Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Windows 64bit > Perhaps you'd better sit down now!

Reply
Thread Tools

Perhaps you'd better sit down now!

 
 
Tony Sperling
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2006
Hi, all.

I just recieved some shocking news - well, let's call it a rumour, at this
stage. Word is out that none of the current line of graphics cards will be
upgradeable to accomodate DX10 - such that they will all in fact be
worthless the day DX10 ships.

Is there any bit of truth in that? Any way to find out?

I sure hope that this is yet another misinterpretation of the term
'backwards compatibility', which could mean that DX10 being installed it
would still be running an upgraded form of DX9 and not taking advantage of
the upgraded DX10 specifics.

What ya' all say?


Tony. . .


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Colin Barnhorst
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2006
I believe that is correct information in so far as DX10 but I wouldn't worry
about a card being useless. DX10 will support the earlier versions.

"Tony Sperling" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:OOVt7%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi, all.
>
> I just recieved some shocking news - well, let's call it a rumour, at this
> stage. Word is out that none of the current line of graphics cards will be
> upgradeable to accomodate DX10 - such that they will all in fact be
> worthless the day DX10 ships.
>
> Is there any bit of truth in that? Any way to find out?
>
> I sure hope that this is yet another misinterpretation of the term
> 'backwards compatibility', which could mean that DX10 being installed it
> would still be running an upgraded form of DX9 and not taking advantage of
> the upgraded DX10 specifics.
>
> What ya' all say?
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Yak64
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2006
Just a thought - would they be able to write DX-10 at all if at least
*some* of the current crop wasn't able todo DX-10 things?

I don't expect my nv6200 to work mind...


>On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 22:40:23 +0200, "Tony Sperling" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>Hi, all.
>
>I just recieved some shocking news - well, let's call it a rumour, at this
>stage. Word is out that none of the current line of graphics cards will be
>upgradeable to accomodate DX10 - such that they will all in fact be
>worthless the day DX10 ships.
>
>Is there any bit of truth in that? Any way to find out?
>
>I sure hope that this is yet another misinterpretation of the term
>'backwards compatibility', which could mean that DX10 being installed it
>would still be running an upgraded form of DX9 and not taking advantage of
>the upgraded DX10 specifics.
>
>What ya' all say?
>
>
>Tony. . .
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
Aaron Kelley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2006
Current cards will work fine with DX10 installed. They won't be able to use
any new DX10 specific features. For instance, DirectX 9 added the pixel
shader 2.0 effect, which requires hardware support for applications to use
it. (I don't really know what is new in DX10.)

I guess it's up to developers to decide which hardware features they want to
require for apps or games to run, regardless of the version of DirectX. You
should be able to install DX10 and run applications that use new featuers in
the DX10 API, and everything should fine as long as the application does not
use any new DX10 features that require new hardware support.

This is just my understanding of things, I don't really call myself an
expert. I might be wrong.

- Aaron

"Tony Sperling" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:OOVt7%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi, all.
>
> I just recieved some shocking news - well, let's call it a rumour, at this
> stage. Word is out that none of the current line of graphics cards will be
> upgradeable to accomodate DX10 - such that they will all in fact be
> worthless the day DX10 ships.
>
> Is there any bit of truth in that? Any way to find out?
>
> I sure hope that this is yet another misinterpretation of the term
> 'backwards compatibility', which could mean that DX10 being installed it
> would still be running an upgraded form of DX9 and not taking advantage of
> the upgraded DX10 specifics.
>
> What ya' all say?
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Dominic Payer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2006
To get the most from DX10 the card's hardware will have to meet DX10
specifications.

There will be software emulation, at a price in system resources, so that at
least cards with DX9 hardware can run DX10. Cards which have DX8 and earlier
hardware may not be able to run DX10 well or at all.


"Tony Sperling" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:OOVt7%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi, all.
>
> I just recieved some shocking news - well, let's call it a rumour, at this
> stage. Word is out that none of the current line of graphics cards will be
> upgradeable to accomodate DX10 - such that they will all in fact be
> worthless the day DX10 ships.
>
> Is there any bit of truth in that? Any way to find out?
>
> I sure hope that this is yet another misinterpretation of the term
> 'backwards compatibility', which could mean that DX10 being installed it
> would still be running an upgraded form of DX9 and not taking advantage of
> the upgraded DX10 specifics.
>
> What ya' all say?
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Colin Barnhorst
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-20-2006
Pixel shader 3 if I remember right.

"Aaron Kelley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Current cards will work fine with DX10 installed. They won't be able to
> use any new DX10 specific features. For instance, DirectX 9 added the
> pixel shader 2.0 effect, which requires hardware support for applications
> to use it. (I don't really know what is new in DX10.)
>
> I guess it's up to developers to decide which hardware features they want
> to require for apps or games to run, regardless of the version of DirectX.
> You should be able to install DX10 and run applications that use new
> featuers in the DX10 API, and everything should fine as long as the
> application does not use any new DX10 features that require new hardware
> support.
>
> This is just my understanding of things, I don't really call myself an
> expert. I might be wrong.
>
> - Aaron
>
> "Tony Sperling" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:OOVt7%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hi, all.
>>
>> I just recieved some shocking news - well, let's call it a rumour, at
>> this
>> stage. Word is out that none of the current line of graphics cards will
>> be
>> upgradeable to accomodate DX10 - such that they will all in fact be
>> worthless the day DX10 ships.
>>
>> Is there any bit of truth in that? Any way to find out?
>>
>> I sure hope that this is yet another misinterpretation of the term
>> 'backwards compatibility', which could mean that DX10 being installed it
>> would still be running an upgraded form of DX9 and not taking advantage
>> of
>> the upgraded DX10 specifics.
>>
>> What ya' all say?
>>
>>
>> Tony. . .
>>
>>

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Sperling
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-20-2006
Alright, more or less all of you managed to confirm my own suspicions. I
assume we may prepare for at least the major selling point of DX10 to be
missing and remain un-upgradeable from the old crop, the older the crop -
the more will be missing!

At least, I am very glad that I didn't rush out and invest in two dual core
cards for a new SLI enabled system. A new version of DX wouldn't necessarily
have allerted my attention, although it should have.

Thanks, lads!

Tony. . .


"Tony Sperling" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:OOVt7%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi, all.
>
> I just recieved some shocking news - well, let's call it a rumour, at this
> stage. Word is out that none of the current line of graphics cards will be
> upgradeable to accomodate DX10 - such that they will all in fact be
> worthless the day DX10 ships.
>
> Is there any bit of truth in that? Any way to find out?
>
> I sure hope that this is yet another misinterpretation of the term
> 'backwards compatibility', which could mean that DX10 being installed it
> would still be running an upgraded form of DX9 and not taking advantage of
> the upgraded DX10 specifics.
>
> What ya' all say?
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Perhaps Python can do this better ? news@absamail.co.za Python 0 01-09-2006 12:24 PM
Dear RubyGems: Perhaps a better way to override require... Trans Ruby 3 08-11-2005 08:48 PM
70-216 - To sit, or not to sit.... Sean MCSA 4 07-06-2005 05:25 PM
Slightly OT perhaps? Which SDL binding is better? Asfand Yar Qazi Ruby 0 12-29-2003 09:34 AM
perhaps better than nat with enough IPs Brian Bergin Cisco 2 11-11-2003 04:45 PM



Advertisments