Printable View
ye, i'd say it's 2-3 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
it'll take some time for dx11 to mature and make it into games. yes, there are quite a few games with dx11 support already and in the near future, but i think these make only use of very few dx11 features. yes, some of these already feature e.g. tessellation, but in my opinion the things such features are used for right now are very negligible. look at the unigine heaven benchmark what tessellation is capable of.
All I've seen from DX11 is some cobblestones that look painful to step on and some effects that are almost impossible to discern in-game. Then again it's early, so hopefully something can still kill my pessimism.
I love how people think a new DirectX is like magic fairy dust that you sprinkle on a game for it to improve visually. That is not how this process works. The developers actually have to improve the game themselves. If a new DirectX api is just injected into a game with no graphics being modified by the developers your going to see very little improvement if any, with less performance. Which is what happened alot with DX10. Not saying DX10 was great and wasnt used correctly (cause seriously DX10 was not that great) but alot of games I think just used dx10 to maybe get a little more copies sold. Even Crytek was a guilty party of this to a degree.
i got a free download of dirt 2 when i picked up a new xfx radeon 5850. i can't wait to see what dx 11 looks like
like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0yR0gx-MsE&hd=1Quote:
Originally Posted by billyb0b
you can thank BenchZowner
Tessellation is magic fairy dust!Quote:
Originally Posted by Decami
I've been waiting for round barrels for over a decade and a HALF!
DOWN WITH THE HEXAGONS!! WELCOME THE PERFECT CIRCLE OVERLORDS!!!!!!!
MS had a new OS called Vista & needed to shoehorn people from the deep rooted XP.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
MS had a DX10 OS & need DX10 hardware near the time of launch.
Only NV had anything ready by then but it could not meet the full spec & had MS by the nads as MS needed all the reasons it could to get people off XP & DX10 was one of them so the spec was change for what hardware was available or there would of not been any DX10 cards until ATI got its act together which was far to long & DX10 as a selling point for vista would of been null from day one without the hardware.
This time there will be full spec hardware available at launch & MS will not want to get bitten twice with people saying there is no difference in the games again because NV wanted to gimp the full DX11 spec.
MS will not let a hardware vendor spoil the W7 party because they cant keep up yet for a second time & MS has learnt its lesson from vista.
It'll never be a perfect circle no matter how much AA & Tessellation you throw at it. Such a shape doesn't exist in nature.Quote:
Originally Posted by KoHaN69
Except this is not nature, this is the digital world :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by initialised
FTFY.Quote:
Originally Posted by initialised
They used direct compute to accelerate post processing. This is GPGPU.
It's a matter of programing since D3D10 cards also support direct compute.
We need WDDM 2.1 to see any real boost in Windows gaming with D3D11.
what?? WDDMM 2.1? what are you talking about? WDDM is Windows Driver Model, and Win 7 uses WDDM 1.1Quote:
Originally Posted by Marios
You're right that D3D10 cards supports DirectCompute, but in version 4.0 or 4.1 for DX10.1 accelerators! But devs who'll implement DirectCompute will go only with 5.0 for DX11 accelerators, 'cos that's worthy going for the performance gains you get...
Also, regading the BattleForge, not only do you get more performance with DX11, you get better image quality 'cos game uses HDAO method for Ambient Occlusion when you set "very High" in the menu.
well, dx10 was just too radically different at the time.
dx11 is now coming out and its similiar to dx10, and since thats been out for years, theres no excuse this time.
Yes, this is the problem. Windows 7 uses WDDM 1.1 instead od 2.1 driver model. So there is no real support or difference between DX10 10.1 11.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
How do you know there is big difference between DirectCompute 4.0 or 5.0?
It's a matter of programing. Programmers might choose to support DX10 cards instead of DX11 or both. Or they might choose cuda or anything else. It's all GPGPU
is it hard to program the GPGPU? i thought they're just another add-on module (might be a large one!)
but as long as they use UML standards ... they can add-on anytime right?
Is HD 4890 identical in performance with HD 5870 ???
Cause from what i saw in those tests, the comparisions are not betwen HD 5870 (DX 10) vs. HD 5870 (DX11) but HD 4890 (DX10.1) vs HD 5870 (DX11). :confused:
firstly GPGPU stands for general purpose computing on graphical processing units, so its NOT a physical thing to program, but rather a technique.Quote:
Originally Posted by Serpentarius
secondly UML is a modelling language used for documentation and has nothing to do with code what so ever...
DX10 is a new API, so by just swapping the renderer to DX10 on an engine designed for DX9 with appropriate assets isnt going make any difference, if the engine is designed from the ground up with dx10 / dx11 in mind then the performance and image quality gains are potentially massive.
also dx11 is a superset of dx10 so most dx10 cards should be able ot run dx11 games with certain features turned off, and yet still have support for other dx11 features like multithreaded rendering...
Got to have all the eye candy. With DX10 a lot was going on that a dip in fps was negligible (at least to me). Nice improvement on DX11.
dude you don't know what you're talking about!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marios
WDDM 1.1 hasn't got anything to do with DX11 support! Vista uses WDDM 1.0 and it supports DX11
'cos those people who are programming, called developer, say so!Quote:
How do you know there is big difference between DirectCompute 4.0 or 5.0?
It's a matter of programing.
They might, but they will not choose to do so 'cos of the trade-offs! GPGPU in games will be supported via DirectCompute 5.0, or OpenCL... but taking in to account share of DirectX in game development, it's reasonable to assume that DirectCompute 5.0 will prevail in game implementation over the OpenCL.Quote:
Programmers might choose to support DX10 cards instead of DX11 or both. Or they might choose cuda or anything else. It's all GPGPU
Unimportant!
None of any of that matters, the ONLY thing that should matter is benching dx11 on Battlefield: Bad Company 2
DICE always uses technology efficiently and wisely.. eye candy never overrides gameplay, so nothing else matters to me, as that franchise has proven themselves for over the last 8 years.
I suspect this will be a defacto-game, benched in many reviews, etc.
OH.. & what about Project Offset ..? They went underground after the buy-out, changed their name and went silent, anyone?
selling them self to Intel was their biggest mistake ever!Quote:
Originally Posted by Xoulz
Intel want to make "killer app" of their Project Offset for LRB, but now they're on the path of DNF :)