Is DX10 All That?

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
BootDaily's Lost Planet DX10 article, in a roundabout way, asks the question “Is DX10 all that right now?” It’s a legit question that I am sure everyone will have a different opinion on. So…what side of the fence are you on?

Lost Planet has full Shader Model 4.0 support which means you have to have a DX10-class card , Windows Vista, and the DX10 demo to run the game in that mode. What we believe we’re seeing here is the early growing pains of an API to develop and mature. As we can see in the screenshots below, there isn’t any visible difference between running the game in DX9 versus DX10.
Click to expand...
 
Until that first DX10 game comes out, nobody is really going to know. And a demo? How can we know if DX10 is any good from a demo?

I vote you cant. Wait for the real thing, then we shall see..
 
"Is DX 10 all that right now" is not a legit question because "all that" is never specified.
 
Its pretty nice. Set the setting to max on 8800 and its pretty cool.
 
Besides the obvious lack of games (not demos) to use DX10, the drivers are immature for graphic cards under Vista. Although, I haven't had any problems with my X1950XT under Vista, I still don't think they are quite optimized for the current DX9 games, let alone DX10 games that aren't out yet.
 
jordan12 said:
Until that first DX10 game comes out, nobody is really going to know. And a demo? How can we know if DX10 is any good from a demo?

I vote you cant. Wait for the real thing, then we shall see..
Click to expand...

Well considering that "demo" is running with the game engine, I'd say it's a far evaluation.
 
I have only seen side by side comparison screen shots... I personally couldn't tell that much a difference. I know that DX10 will take some time to mature to really show off what it can do. Just because a game is DirectX 10 capable, doesn't mean that it will look any better than DirectX 9... I'd give it some time
 
As far as I could tell this article didn't answer anything pertaining to DX10 vs 9. FPS comparisons are meaningless unless all optimizations have been made. Furthermore DX10 wasn't about making games run faster, it was about making a unified development platform. With DX10, you won't have NVidia implementing shaders one way and ATI/AMD doing it another. Ultimately the gamer will benefit from this, because ATI and NVidia, will both implement graphics in the same way. Right now, articles like this are asking if DX10 can implement more graphics detail for the same FPS as DX9, but that isn't the point. DX10 offers a lot more options for the developer and he won't have to make code path decisions because ATI implements things differently than NVidia. When DX11 rolls around we should have a truly unified development platform, which will significantly reduce development time and cost. Just my 2 cents.
 
Clearly, DirectX 10 has quite a ways to go before it impresses us
Click to expand...
Rather a ridiculous conclusion to draw, when you've been assessing the extent to which DX10 has been implemented in a particular game, and the performance impact of the implementation. The writer is suggesting that DX10 hasn't been utilised to gain much improvement in visuals, and then copncludes that it's the DX10 API which is at fault? Sounds rather illogical to me ;)

– even if you can appreciate the added differences the DX10 version brings in the form of motion blur, a bit more detail etc, you do have to ask “Is the performance penalty worth it”? Is a feature really a feature if it drags down the game performance like this?
Click to expand...
The writer misses the point of DX10. What's that shit about the 'detail'? The improved technology supported under DX10 is primarily about lighting and physics, and if added 'detail' becomes evident it's as a result of those factors. The extent to which a game developer has utilised the capabilities is no basis upon which to assess them.

BootDaily's Lost Planet DX10 article, in a roundabout way, asks the question “Is DX10 all that right now?”
Click to expand...
Does it now? As mentioned, the BootDaily article examines a particular implemetation of an API, not the API itself!

Disappointing report. Disappointing reporting of the report!
 
I thought games built only with DX9 in mind just started coming out? It usually takes a few years for games to really make use of a specific version of DX.
 
"3. As with all APIs, things take awhile to mature"

I think they are saying that the games and developers are the things that have to mature, not the API itself, and that this happens with all API's when they are first released.

The article seemed fine to me. They were basically saying that the devs didn't utilise DX10 so we can't tell if DX10 makes any difference. They just used an ambiguously worded comment that people seem to have taken the wrong way.
 
Was this game developed from the ground up in DX10? Or was it just sort of tacked on at the last minute?
 
They mention nothing about the game settings being used. I would hope that they used identical detail settings but hey, it doesn't matter, the DX10 version is programmed to use certain effects that aren't present in the DX9 version. Parralax mapping and some other techniques are employed and well, more effects = performance hit. I forgot where I read the article but there was an interview with the folks responsible for the port and they somewhat went into detail about the differences between DX9 and DX10 versions of the demo.

I don't know about the rest of you but I took the demo for what it was, a port of Lost Planet (and XBOX 360 title) and a darn good one at that. If anything it showed how they could take a title from a next gen console and improve upon it with the new API. I wasn't looking to have my socks blown off, although it would have been a nice surprise.

I don't see the point of the article. It's too early to make any sort of judgement on DX10. I'm curious to see if the platform is all that it's cracked up to be for developers. I hope it is. This could be the end of crappy Ubisoft and EA ports. :)
 
Just like the previous DX releases.. I am sure it could be "all that" some day.. The demos always look good but the games never quite reach that goal. And the ones that almost do, run like crap on the cards they were designed for anyway. Take Morrowind and Oblivion, two games on the cutting edge when released, but required PCs that didn't even exist when they were released to play well with all of the intended graphical bells and whistles.
 
The Lost Planet demo sucked, and nvidia should be ashamed for even using it as 'showing off' their DX10 capable cards. Its a 360 port, and it looked horrible and ran terrible. Honestly, CS:Source and Fear look MUCH better, and run better. As far as I'm concerned, DX10 isn't even here yet to make a good evaluation of it. I'll be waiting for Crysis and other DX10 games that are optimized for PC use before I make a call on it.
 
if DX 10 made games less buggy, more polished, and the gameplay more fun, then yes, DX 10 is all "that."

If it's there to slow my computer down, force me to upgrade, or give programmers more opportunity to include HDR/Bloom, then no.
 
littledoc said:
Was this game developed from the ground up in DX10? Or was it just sort of tacked on at the last minute?
Click to expand...

Its a x360 port, so of course its a tacked on feature. From the pics theres barely a difference, the extra snow around the shoes is all dx10 gives you ;)
The dx10 version of call of juarez should be coming out soon, now that looks impressive.
 
To be honest, I don't think there is enough DX10 in the demo to form opinions about it, yet. I'd like to see some actual completed, released games before forming an opinion. We all know how quickly game development can change - one minute you are promised one thing, and the next it's something else entirely.
 
They should stick to letting the Crysis trailers speak for DX10. Perfect example of the lighting/physics capabilities leading to stunning visual results.
 
forcefed said:
Its a x360 port, so of course its a tacked on feature. From the pics theres barely a difference, the extra snow around the shoes is all dx10 gives you ;)
The dx10 version of call of juarez should be coming out soon, now that looks impressive.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know, it was rhetorical. Frankly even games like UT3, Bioshock and Crysis were originally developed in DX9. But at least they're not warmed-over ports of a mediocre console game. The jury is very much out on DX10.
 
jordan12 said:
Until that first DX10 game comes out, nobody is really going to know. And a demo? How can we know if DX10 is any good from a demo?

I vote you cant. Wait for the real thing, then we shall see..
Click to expand...

Too true !!


MrWizard6600 said:
"Is DX 10 all that right now" is not a legit question because "all that" is never specified.
Click to expand...


Exactly,and the API is only in its infancy,hardly even taking baby steps at this point.This article and question should revisited in 6 months time.... Not asked now. :rolleyes:



Max Mike said:
What next…

30 Days with DX10
Click to expand...


I wouldn't be surprised to see it (another [H] article,on just this) real soon. :( Again it should be done in 4 to 6 months time,at the earliest...
 
By the time games get optimized for DX10, then DX11 will be out. I dont plan on getting Vista or, the attached DX10 for quite awhile myself.
 
I am the only one wondering why they used a 320mb card instead of a 640mb? I'm curious to see how the extra ram would have possibly made a difference.
 
forcefed said:
Its a x360 port, so of course its a tacked on feature. From the pics theres barely a difference, the extra snow around the shoes is all dx10 gives you ;)
The dx10 version of call of juarez should be coming out soon, now that looks impressive.
Click to expand...

Call of Juarez DX10 is hardly impressive in my opinion. A new water shader and new mountain textures is hardly a huge leap. Nothing that couldn't be done with DX9. Unless there are some large performance improvements then i dont see the point.
 
All this reminds me of when DX9 came out. I remember Freelancer (Which I think was one of the earliest games to use DX9) was compared in DX9 vs. DX8 mode and everyone with the GeForce 4's and GeForce 3's wanted to know if moving to the ATi 9700/9500 Pro was even worth it for the DX features. And despite the game being published from MS the DX9 features were simply a slightly shinier ship.

Fast forward a few years and I think we can see where DX9 has actually taken us and compare those DX9 only games to that of DX8 and you can find out all the new differences that made DX9 better then DX8. So I do not know why such a big deal is being made of this. It simply that no one really knows how to work well with DX10 yet.
 
(that DX10 is all that)

Since Oblivion must have been made to make the 360 look good (I expect the PC port to be an afterthought), I suspect that DX10 (or the 360 equivalent) to be available.

Not a whisper of plans for a DX10 patch from MS, even though that would make an obvious demo as to why to buy vista.

My guess, it would be a reason to avoid vista until a few SPs and better software was exclusive (DX10 games, mostly).

Wumpus
 
"Is a feature really a feature if it drags down the game performance like this?"

Um, yes. It doesn't matter what the feature does or how quickly it does it, it is still a feature. I really wish they would stop letting just anyone off the street write reviews and such. Asking a question like that one shows a very poor grasp of the language, and you shouldn't be writing if you think questions that stupid are actually worth having someone else read.
 
littledoc said:
Frankly even games like UT3, Bioshock and Crysis were originally developed in DX9. But at least they're not warmed-over ports of a mediocre console game. The jury is very much out on DX10.
Click to expand...



UT3, Bioshock and Crysis (maybe even Hellgate), are going to be the real deciding factors in pushing people to get Vista/DX10 I think.

But at least with an awesome company like Epic, they're optimizing they're engine for DX9 users as well---knowing that not *everyone* has made the Vista/DX10/DX10 vid card jump just yet (myself included).

Here's my setup currently (and this is my 2004 pc! lol)
3.6ghz P4 - PCI Express
256mb X800XT - PCI Express
XP Pro
2 gb RAM


this PC has served me well since 2004, even with games like Oblivion. The only thing I'm going to change on it later this year is upgrade my vid card so I can get better quality from UT3 (the only one I really care about right now).

I'm going to assume that my pc will still last me a bit longer and I wont have to make the Vista leap just yet.
(anyone care to give me their advice/opinion on that?)




So DX10 I think will be another year at least or so before I personally feel it's worth it. ACtually I'm afraid to get Vista right now---I don't want all my games (and old games) not to work ! *gasp!*
:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top