Direct X10 For Vista Only

Mike Howes 15 Jun, 2006 at 1:43pm ET Article published in Tech

Those who plan to buy Direct X 10 hardware will have to buy Vista as well if they want to use it’s full potential.

It seems the current driver model on the Windows XP is the limitation. A key feature of Direct X 10 is it’s ability to handle more independent objects and Windows XP simply won’t be able to deal with it.
Direct X 10 hardware will of course run Direct X 9 games and is supposed to do it a lot faster.

The Vole, ATI, Nvidia and the other creators of the Direct X 10 specification wanted to make sure that you will be offered the toppest-notch gaming experience.

Source: The Inquirer

Comments

15 Jun 2006 ~ 2:42pm Enverex

Winga wrote:

Direct X 10 hardware will of course run Direct X 9 games and is supposed to do it a lot faster.

According to Microsoft the opposite is true. Games that aren't DirectX10 will need to be almost emulated ergo performing WORSE than on a DX9 machine (the only redeeming point being that DX10 cards would [normally] be more powerful than the older DX9 cards and may initially take some of the blow, but I doubt all of it).

Although, I offer free slaps for anyone that didn't see this coming.
15 Jun 2006 ~ 4:07pm RWB heh... so am I correct in assuming...

"GET VISTA OR YOU'RE SCREWED!"
15 Jun 2006 ~ 4:40pm airbornflght

RWB wrote:

heh... so am I correct in assuming...

"GET VISTA OR YOU'RE SCREWED!"

Yes, pretty much.:Pwned: (by M$) Although, this isnt the first time M$ did this. Well, I wonder when Xp's EOL is going to be.
15 Jun 2006 ~ 4:46pm rapture I thought this pretty much common knowledge already. Microsoft can't take all the blame either...
16 Jun 2006 ~ 4:48am Well at least none of us have shelled out vast quantaties of money on a DX9 SLi setup that will be obselete when vista launches right? er...
16 Jun 2006 ~ 2:37pm GHoosdum Oh, great, more "Bend Over, Here Comes Vista!" news...
16 Jun 2006 ~ 4:59pm jradmin What about all these cards that say they are designed for Windows Vista? Thats like false advertisment right?
16 Jun 2006 ~ 8:48pm GHoosdum I don't think it's necessarily false advertising. Aero Glass apparently runs on DX9 hardware just fine, as long as you have enough video RAM. The cards that are advertising made for Vista are probably talking about being able to run Aero Glass.
16 Jun 2006 ~ 10:12pm airbornflght

GHoosdum wrote:

I don't think it's necessarily false advertising. Aero Glass apparently runs on DX9 hardware just fine, as long as you have enough video RAM. The cards that are advertising made for Vista are probably talking about being able to run Aero Glass.

Is it seriously going to suck up that much juice?
16 Jun 2006 ~ 10:13pm GHoosdum

airbornflght wrote:

Is it seriously going to suck up that much juice?

Something like 128-256MB of Video RAM required just to run Vista with Aero Glass enabled, IIRC.
16 Jun 2006 ~ 11:42pm airbornflght good god, my video card only has 256, and I thought that was a lot. damn!
17 Jun 2006 ~ 2:07am Yayo01 Vista sucks to the bone.....i will never buy the damn thing....ill stick with WinXP
17 Jun 2006 ~ 3:44am Enverex Wow... Linux's XGL looks much better than Aero Glass and will even run on crappy old cards. What the fear with optimising things these days so they'll actually run on anything other than the actual best of the best?
17 Jun 2006 ~ 6:12am rapture

Vista sucks to the bone.....i will never buy the damn thing....ill stick with WinXP

Same thing was said over and over again about XP and Win2k. What's everybody using (and defending) now?
17 Jun 2006 ~ 6:14am Enverex

rapture-IC wrote:

Same thing was said over and over again about XP and Win2k. What's everybody using (and defending) now?

Little choice, can't really use 98 due to it's now complete discontinuance.
17 Jun 2006 ~ 8:33am rapture You seriously expect me to believe you think Windows 98 is better than XP?
17 Jun 2006 ~ 8:36am Enverex No, I don't. But I have friends that would rather use it, but, for people that needed or wanted to use programs that worked on 98 but not XP then it would have been better then aswell.
17 Jun 2006 ~ 8:09pm Well here you go, since you can try the damn thing out for yourself and see how it works on your rig. I installed 32bit Win Vista on a rig with these specs;

AMD 3000+ socketA
512mb ram
ATI 9600xt
80GB HDD

Runs smooth. Few slow ups, and everything performs exactly the same as on WinXP. Seriously as far as realworld performance goes it was equal to how that rig runs xp. Obviously with the limited RAM I was unable to run 56820572 windows open and 18501058 more apps running the background, but I couldn't do that with winxp anyway. DX9 was more than capable to handle all of Vistas out of the box features, at least what they gave us in Beta 1
18 Jun 2006 ~ 2:27am RWB WinXP and 2000 was bad when they first came out. I hated XP at first but it got better with Age. Hell I even managed to get Windows 98 to run pretty damned well if you ask me...

Vista will get better as well, hopefully quick.
18 Jun 2006 ~ 10:59am rapture I've used XP since it was released to OEMs. Other than having to use Win2k drivers with some devices at the beginning which caused its own problems I cant complain at all. I only bought it cause of the green start button, never expected it to actually be half decent.