Direct x 10 was used for gears of war on pc, its a joke, guess what the only feature of directx10 was? anti aliasing, thats it, funny enough you can do that in your nvidia control panel.
dx 11
- Thread starter skittlesareyum47
- Start date
But there is a difference between native AA support and forcing it from your controll pannel.
I think you'll find that it currently is mainstream since all computers sold these days have DX10 graphics in them.
Just to prove my point: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
45% have DX10 graphics cards. That's mainstream in my opinion.
45% have dx10 graphics cards and a dx10 os.
27% have dx10 graphics cards and run win XP.
quite some of those 27% will probably switch OS at some point.
27% have dx10 graphics cards and run win XP.
quite some of those 27% will probably switch OS at some point.
DirectX 11 spec hardware != DirectX 11.
Any DirectX 10 spec GPU is a native DirectX 11 spec GPU with a limited featureset. So basically DirectX 10 GPU's ARE DirectX 11 GPU's.
They only lack various instructions for DirectCompute and hardware-accelerated tessellation.
Both Windows Vista and Windows 7 now have DirectX 11.
In short, that 45% DirectX 10 now is 45% DirectX 11 capable hardware. Thus DirectX 11 is mainstream.
Well every DX10 videocard afaik is DX11 compatible but not DX11 compliant. DX10 or DX10.1 videocards do not support all requirements of Direct3d 11 and thus cannot be called DX11 compliant even though for the biggest part they might be. Just like most of the current nvidia videocards cannot be called dx10.1 videocards.
DX11 Compatible means that the videocard can run if dx11 is installed on the system. But indeed if the game would be given dx11 features the devs would never make the game only work on dx11 hardware, and would make teh specific dx11 features an option in the graphics menu. The main thing for me is the hightmap alike ability of tesselation, as with regular normal/hight/bump whatever they are called maps, things often look plastic to me.
So generally if on a box of a game you see at the requirements the videocard must be DX11 compatible then that means that DX11 must be installed on the system for the game to run (and even this wont happen soon most games still have 9.0c or older here).
And if the requirements for the videocard say, the videocard must be DX11 compliant then that means that the videocard must support all features of DX11 (before we see games like this well be a few years further).
DX11 Compatible means that the videocard can run if dx11 is installed on the system. But indeed if the game would be given dx11 features the devs would never make the game only work on dx11 hardware, and would make teh specific dx11 features an option in the graphics menu. The main thing for me is the hightmap alike ability of tesselation, as with regular normal/hight/bump whatever they are called maps, things often look plastic to me.
So generally if on a box of a game you see at the requirements the videocard must be DX11 compatible then that means that DX11 must be installed on the system for the game to run (and even this wont happen soon most games still have 9.0c or older here).
And if the requirements for the videocard say, the videocard must be DX11 compliant then that means that the videocard must support all features of DX11 (before we see games like this well be a few years further).
Last edited:
I guess I'm a minority of a minority then. My laptop is running Windows 7 64bit with DirectX 11.
I have found that every game I have that can do DX9 or DX10 always without a doubt runs with a higher frame rate in DX10 while on equivalent or even higher settings. The best example is RE5 which runs a good 10-15fps faster in DX10 mode than DX9 mode, and at higher quality settings to boot.
Everyone seems to be saying it should be the opposite though
GTX260 here BTW (the 2nd rev with the extra shader units).
Everyone seems to be saying it should be the opposite though
GTX260 here BTW (the 2nd rev with the extra shader units).
I have found that every game I have that can do DX9 or DX10 always without a doubt runs with a higher frame rate in DX10 while on equivalent or even higher settings. The best example is RE5 which runs a good 10-15fps faster in DX10 mode than DX9 mode, and at higher quality settings to boot.
Everyone seems to be saying it should be the opposite though
GTX260 here BTW (the 2nd rev with the extra shader units).
It was mostly a thing with the early (i dont want to say badly coded) dx10 games combined with the hardware at the time, and considering that most people first taste of dx10 would have been the crysis demo on an nvidia 8 series its not surprising that when people think of dx10 they think of it as slow.
Saying that though I have a grand total of 3 dx10 games of which I can only use one of them in dx10 mode properly.
Company of Heroes - on ati 4870 it crashes after 0-15mins, a known bug with COH Dx10 and ati cards. On my laptop 8600m, works fine but its just not good enough to run it at dx10 level.
LOTRO - on ati 4870, similar to COH, will crash randomly though can work for hours at just as good a framrate as dx9 and looks better. Crashes are an unofficially recognised bug with 4870 cards. On 8600m it runs okay but for smooth fps may as well run in dx9.
Stalker CS - only game I have that supported dx10 on launch and the only one that runs properly on DX10 with my 4870. Frame rate compared to dx9 is pretty similar and it looks alot better as well. Never tried with my laptop as it would struggle even on dx9.
Last edited:
If you play Bioshock and Crysis, you see what the difference is between Dx9 and Dx10. It's alot more than AA.
Soooo what was the difference in Crysis?
DX 9 = high settings, DX 10 = very high settings in Crysis.
Things like lighting and water look better. Not a whole lot, but it is noticeable.
Not enough games utilize DX10 as it is (although that's finally turining around) so I wouldn't expect DX11 to become standard for a good while, and Tripwire Interactive isn't the most cutting-edge graphics wise (which has a lot to do with a conscious decision on their part to keep system requirements low), so the idea of DX11 in this game is probably not a realistic one at all.
DX11 adoptation is a lot higher than dx10 by devs atleast.
Games made for dx11 are often backwards compatible and perform better on dx10 systems as well. dx11 is available on both vista and win 7. There are already dx11 games out, and both nvidia and ati are pushing hard on dx11 this time.
So a lot of upcomming originally DX10 games are converted to DX11.
Games made for dx11 are often backwards compatible and perform better on dx10 systems as well. dx11 is available on both vista and win 7. There are already dx11 games out, and both nvidia and ati are pushing hard on dx11 this time.
So a lot of upcomming originally DX10 games are converted to DX11.
Last edited:
Soooo what was the difference in Crysis?
difference between DX9 and DX10 in crysis are huge. when all my friends, that have DX10 VGA but runs win XP, see my DX10 crysis they do this face:
crysis is the only game that really use DX10, and i repeat: the difference between DX9 and DX10 is very very huge. better physics, better shader, all is better...is so long time that i don't play crysis...but i remember some difference....Motion Blur, Depth of Field, Dynamic Lighting and more....
EDIT: sorry for the double post
difference between DX9 and DX10 in crysis are huge. when all my friends, that have DX10 VGA but runs win XP, see my DX10 crysis they do this face:
crysis is the only game that really use DX10, and i repeat: the difference between DX9 and DX10 is very very huge. better physics, better shader, all is better...is so long time that i don't play crysis...but i remember some difference....Motion Blur, Depth of Field, Dynamic Lighting and more....
EDIT: sorry for the double post
Srsly, I didn't see any difference.
