Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
DirectX 9 vs DirectX10
A.Blackloch
Member UncommonPosts: 842
Didn't know there difference between them can be this big. 
Anyone else think it's worth upgrading to Vista to get more eyecandy?
This is the DX9
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r252/Wildsbane/age-of-conan-dx9.jpg
And this is the DX10
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r252/Wildsbane/age-of-conan-dx10.jpg
Comments
Nope. DX10 will eventually make it to XP, or it'll be included in the new Windows Vienna which is slated for 2009..
Vista is ME all over again. Nothing is worth moving to Vista.
That's good news then, since I have to use Vista at work and school every day and it's pure pain. I'm running pretty customized versio of XP and the idea of going to Vista has been pretty discouraging.
Though I do think the game looks awesome with Dx10. Pretty tempting.
I have to agree with Morttemia, the Direct X 10 shots are quite impressive.
The good news is you can turn off a lot of the features of Vista that really make it a memory and resource hog.
Tempting indeed.
Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens.
J. R. R. Tolkien
Yeah, except they did the same "eye candy" shots with Crysis. Then it turned out that Directx9 could have done the same, but the settings were disabled on dx9 systems, to make it look like there was a big difference. Some hackers showed the truth. So, as far as using dx10 and Vista for marketing regarding better graphics, nope. It's a scam on Microsofts' end.
I don't think DirectX 10 will ever make it to XP, simply because of the differences in memory management between XP and Vista.
In vista, directx is integrated into the OS, Xp doesn't have that.
you know those instances where sometimes you want to run a second game window and get a directx error? That's what I'm talking about, you don't get that with vista because directx is already called upon and running as soon as vista starts.
If you want to get a fully working directx 10 on XP, you're gonna have to get rid or alter alot of things in XP's memory management and core. (if you still don't know, vista was built from the ground up, why do you think there's so many slowdowns and bugs? would have been alot less of those if they just used a watered down XP, no?)
Anyways, I'm too lazy to read through all of the dev notes and scientifical jibberjabber, so if you wanna know the details, go read them yourself.
As for me, I'm setting my sights on Vista SP1 thats coming out this months and pray my system gets a boost from it.
Either way, I think vista is great, it just takes some getting used to (and customization), like turning off all the graphical eyecandy and transparency, which us gamers don't need anyways since we have something on top of our desktop anyways.
Vista is still NT based (i.e. same kernel structure as XP and every system back to back to 3.1, the only thing they added was some extra security to the kernel to lock programs out of it. New kernel structure? Vienna gets it. WINFX? Vienna gets it.
Sorry you believe what MS spouted in the beginning, but none of it turned out to be true. In fact, directx10 was slated to be incorporated into XP with SP3. When they realized this was their biggest carrot to hang out for the gamers ( remember, Vista is supposed to be a gamers OS according to MS lol), they ditched that idea and made it Vista only. Remember them marketing Halo 2 as Vista only? One hacked exe. file, and it runs perfect on XP.
And directx10 will be on XP, whether it's officially incorporated or not. There are already several hacker teams working on it, with positive chances of success showing.
So, if you like Vista, more power to you. But don't try to help MS mislead people anymore than they already have.
SP1 for Vista will not be giving you any performance boost. It is fixing other problems. If you do your research you will read that the LAST service pack for XP which is SP3 will actually make XP faster than Vista. (unfortunetly it will be the last sp for xp)
However, MicroSoft promises to put out a performance boost for Vista with SP2 so maybe in about 18 to 24 months.
While I think DX10 is impressive, no way will I be upgrading to Vista for a long time....maybe never. I think this OS will go the way of Windows Millennium lol remember THAT great OS release from MS?
It was bad everything this time around from Microsoft. Small, Medium and Large business just went through 5 years of upgrading to XP and Office 2003/2005 which cost millions and what does MicroSOft do? They release an entirely new OS that is/was buggy as hell with all their old software and just about every 3rd party software vendor out there.
As a result sales to business is dead and slow at best.
The only real sales are to the home PC vendors. (just like Windows Millennium ) (dell, gateway, microcon, etc)
I know of large companys purchasing PCs with Vista on them and the first thing the I.T. Department does is format the drives and install XP.
Nope I would hold off spending money for Vista. It is nothing more than a stepping stone like Windows Millennium was.
As far as the comment that DX10 will NEVER be available for XP........well market demand will make the deciding vote on that issue.
**im starting to believe that myself. the evidence is becomng more and more clear to the point you can't ignore it.
I myself will not be purchasing VISTA as its nothign more than ME, i bought ME it was a POS lol. i went immediately back to WIn98 until Win XP came out thank god I'm notorious for keeping my cd's lol. but either way, im surprised about this whole Win Vienna thing, new OS?? Possible Win ME to Win XP comparison?? if that is indeed the case I may just wait for that.
3.4ghz Phenom II X4 965, 8GB PC12800 DDR3 GSKILL, EVGA 560GTX 2GB OC, 640GB HD SATA II, BFG 1000WATT PSU. MSI NF980-G65 TRI-SLI MOBO.
It is possible to run DX10 op Win XP. And it is pretty much legal, but you'll loose some performance, and you'd had to buy Win Vista anyway. www.winehq.org, install it on Win XP / Mac OS X / linux, copy everything you need from the Windows Vista folders to the 'imaginary' folders of wine. And you can play with DX10! This also is the only way for linux users to game properly.
You know it, the best way to realize your dreams is waking up and start moving, never lose hope and always keep up.
Microsoft WILL NOT make a DX10 for XP, They've said it at dozens of press releases, and its on their forum everywhere. NOW, somebody will find a way to make DX10 work on XP Eventualy, BUT support will be nonexistant, and more people will have problems making it work then those who don't.
Read my previous post.
Wine already did it, most people got used to MS's way of doing business, so they found a way around it, a long long time ago...
You know it, the best way to realize your dreams is waking up and start moving, never lose hope and always keep up.
Read my previous post.
Wine already did it, most people got used to MS's way of doing business, so they found a way around it, a long long time ago...
Getting A system to RUN a DX10 game, and Actualy getting DX10 to work RIGHT are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. Wine doesn't actualy allow you to take advantage of DX10 Features. Its a WORK-AROUND. Hardly the HOLY GRAIL of DX10 Projects ALSO.
Windows 2000 ftw. I really liked that OS.
seeing how XP makes driver calls vs vista, it might be a pretty tough change to make. I wouldn't hold my breath.
First of all, Vista is native 64 bit. There are huge advantages to x64 that x86 just doesn't have. Better data handling, better memory handling, better memory mapping, can use all of my RAM, etc.
Second, Vista isn't ME. Anyone who makes that comparison is just ignorant of the subject matter. You see, I had a computer that came with ME. It was installed for 3 months, until Windows 2k rescued me. ME is the worst operating system known to man. It would stop recognizing CDs in the drive after a while, until I had only two games where it would even accept that the CD was in the drive (the drive would spin up, the operating system would register nothing). It used to blue screen at the drop of a hat. It frequently destroyed installs, rendering working programs virtually useless. It wasn't even compatable with microsoft software - office ran buggy. Moreover, some days it just wouldn't start up, requiring multiple restarts to be satisfied.
In comparison, Windows Vista has some backwards compatability issues, and is a memory hog.
Excuse me while I laugh at your pitiful comparisons. Windows Vista is just Windows XP, service pack 0. Remember that hunk of junk? People used to joke about how much better 2k was than SP0. SP1 fixed a lot of problems, and SP2 made the operating system good.
So, guess we'll see. My feeling is a few service packs and this OS will be fine.
As for DX10, it is tied directly into the operating system, and it does make things look good - though the GTX really doesn't hurt on that score.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
M$ ain't getting any money from XP anymore. If people upgrade to Vista they are. Simple as that.
I got Vista and personally I'm not very impressed by it's performance. If it's a resource-hog of a game I usually play it in DX9. M$ got some serious optimizing ahead of them if they want games to run good on the system.
Nice find. Huge lighting difference.
I have to be honest and say im going to be trying to play this game on the maximum setting come release.
Im in the market for 2 new PC's (one for the wife) but will be buying come end Feb / March. They will have Vista on them, from what I hear the new service pack will sort alot of issues out.
I'll be buying the 64bit client too.
Ya, the difference is so big that I am skeptical of the honesty of the screenshots. It does look like some effects are turned off in the dx9 shot to make it look like that huge of a difference.
Guild Video|Forums|Guild Website+New Video|AoC official FAQ|E3'07 Official Trailer
No.
As someone on Gamespot forums as said, if M$ releases DX10 for XP, I will feed 10 homeless guys for a week.
|Mortal Online|Gnostaria|
thats nothing. crysis dx9 and dx10 is MUCH different. but unplayable for multiplayer. if you want to siege and pvp, you want dx9.
I do agree with this. Unless they heavily relied on dx10 to use their lighting effects (which seems unlikely, the game's engine predates DX10 by quite a bit) the difference shouldn't be that pronounced.Ya, the difference is so big that I am skeptical of the honesty of the screenshots. It does look like some effects are turned off in the dx9 shot to make it look like that huge of a difference.
We'll really start to see the DX10 effect in 3 years. So far developers and programmers seem psyched over it, which is what I measure success by (consumers won't be psyched until they see games that actually utilize it from the ground up, instead of tacking on a few of the features it lets you use).
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
People love to bitch about Microsoft just like they love to bitch about WoW, that will never change. Don;t let few nutjobs influence your choice in purchasing OSs though.
I have been runnig VIsta for a while on test systems, in office networks, etc..etc.. and frankly i love it. The only thing that sucks about Vista is that companies making hardware are slow to make working drivers for it. Even though that's hardly microsofts fault they get all the slack for it.
Personally I went with Vista 64bit ultimate for my Conan machine ( Conan will ship with a 64bit client ). Its an awensome OS as far as I am concerned.
Peoples reactions to microsoft is so predictable its almost funny. Just like the fact that someone will make a post here about how windows sucks, how i have no idea what i am atalking abot, how its buggy, someone will tell me that they know more about OSs, hell someone in this thread allready stated that vista has basically thesame core as 3.1 with few things added.
Ignore the nutjobs, trust your own experiences and what you see on your own monitor.
Sinister Savant MMORPG Community
It's not an unsubstantiated rumour that Vista runs games slower than XP. It's been tested to death and the results are evident. I'm hoping there will come a patch that will fix this soon as I bought Vista for my last rig, but frankly I'm not so sure it'll come anytime soon.
Ah well. I can always run games in dx9 for now.