DX10 do you use it?

uglyjohn

Basically i wanted to ask all the PC gamers about their opinions on DX10.

to set the scene:
Vista was released on the 30th of Jan 2007.
we now have affordable graphics card that are DX10 ready (hd 3xxx and Nvidia 8XXX series) as well as more high end cards that can run dx10 in higher res/settings while sill not costing the earth.

with that in mind i wanted to see what the general opinion is.

personally i have a hd 3850 not exactly the most high end card but i think anything better would be wasted in my pc (pentium d 2.8,2gb ram)
i dont bother with dx10. im going to wait till my next computer which is probably about 12-18 months away.
my 3850 has no problems with COD4,bioshock, medieval2,COH source games etc.

a year and a bit into dx10......who has bothered?

Kiith

I didnt vote as i have both. My desktop is still a dx9 card, while my laptop is dx10. I guess i would upgrade to dx10 on my desktop if Vista wasnt a piece of ****. The price wouldnt bother me as much.

thelordofcheese

I'm building a new machine come the new year so i doubt i'll get a choice so i might as well make the leap.

However DX10 is a real change in how DX works (and that is cool. it's about the only thing thats making the change to DX10 palatable), but due to vista being a pile of shit the uptake has been very slow. Therefore PC games have to cater to both so you'll only really get a few extra shinys if you have DX10. Like the volumetric smoke in WiC. yeah, it's nice but hardly a gameplay changing feature.

Erm, so... maybe i guess is what i'm saying? i dunno.

uglyjohn

thelordofcheese wrote: »

I'm building a new machine come the new year so i doubt i'll get a choice so i might as well make the leap.

However DX10 is a real change in how DX works (and that is cool. it's about the only thing thats making the change to DX10 palatable), but due to vista being a pile of shit the uptake has been very slow. Therefore PC games have to cater to both so you'll only really get a few extra shinys if you have DX10. Like the volumetric smoke in WiC. yeah, it's nice but hardly a gameplay changing feature.

Erm, so... maybe i guess is what i'm saying? i dunno.

i agree with a lot of that,i've compared screenshots of COH in DX10 and DX9. there is very little difference......im sure things are a lot better....but i think graphics have gotten to the point where so much extra work goes into making something look a little better....and it doesnt really add much to gameplay.i suppose people just expect new things to keep looking better.

tman

No-and i dont care about it

Didn't put much thought into it really, I was building a new pc with an 8800GTS back in Sep last year and it would have been silly to not have Vista on it...

thelordofcheese

uglyjohn wrote: »

i agree with a lot of that,i've compared screenshots of COH in DX10 and DX9. there is very little difference......im sure things are a lot better....but i think graphics have gotten to the point where so much extra work goes into making something look a little better....and it doesnt really add much to gameplay.i suppose people just expect new things to keep looking better.

a pure DX10 game, from what i've learned about it, would look fantastic. But all games curently have to sit between two barstools when it comes to DX9 and 10 so we don't get to see much of what *could* be done. A few years from now when people have finally started to move to DX10 and DX11 is on the horizon, then we'll see some pretty cool shit.

L31mr0d

Yes- i was upgrading anyway

I moved to Vista mainly for the DX10 support. I love eye candy and DX10 offers lots of it. I'd rather play the game the way the developers/designers intended rather than lower all the graphical settings.

I mainly moved over initially to play Crysis, World in Conflict, Call of Juarez and Lost Planet in DX10.

DX10 is cheap enough now that you could build a DX10 capable PC for about the cost of a 80GB PS3.

For example, my HTPC, hooked up to my TV, plays every recent game with maxed out graphics at 720p. I've even played Crysis on it with the settings all just at high as it has native support for the 360 controller. The most recent games I've been playing on it where: Devil May Cry 4, Gears of War, Race Driver GRID and Crysis

Here are the specs I use:
CPU: E6600
RAM: 4GB PC2-6400 RAM
Mobo: Basic Gigabyte mATX skt775
GFX: 8800GT (great overclockers)
HDD: SATA II drive

Sephiroth_dude

I built a new rig recently and I have a gtx 260 card and to be quite I have'nt noiticed any difference between direct x9 and 10 (my laptop was dx9) excuse my ignorance but do you have to turn it on sumthing ? Like I played stalker on my laptop and im playing on my new rig now and I can see any graphical differences being honest.

pixelburp

No-but i want to and would if i could afford/saw something that justified an upgrade.

I think DirectX 10 is a case of Microsoft snake oil & was a blatent attempt to force users / gamers into upgrading to Vista, pure and simple. It was nothing more than a cynical marketing ploy as Microsoft knew Vista was going to be a hard sell.

uglyjohn

the first stalker doesnt have DX10, only Clear sky,the new one.

Silenceisbliss

Yes- i was upgrading anyway

i use it, im just capable with my rig

Sephiroth_dude

uglyjohn wrote: »

the first stalker doesnt have DX10, only Clear sky,the new one.

oh I did'nt realise that,d'oh.

RobertFoster

I haven't properly upgraded in a few years now, but I'll go DX10 when I get the chance to upgrade again.

chabsey

L31mr0d wrote: »

For example, my HTPC, hooked up to my TV, plays every recent game with maxed out graphics at 720p. I've even played Crysis on it with the settings all just at high as it has native support for the 360 controller. The most recent games I've been playing on it where: Devil May Cry 4, Gears of War, Race Driver GRID and Crysis

Here are the specs I use:
CPU: E6600
RAM: 4GB PC2-6400 RAM
Mobo: Basic Gigabyte mATX skt775
GFX: 8800GT (great overclockers)
HDD: SATA II drive

Hey L31mr0d,

building a HTPC for a 1080p TV and was wondering what you thought of this card, it's a passively cooled HD4850:

http://scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductId=874141

Would you imagine it'll play most games at a decent pace over 1080p assuming the rest of the rig is up to scratch? Anyone got any opinions on 4850s in general?
Thanks!

DirkVoodoo

No-but i want to and would if i could afford/saw something that justified an upgrade.

No real interest in DX10, the only games I have that are DX10 capable at the moment are crysis and bioshock. Crysis might be worth it, but any reports I have seen on DX10 mode in bioshock are minimal improvements in particle/water effects.

K.O.Kiki

Where the heck is my "Atari Jaguar" option?

Shiminay

Atari Jaguar has DX10!?!??!!??! :eek:



I have a 8800GTX, but have not switched to Fista as it's a pile of <--- insert expletive of choice here --->

PogMoThoin

Yes- i was upgrading anyway

I'm like L31mr0d, I love playing as high as my pc will run graphically, its why I upgraded.

Those who complain bout Vista being a pile of shíte obviously haven't tried it or don't have the power to run it, I'm using 64bit here for the last yr with no issues, No way I'd go back to Xp. Some great touches and Prefetch is just magical. So what if it eats half my ram, I've got 4GB which only cost €80, I'll buy another 4GB soon if needed.

L31mr0d

Yes- i was upgrading anyway

Kharn wrote: »

Atari Jaguar has DX10!?!??!!??! :eek:



I have a 8800GTX, but have not switched to Fista as it's a pile of <--- insert expletive of choice here --->

Compared to what? If you are going to say compared to XP then I laugh at you sir Don't believe the hype, Vista is as good, if not better than XP. I've been using both Vista 32bit on my HTPC and Vista 64bit on my main pc for over a year without issue. Vista 64bit has excellent legacy 32bit support, unlike the abysmal XP 64bit.

Azza

I'm another user thats happy with Vista. Its better OS overall than XP was.

As for DX10 games I only really play Company of Heroes in DX10 as its one of the few I can run at a resolution that does not look bad on my monitor.

Small improvements for big performance hit overall.

humanji

No-and i dont care about it

I upgraded my PC a while ago to one that could run DX10 and I've not really noticed much of a difference. I had heard World In Conflict supposedly had some amazing differences when you change to DX10 so I was all excited to see what it was like. I was more than a little disappointed that I couldn't see a difference.

The only game that seems different is Crysis. It looks fairly shìt hot with DX10. Age Of Conan supposedly will look amazing too, but that'lll only be seen by the developers and the three remaining subscribers.

L31mr0d

Yes- i was upgrading anyway

humanji wrote: »

but that'lll only be seen by the developers and the three remaining subscribers.

*cough* flaccus *cough*

Despite the hype, if you can deal with 720p, you could run Crysis with everything set to "very high" or "enthusiast" :rolleyes: in warhead with 2x AA with 1 x 8800GTX, a quad core (fairly cheap now) and 4GB's of cheap PC2-6400 RAM (~€50)

I will admit that DX9 still had a lot of life left in it and that we could of done without DX10, but it was the golden carrot for MS and its here now so why fight it.

Personally, the biggest difference I notice is bump mapping, when running in DX9 mode in most games (most notably Call of Juarez) the bark on trees and the stones on the ground look like a texture, but with DX10 enabled the bump mapping makes them look raised and more realistic.

MooseJam

No-and i dont care about it

Running vista & dx10 whenever it's possible, would have to try hard to spot the difference,vista is a great OS though despite the naysayers

Tyrant^

No-and i dont care about it

Vista is awesome.... with 8 GB of ram

Stephen

No-and i dont care about it

I could never go back to XP. I've been running Vista x64 on my gaming PC since just after it was released, and I it. I've an e6600 with 4 gigs of ram and an 8800GT and it seems to handle everything I throw at it.