PDA

View Full Version : DX10 vs DX9 effects


Pages : [1] 2 3

Vanzagar
09-08-08, 06:10 PM
I'm still clinging to Win XP, and was going to wait it out until Version 7, but every once in awhile a little voice in my ear tells me to go buy Vista. The only real benefit in terms of games I see is a little better special effects and better support for 4gb ram. On the other hand the performance drops, so the question being, for games are the added D10 visuals really worth the performance hit? Did SP1 improve either the visuals or the performance significantly?

I found an old link comparing DX9 vs. DX10 visuals but am rather skeptical of the pics, do you find this link fairly representative or exaggerated? Although AOC I hardly see any difference, little crisper textures?

DX10 vs DX9 Visuals (http://www.winmatrix.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9550)

Thanks,

Vanz

Q
09-08-08, 06:32 PM
Did they really compare Halo to Crysis?

Wow.

slivski
09-08-08, 06:43 PM
wow
halo vs crysis...
thats like a crippled retard vs chuck norris

:headexplode:

sammy sung
09-08-08, 07:20 PM
wow
halo vs crysis...
thats like a crippled retard vs chuck norris

:headexplode:


TIMMEH !!!!

mailman2
09-08-08, 07:39 PM
I'm still clinging to Win XP, and was going to wait it out until Version 7, but every once in awhile a little voice in my ear tells me to go buy Vista. The only real benefit in terms of games I see is a little better special effects and better support for 4gb ram. On the other hand the performance drops, so the question being, for games are the added D10 visuals really worth the performance hit? Did SP1 improve either the visuals or the performance significantly?

I found an old link comparing DX9 vs. DX10 visuals but am rather skeptical of the pics, do you find this link fairly representative or exaggerated? Although AOC I hardly see any difference, little crisper textures?

DX10 vs DX9 Visuals (http://www.winmatrix.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9550)

Thanks,

Vanz


At this point, wait it out. Nothing has come along that makes you want to play DX10 over DX9. There hasnt been anything released that really makes you want to use DX10. The eyecandy is subtle and except for Lost Planet, the performance is always slightly lower.

Soetdjuret
09-08-08, 07:43 PM
Stupid.. and btw, the only thing Dx10 can do witch dx9 "can't" do is the soft particles and object based motion blur. In crysis you can get dx9 look almost identical to dx10.

In bioshock its just water ripple effects, higher resolution shadows and the soft particles.. But in dx9 u can do AA witch u can't without issues in dx10. So i prefer dx10 for that. Sun-rays, HDR, soft shadows, self-shadowing and stuff like that is NP to do in dx9...

Dx10 is generally just BS and a way to earn money by ppl buying so called "dx10 exclusive hardware and operative system" altho u can get about the same quality with xp and a regular geforce 8 or up card...

CaptNKILL
09-08-08, 07:45 PM
If you're picky about framerates, don't bother with DX10 in most games. Maybe if you have GTX 280 Tri SLI or 4870x2 CF, but even then I'm not sure...

XxDeadlyxX
09-08-08, 07:48 PM
If you're picky about framerates, don't bother with DX10 in most games. Maybe if you have GTX 280 Tri SLI or 4870x2 CF, but even then I'm not sure...

Except CoJ :P That ran quite well on 8800GTX 1920x1200 DX10. Not perfect, but still very playable.

Crysis DX10 is a waste though, especially with all the custom configs out there.

nekrosoft13
09-08-08, 08:47 PM
If you're picky about framerates, don't bother with DX10 in most games. Maybe if you have GTX 280 Tri SLI or 4870x2 CF, but even then I'm not sure...

single GTX 280 does very well in every DX10 i tried so far

CaptNKILL
09-08-08, 09:21 PM
Except CoJ :P That ran quite well on 8800GTX 1920x1200 DX10. Not perfect, but still very playable.

Crysis DX10 is a waste though, especially with all the custom configs out there.

I tried playing CoJ in DX10 on my 8800GTX at 1600x1200 or 1440x1080 and in some places I was getting 25fps. For an action game that requires reflexes and precision aiming that just isn't good enough for me.

In DX9 I got 50+ constant at 1600x1200 throughout the entire game and the only thing I really noticed that looked different was the texture quality of rocks and mountains. The difference there was huge, but not worth hurting the gameplay with poor performance.

jlippo
09-09-08, 02:02 AM
They used the Flight Simulator comparison shot as well and that image is really bad photoshop work..

jeffmd
09-09-08, 02:42 AM
Vanzagar, currently dx10 is a non issue. Very few games yet take advantage of it. Games that do support it only offer a slight few effects (most of crysis's touted dx10 effects can be forced in dx9.. lighting still seems a bit better in dx10) and often at lower performances. If you wanna get vista, get it because you want vista, not for your games. ;)

The FSX DX10 shot is a known photoshop hack, and lolz at the halo1 comparison to crysis.

bob saget
09-09-08, 02:55 AM
TIMMEH !!!!

:lol: nice

Revs
09-09-08, 03:04 AM
J-Jimmeh?

jolle
09-09-08, 03:11 AM
I think the problem with DX10 atm is that every game is built with DX9, and then devs toy around a bit with a DX10 implementation.
Ive heard that this usually means that the time needed isnt spent, and the code is still doing all the drawcalls instead of doing alot less that is one of the benefits with DX10.

There is prolly alot of potential that there is just no time to tap into today.
A few generations in, the games will prolly use it better, and for things that noone really thought of the first time around.
Right now you cant really do anything critical, as the games are DX9 mainly, and you cant really have a big delta between the DX9 and DX10 path, certainly nothing affecting gameplay.
So we get the trivial stuff, like they showed with hellgate, a rather fugly DX9 game that used DX10 to do some fluid simulations on smoke, texture arrays for rain splashes when it hits objects and to "light" the particles that pass through the cone of a streetlight.. etc.

My guess is nice potential hampered by the need to stay backwards compatible and make DX9 games first, with some added fluff done rather quickly on the side.

SLippe
09-09-08, 04:35 AM
Yeah, stick with XP for now. I really liked Vista when I ran it, but not for gaming, at least not DX10 titles. Bioshock didn't run all that smooth on my system in Vista. Noticable difference in performance. I plan on going with Vista, again, in the future, maybe. ;)

nekrosoft13
09-09-08, 06:11 AM
you do know just because you have the option to run DX10, doesn't mean you have to?

no one is forcing you to run it under dx10.

Zeus666
09-09-08, 11:38 AM
I found an old link comparing DX9 vs. DX10 visuals but am rather skeptical of the pics, do you find this link fairly representative or exaggerated? Although AOC I hardly see any difference, little crisper textures?

DX10 vs DX9 Visuals (http://www.winmatrix.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9550)

Thanks,

Vanz


oh man that link is a blasphemy, stay away it could damage our brain ..... think about if it was contagious ... omg

Mr Bigman
09-09-08, 12:50 PM
This is bad for those who bought hardware and for those who was hoping for games.

I think we should move foward and focus more on whats out now, not whats out in 2002.

When DX9 came out it showed . DX 8.1 was ok but didn't do what dx 9 gave us.

Devs really need to tap the abilities of DX10 and soon 11.

Move foward not backwards.

ViN86
09-09-08, 12:57 PM
Yeah, stick with XP for now. I really liked Vista when I ran it, but not for gaming, at least not DX10 titles. Bioshock didn't run all that smooth on my system in Vista. Noticable difference in performance. I plan on going with Vista, again, in the future, maybe. ;)

like nekro said, run them in DX9 :headexplode:

asd
09-09-08, 01:04 PM
I hope my new system can run most DX10 games smoothly, waiting the new i7 cpu and one 4870x2, with 6GB of DDR3 memory, games like CoH, HGL and stalker:CS should at least give me 35~40FPS. ( If the driver do the right job for me)

FastRedPonyCar
09-09-08, 02:15 PM
I switched to vista just so I could have 64 bit to play cinematic mod 8 for HL2. I've done back to back benchmarks with crysis using the rygel textures and mster quality config and it benchmarks 5~8 fps faster when running in DX9 compatibility mode.

I do use DX10 for bioshock as the smoke and water ripples/splashes and shadows are noticably better though really don't equate to much in terms of overall game experience improvement.

My favorite DX9/10 comparison was those crysis screenshots (which I can't find any more haha) that had several scenes, one of which was at full very high settings and another at what appeared to be very low or low settings as even the medium and high effects and visuals weren't there.

Soetdjuret
09-09-08, 03:12 PM
I do use DX10 for bioshock as the smoke and water ripples/splashes and shadows are noticably better though really don't equate to much in terms of overall game experience improvement. Fact that AA works in dx9 overrides all of those u mention above. IMO! But the shadows u can tweak to get same in dx9 as 10. All u miss out is water ripples and soft particles, witch isn't much different from the dx9 ones. I prefer AA over those tbh.

FastRedPonyCar
09-09-08, 03:56 PM
Fact that AA works in dx9 overrides all of those u mention above. IMO! But the shadows u can tweak to get same in dx9 as 10. All u miss out is water ripples and soft particles, witch isn't much different from the dx9 ones. I prefer AA over those tbh.

At 1680X1050, I don't notice a lack of AA. Nvidia Nhancer can override game settings and apply AA in DX10 though.

Soetdjuret
09-09-08, 06:23 PM
At 1680X1050, I don't notice a lack of AA. Nvidia Nhancer can override game settings and apply AA in DX10 though.

Sure you do, as its an LCD display and not a CRT. It doesn't compress the pixels as it does with CRT monitors as you raise the resolution. A 24" LCD in 1920x1200 has about the same quality as a 19" LCD in 1280x1024 in terms of aliasing and overall quality. That's because they both run at native resolution and as the resolution is higher on the 24" the screensize is bigger aswell, aligned with it.. so therefor u dont get an natural anti-aliasing on LCD,s on witch you can acchieve on CRT's.. Crysis for example looks amazing in 2048x1534 on my 21" CRT.