do anything perfect anywhere.
What everyone can not just come out and say... is ... It is highly possible that devs will just jump to DX11 rather than code for DX10.1 as Windows 7 is not that far away. I have heard that MS is actually rushing it due to Ultra poor Vista absorption. Will Windows 7 be a nightmare as a result? Undoubtedly.

The last I heard, DX11 isn't due out for another year and half. That's plenty of time for DX10.1 capable games to be released.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020

Originally posted by: Fox5
The most likely games to use dx10.1 are the xbox 360 ports, since the 360 gpu supports some of the 10.1 features. I think some of the ports already do use the tessellation hardware on ati gpus, even without dx10.1.

I thought the Xbox360 uses Direc3D 9 (as in NINE), are you sure?

All I'm saying is, if both camps are not on the same side, no developer will take advantage of DX 10.1 (wasn't the only benefit of DX10.1 some AA thing? when did it become a big thing? I'm puzzled) if NV doesn't have it, the same way PhysX will never take off until it's ported to AMD cards and NV allows you to mix n match Radeon and GeForce cards to your liking as dedicated render/physx cards.

DX10.1 adds a few minor features. Tessellation hardware support, some stuff with AA, blah blah.
Anyhow, the xbox 360 supported the tesselation hardware. I'm not sure exactly where the xbox 360's hardware lies as it does not use any specific pc version, but it doesn't support the whole of dx10, yet supports more than dx9, and some things not in dx10. A few xbox 360 port developers have managed to make use of the hardware despite it not being supported in the official api yet, and it has a notable performance improvement.
Valve may have implemented it as well for all Source engine games. Or at least starting with the Radeon x1000 series, they're listed as running DX9+. That may explain why valve games tend to perform better on ATI hardware.

 

[Slugbait]

I heard a rumor that 3D Realms has already stopped coding against DX10.1 to concentrate on coding against DX11 for Duke Nukem Forever.

But it shouldn't impact their ship date by much...

 

[Cutthroat]

Originally posted by: Slugbait
I heard a rumor that 3D Realms has already stopped coding against DX10.1 to concentrate on coding against DX11 for Duke Nukem Forever.

But it shouldn't impact their ship date by much...

LOL, now that I've picked myself up off the floor...

Some people here are acting like DX10.1 is gonna change everything.

Remember about a year ago when the first DX10 games and patches came out? I was still using a 7800GTX at that time. There were lots of promises from MS that DX10 would speed up gaming and add IQ improvements that we just couldn't live without. Then the games slowly started to emerge and in fact they ran like slugs on the hardware of the time, and even on modern hardware, it's no faster than DX9. What about IQ? Well as nice as Crysis looks all maxed out with DX10, GRID looks pretty damn fine too with just DX9, runs pretty good too.

When I purchased my GTX280 DX10.1 was not part of the equation, by the time I see a game that uses it I will have a newer card, and I probably still won't care. Wake me up when they release a game that uses ray tracing.

 

[Aberforth]

This isn't a AMD vs NV thread, you are supposed to talk about the benefits of DX 10.1 whether it's significant or not. It seems to me that those who have purchased (or the early adopters) Geforce G200 series aren't willing to admit they have made a bad decision in buying it even though they were ripped off by nv, it is crystal clear that Radeon 4800 series is much faster and future proof, it's raw power beats a 1.4 billion transistor nv gpu and if it has DX 10.1 support what's the point in downplaying the API itself? there are definitely some good things in the API like 4X AA without performance drop and cubic array mapping. It's incredible that people can go as far as bashing Vista, DX 10, Bill Gates, AMD... just to defend their lousy purchase.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I call complete BS on last few replies. I supplied a video that explains and shows what DX10.1 has to offer. Looks more than triveal to myself . Ya thats just me tho . The fact that AC was released with some DX10.1 . But because of tech . problems with coders . IT was patched.:shocked:

Than their is the fact that larrabee is coming in o9 and it to uses DX10.1 . This week will see demoes that will knock your socks off using DX10.1 = Global ill. = Ray tracing.

Ya know developers would never thinK that intel could have an influe. On what the market does. NV has done good. but without DX10.1 there going nowhere. DX11 will not save them. Way to late to the game . That why Ruby video says GAME OVER . Because it is.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I didn't see anybody say anyone was going to do anything perfect anywhere.
What everyone can not just come out and say... is ... It is highly possible that devs will just jump to DX11 rather than code for DX10.1 as Windows 7 is not that far away. I have heard that MS is actually rushing it due to Ultra poor Vista absorption. Will Windows 7 be a nightmare as a result? Undoubtedly.

The last I heard, DX11 isn't due out for another year and half. That's plenty of time for DX10.1 capable games to be released.

You could be right, but I don't see any. And in a year and a half, what type of graphics hardware do you think we'll have? Still DX10/10.1?

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Aberforth
This isn't a AMD vs NV thread, you are supposed to talk about the benefits of DX 10.1 whether it's significant or not. It seems to me that those who have purchased (or the early adopters) Geforce G200 series aren't willing to admit they have made a bad decision in buying it even though they were ripped off by nv, it is crystal clear that Radeon 4800 series is much faster and future proof, it's raw power beats a 1.4 billion transistor nv gpu and if it has DX 10.1 support what's the point in downplaying the API itself? there are definitely some good things in the API like 4X AA without performance drop and cubic array mapping. It's incredible that people can go as far as bashing Vista, DX 10, Bill Gates, AMD... just to defend their lousy purchase.

What's incredible is your post here. Like your from another planet. In the first sentence, you made sense. In the rest of your paragraph, you went against your first sentence. How did that happen?

 

[Aberforth]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Aberforth
This isn't a AMD vs NV thread, you are supposed to talk about the benefits of DX 10.1 whether it's significant or not. It seems to me that those who have purchased (or the early adopters) Geforce G200 series aren't willing to admit they have made a bad decision in buying it even though they were ripped off by nv, it is crystal clear that Radeon 4800 series is much faster and future proof, it's raw power beats a 1.4 billion transistor nv gpu and if it has DX 10.1 support what's the point in downplaying the API itself? there are definitely some good things in the API like 4X AA without performance drop and cubic array mapping. It's incredible that people can go as far as bashing Vista, DX 10, Bill Gates, AMD... just to defend their lousy purchase.

What's incredible is your post here. Like your from another planet. In the first sentence, you made sense. In the rest of your paragraph, you went against your first sentence. How did that happen?

If you look closely my entire comment made sense....I was only clarifying the obsessive delusion of some people.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Aberforth

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Aberforth
This isn't a AMD vs NV thread, you are supposed to talk about the benefits of DX 10.1 whether it's significant or not. It seems to me that those who have purchased (or the early adopters) Geforce G200 series aren't willing to admit they have made a bad decision in buying it even though they were ripped off by nv, it is crystal clear that Radeon 4800 series is much faster and future proof, it's raw power beats a 1.4 billion transistor nv gpu and if it has DX 10.1 support what's the point in downplaying the API itself? there are definitely some good things in the API like 4X AA without performance drop and cubic array mapping. It's incredible that people can go as far as bashing Vista, DX 10, Bill Gates, AMD... just to defend their lousy purchase.

What's incredible is your post here. Like your from another planet. In the first sentence, you made sense. In the rest of your paragraph, you went against your first sentence. How did that happen?

If you look closely my entire comment made sense....I was only clarifying the obsessive delusion of some people.

If I look any closer, my face would go through my monitor. Only your first sentence made sense. The rest was a fud filled dig at NV, directly going against your first sentence. Anyone can see this.

 

[Aberforth]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Aberforth

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Aberforth
This isn't a AMD vs NV thread, you are supposed to talk about the benefits of DX 10.1 whether it's significant or not. It seems to me that those who have purchased (or the early adopters) Geforce G200 series aren't willing to admit they have made a bad decision in buying it even though they were ripped off by nv, it is crystal clear that Radeon 4800 series is much faster and future proof, it's raw power beats a 1.4 billion transistor nv gpu and if it has DX 10.1 support what's the point in downplaying the API itself? there are definitely some good things in the API like 4X AA without performance drop and cubic array mapping. It's incredible that people can go as far as bashing Vista, DX 10, Bill Gates, AMD... just to defend their lousy purchase.

What's incredible is your post here. Like your from another planet. In the first sentence, you made sense. In the rest of your paragraph, you went against your first sentence. How did that happen?

If you look closely my entire comment made sense....I was only clarifying the obsessive delusion of some people.

If I look any closer, my face would go through my monitor. Only your first sentence made sense. The rest was a fud filled dig at NV, directly going against your first sentence. Anyone can see this.

My comment wasn't against NV, I was only referring to the hardcore facts to clarify some of the users above. I never bash anyone or go off-topic or blindly talk about something that I don't know, I made that comment because some users were downplaying the benefits of DX 10.1, I wasn't the one who bought up DX 11 or GTX 280 in this topic.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Hay guys we don't need a thread lock here . Keys was right.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Sind
StarCraft 2 has been in development since May 2007. It typically takes Blizzard two years or more from start to release to get something on the market. If you would care to Google StarCraft you could inform yourself as to the current level of development it is at over a year later now.

SC2 was announced in May of 2007, however it has been stated that it began development shortly after War Craft 3: The Frozen Throne was released in 2003