Staredit Network

I can only say wow.

If what Microsoft says is even partly true, if DirectX 10 can display graphics even just twice as fast as 9.0c, you are going to be able to get X-Box 360 or PS3 graphics on a $750 PC. Could DirectX 10 finally make the PC a viable alternative to the "big three" consoles as a purely gaming machine?

What DirectX10 pushes for is to make the GPU less reliant on the CPU. You wont end up seeing Dx10 eight times faster than Dx9, just like you wont see a Ps3 reaching 2 teraflops(probably not 100 gigaflops).

Microsoft is trying to make a big push for Windows to become a gaming platform again. Dx10 will ease things up for developers(removal of cap bits), and be much faster. You wont really see Dx10's potential with this first generation of Dx10 cards as there still very Dx9 focused. You'll start seeing main hardcore Dx10 graphic cards around the third generation.

Microsoft will never be able to make Windows as much of a gaming platform as the leading consoles. The fact that each console is specifically built for gaming means they will always out-preform the average PC for 4x the price.

Yeah, PCs will never beat consoles in price.. at least the consoles like the xbox 360 and stuff.. but more and more I think consoles are becoming more like PCs, so that could change their price in the future..

More functionality obviously means that they'll need to have more system resources which will increase the price, and the price of electronics increases somewhat exponentially. For example, a 512Mb stick of Ram might be $40, a 1Gb stick might be $110, and a 2Gb stick might be $270. The technology in consoles is very simple in comparison to any new computer and has only a fraction of the computing power. Sony said the PS3's graphics... what was the term they used - accelerator? Quaint, no? Anyway, they said the PS3's graphical processor was as good as two GeForce 6800 Ultras. Well, whoopty doo. The "new and amazing" console features have been standard on PCs for years! "But Fela, what about 1080p?! It looks so crisp and sharp!" Honestly, find me five people that use anything above 720p. Surprise, surprise! That's 1280x720! Considering that most, if not all, monitors support 1280x1024 or larger, I'd say that monitors have the edge over HDTVs. Every computer is basically a home theater PC nowadays. It continues to amaze me that people herald the achievements of consoles while dismissing computers as gaming/multimedia centers.

*Edit* Just for kicks and giggles, I tested CS: Source out at 800x600 with all settings at minimum. It was fun to see 625fps steady.

Haha, too bad running the games at a few hundred frames per second doesn't make it look smoother in some way.

That's just silly. Source doesn't look any better anywhere above like 95 FPS.

I just wanted to see how high I could go. I wonder how many fps I could manage with StarCraft.

my monitor doesnt support anything better then 1024x720....

How old is your monitor?

I've got 1080p. And the highest my monitor supports is 1280x1024. So, my 50" 1080p TV is superior to my 17" monitor. So ha!

So you're one. Find me four more. Oh, but when you think about. Divide 1280x1024 by 17 and then divide 1920x1080 by 50 and tell me which is higher (the higher number represents more pixels per inch, which is in fact a clearer image). Alright, so I did the math for you! Your monitor gives about 77,000 pixels per square inch, while your TV gives about 41,500 pixels per square inch. I'm afraid that your monitor is in fact still sharper than your fancy shmancy $2500 TV.

Well then, why not just make 1280x1024 monitors one inch? Or half an inch? That would be the sharpest by far. The truth is, bigger is better. It would be hard to watch TV on a 17 inch screen from 15 feet away. It's just not as conveniant.

True, but most people are sitting right in front of their monitors.

*Edit* What is the formula for figuring out how far you should sit away from a monitor/tv to get the optimal view?

Well, you're comparing a 1080p HD display which is likely to run you up for more than ten times as much as a 17 inch monitor costs.

Why do TVs cost so much more than monitors?

Well, because of what they can do #1, and because monitors are LCDs, and not plasma or DLP #2, I think. There is probably more than that though..

Here's a picture of Crysis running on a single 8800 GTX and Core 2 Duo (they didn't specify, but it was a C2D, not C2Q). It's set at 2048x1536 at I believe full settings and it's getting 60+ fps with the code unoptimized. It appears that DX10 does yield significant, if not enormous, performance gains. Gentlemen, welcome to the future of gaming.

I can't see enough from that picture to be 100% sold... where did you get that information..?

Check the site where I linked the picture from.

Wouldn't it just be better for the computer industry to make their own console?

Uh dude, this is Microsoft not 'the computer industry' we're talking about. They already have a console, they just want to make common household computers more powerful.

So when will DirectX10 be out? If its alredy out, where can i get it?

DirectX 10 requires a new operating system, Vista, and a video card that supports DirectX 10. Only 2 exist right now, the 8800gtx and 8800gts, however, ATI is planning on releasing the R600's, which will support DirectX 10. None of these cards are budget cards though, and are more for enthusiasts than casual gamers. nVidia is planning on releasing more budget friendly cards, and I'm sure ATI will aswell.

With DirectX 10 I believe that onboard video might become more capable of producing midrange graphics (such as a playable 1600x1200 with perhaps 2xAA in new DX10 games). Only time will tell.

Wasn't R600 supposed to be launched by the end of January?

NVidia will release 8300 and 8600 versions of its G80 core soon. While DX9 performance of the 8800 is simply jaw-dropping, DirectX 10 is going to give a substantial performance increase over DirectX 9. For example, Relic is going to release a DirectX 10 patch for Company of Heroes (PC Gamer 96%). They say it will not only look better but have increased physics and AI as well while running more quickly. However, because the graphics core is not going to be updated that much, the biggest improvement will be seen with the CPU (the fps will increase a little bit, but not as much as lowering cpu usage). I expect that memory usage will drop as well.