PDA

View Full Version : So will Vista know become Nvidia's main focus?


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

loafer87gt
01-23-07, 11:45 AM
Edit: Will Vista now become Nvidia's main focus?

As a user still experiencing a number of problems under XP with my GTX I am wondering if 8800 users are going to be left out in the cold now that Vista has been released. For the next couple months following Vista's release, all the review sites are going to be looking at the different manufacturers cards performance under the new OS, meaning NV will probably put most of their engineers to work on improving speed and robustness of the Vista drivers. Unfortunately, the current XP drivers are half baked at best, and there are still a lot of issues that haven't been resolved under this OS. Are we likely going to be stuck waiting for all the Vista fanfare to wear off before we will likely see any new driver developments?

Color me not amused with NV latest driver efforts.

Xion X2
01-23-07, 11:52 AM
Well I hope they continue working on XP, which I'm sure they will, but I'd have no problems if they focused mainly on Vista from hereon out. I plan on upgrading to it and it's the main reason I bought the card--for DirectX 10.

aydc
01-23-07, 12:19 PM
It has already begun. Many G80 users are reporting increased performance compared to XP, with the leaked beta (maybe even alpha?) Vista drivers. Since that is impossible, there's only one explaination... XP drivers were terrible. Even at beta stage, Vista drivers are better. Not good news for people who plan to hold on to XP.

J-Mag
01-23-07, 12:24 PM
Since that is impossible, there's only one explaination...

WHA? First, how do you know that it is impossible for vista to have superior performance. Second just because something is impossible there is only one explanation?!?!? Your logic RULES!

The poster could very well be Bull ****ting. Looks like at least two possible explanations to me ;)

Xion X2
01-23-07, 12:34 PM
Another possible explanation is the reduced overhead of Vista in regards to the API/Driver.

J-Mag
01-23-07, 12:37 PM
Another possible explanation is the reduced overhead of Vista in regards to the API/Driver.

My thoughts exactly...

However, I still haven't seen any results that are trustworthy. A couple people have claimed a 60-80% increase in frame rate with CoH, but I find it hard to believe.

fatal1ty
01-23-07, 12:43 PM
My performance in Vista isn't better, this is especially due to the lack of overclocking utilities for Vista. Vista won't be any faster in games, thats a bunch of crap, if anything that bloated piece of beta spyware will slow things down too much and ruin the gaming experience.

Yes, Vista is nothing more than bloated beta spyware.

fatal1ty
01-23-07, 12:45 PM
It has already begun. Many G80 users are reporting increased performance compared to XP, with the leaked beta (maybe even alpha?) Vista drivers. Since that is impossible, there's only one explaination... XP drivers were terrible. Even at beta stage, Vista drivers are better. Not good news for people who plan to hold on to XP.


Are you on crack? Missing textures and features will make for faster performance. Remember the 5800FX vs the 9800 Pro? The drivers are alpha, **** doesn't work right and the other half of the features aren't working right.

j0j081
01-23-07, 04:27 PM
bunch of idiot bashers in this thread but guess they have to make an appearance in anything MS related.

Monolyth
01-23-07, 05:41 PM
bunch of idiot bashers in this thread but guess they have to make an appearance in anything MS related.

Unfortunately must agree, Microsoft is not going to sit idly by and allow their OS to run games 'worse' then a previous generation, especially considering the added importance that PC gaming has achieved (and is achieving even today).

When XP first came out the drivers were crap, because everyone was migrating their code to the NT Kernel whereas before they were using Microsoft's weakened 9X client kernel. Remember that Windows 2000 was still primarily a business-oriented OS and drivers did exist and were written 'okay', but still back then 98 drivers were 'faster'. Once consumers really started migrating to XP the driver dev team could put full resources behind that development.

We will see the same 'lag' time again because Vista has made significant changes to the driver architecture. After that time we will probably see some very streamlined drivers. When "Games for Vista" becomes an industry standard we will see better performance and stability across the board.

Calling a beta version of an Operating System crap because no good drivers exist for it is a pretty lame statement, wait 6 months and you'll be eating your words. Those of us who have been in the biz for awhile have seen this cycle many times, so be a little more patient.

DarkJedi664
01-23-07, 05:47 PM
Justin Wendel up there is not only an idiot, he's pretty paranoid too! Have fun running DX10 on XP ;) Oh wait, you can't :D

Slammin
01-23-07, 06:44 PM
Simply amazing.

F_L_C
01-23-07, 07:12 PM
The move to the next OS is inevitable. It's either now or later. But to get the most out of G80, you must have Vista and DX10. Many resent this deal, but it also was inevitable. Of course G80 and Vista will become the main focus. But for the older cards and winxp 32/64, the nv driver team better deliver something soon. They better not bend us over, those who wait until later to upgrade to DX10.

fatal1ty
01-24-07, 12:12 AM
Fools....

"Nothing is going to help a new game by going to a new operating system. There were some clear wins going from Windows 95 to Windows XP for games, but there really aren't any for Vista... They're really grasping at straws for reasons to upgrade the operating system. I suspect I could run XP for a great many more years without having a problem with it. They're artificially doing that by tying DX10 [DirectX 10] so close it, which is really nothing about the OS. It's a hardware-interface spec. It's an artificial thing that they're doing there."

John Carmack

Source: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=22161

DarkJedi664
01-24-07, 12:40 AM
Funny, an OpenGL programmer ripping on DirectX...Granted it's Carmack, but still.

fatal1ty
01-24-07, 12:58 AM
Funny, an OpenGL programmer ripping on DirectX...Granted it's Carmack, but still.


The guy is a genius regardless of his last engine design.

F_L_C
01-24-07, 01:11 AM
Your name dropping doesn't work with me. I resent DX10 being tied to Vista as much as the next guy but what can be done about it? MSFT dictates the terms here. When the DX10 games come like Alan Wake and you got a G80 or better, there is no force known to man that can stop you from upgrading to Vista. Like I said, it's either now or later.

evilchris
01-24-07, 01:13 AM
People who buy new videocards every 6 months complaining about upgrading an OS that was released in 2001. lol

a_big_burger
01-24-07, 01:15 AM
The guy is a genius regardless of his last engine design.
He may have a small penis and he is very ****y :D

Slammin
01-24-07, 01:57 AM
Fools....

"Nothing is going to help a new game by going to a new operating system. There were some clear wins going from Windows 95 to Windows XP for games, but there really aren't any for Vista... They're really grasping at straws for reasons to upgrade the operating system. I suspect I could run XP for a great many more years without having a problem with it. They're artificially doing that by tying DX10 [DirectX 10] so close it, which is really nothing about the OS. It's a hardware-interface spec. It's an artificial thing that they're doing there."

John Carmack

Source: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=22161


That is from such a pinpoint point of view. There is more to Vista than just being a game platform, and whether it's good or bad at that, only time will tell. My guess is that it will be good, even w/o DX10, and probably even better than XP as a game platform. Actually, that is more than a guess at this point. Vista loads games faster, plays some just as fast, or even faster than XP already, has better memory mgmt, etc., and having DX10 where XP won't definitely makes it a one-sided advantage - favor Vista.

Now, outside that limited view above (Carmack's), Vista does advance in other areas as compared to XP. It is progress, though some will say that adding things like DRM, crazy UAC, etc isn't progress, but again, single point of view observations all the same. Tell MGM that DRM is nonsense, or tell Grandma to disable UAC.

But back on topic, sure, eventually Vista will become nVidia's main focus, but not anytime soon. To those that even think so, how do you feel about nVidia supporting other OS's such as Linux? Doesn't that just make your blood boil? I hope not!

Just enjoy XP until all your hardware driver support and OS support eventually dries up, but at least knowing that your 10-15 year old AMD 5000 or CD2 E6300 system still runs as good as the day you bought it. :D

I'm sure you will be the same ones still hanging in these forums _itching about why the latest games run so slow too and threatening to sue MS for not ever adding DX10 to XP, as if that would help your old dusty PC's cope! :D :D

aydc
01-24-07, 03:16 AM
We have all read about how much overhead the new DRM measures bring to the drivers. Every driver must check many times every second to find out if necessary protection schemes are in place. Such things bring overhead. It'll be very hard for Vista to surpass XP in benchmarks on same hardware. However, it should come close. Within 5% could be acceptable to most people.

BTW, Carmack is right. I've been dual booting Vista with XP for a month now and I've yet to see any reason to recommend Vista to my friends. The new security programs are worse than third party programs that we use on XP. The new search is worse than Google Desktop. DVD writing, Media Center etc. all have much better third party alternatives that work on XP. Other than DX10, Vista seems pointless to me. In my opinion nVidia should keep on supporting XP as hard as before for as long as possible.

Princess_Frosty
01-24-07, 04:57 AM
It has already begun. Many G80 users are reporting increased performance compared to XP, with the leaked beta (maybe even alpha?) Vista drivers. Since that is impossible, there's only one explaination... XP drivers were terrible. Even at beta stage, Vista drivers are better. Not good news for people who plan to hold on to XP.

You don't know what you're talking about.

DirectX was re-written from the ground up to use less overhead per object, which means that you get greater performance with lots of objects. Not only does DX10 benefit from this but DX9.0L (which replaces DX9.0c) also has the same benefits.

Not only that but because the benefit is a is an increase in performance per object when compared to XP it means the performance difference as games become more complex and graphics cards become faster, is going to get larger. I suspect eventually a lot of the new games will run significantly faster under Vista than XP.

It's supprising to see just how large the gap is already, remember that Vista has an additional overhead as an OS when compared to XP and so it's expected to run slower and run applications/games slower before you take anything else into account, it seems the new API more than makes up for this in certain cases.

*edit*

As for reasons to upgrade to Vista, well there's plenty.

One of them reasons right now is not performance, I don't know who's been spreading rumours about new OS's are supposed to be faster but they need to shut up. New OS's always have more code than their predecessors, they're not "bloatware" or anything of the kind, they're just the next necessary step in the chain of operating systems. Vista is almost unique in that it's been more optimised towards games but right now that optimisation for most isn't enough to balance out the extra overhead of the OS.

One of the reasons I run Vista is, even with somewhat beta driver support, vista is already more stable for me that XP ever was, decoupled drivers mean if your game crashes out or theres a problem that might cause a hard locks or other problems getting back to desktop, Vista deals with this usual BS very well.

I've been playing Theme Hospital over the last few days and it runs without a hitch, the backwards compatability is quite astonishing to be quite frank.

Xion X2
01-24-07, 05:40 AM
DirectX was re-written from the ground up to use less overhead per object, which means that you get greater performance with lots of objects. Not only does DX10 benefit from this but DX9.0L (which replaces DX9.0c) also has the same benefits.

Not only that but because the benefit is a is an increase in performance per object when compared to XP it means the performance difference as games become more complex and graphics cards become faster, is going to get larger. I suspect eventually a lot of the new games will run significantly faster under Vista than XP.

One of the reasons I run Vista is, even with somewhat beta driver support, vista is already more stable for me that XP ever was, decoupled drivers mean if your game crashes out or theres a problem that might cause a hard locks or other problems getting back to desktop, Vista deals with this usual BS very well.

I've been playing Theme Hospital over the last few days and it runs without a hitch, the backwards compatability is quite astonishing to be quite frank.

Absolutely on-target. These XP fanboys who haven't taken the time to read about the new decoupled drivers and API in Vista are just spewing with diarrhea of the mouth right now.

XP is an outdated operating system that was made for gaming 6 years ago. Nobody expects to play cutting edge graphics games on a 6 year old PS2 or Xbox, and I don't know why PC gamers should expect to do it on an outdated platform, either. I realize that's not a perfect analogy because it's ignoring the hardware aspect, but because of the way XP's drivers are integrated it is a serious bottleneck--especially for cutting-edge hardware. And because the drivers and API are so intermingled with the rest of the operating system, unlike Vista, it makes for a much more unstable system than you're going to see with Vista and causes much more overhead and reduced performance.

That API improvement, along with the DX10 platform, is what will finally bring PC gaming into the mainstream, I believe. The reduced overhead will allow games to display many more complex objects and scenarios than before, along with the newly added geometry shader, and will make the games you used to run on DX9/XP look like kid's play.

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2007/004/reviews/931665_20070105_screen001.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2007/008/931665_20070109_screen004.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2007/008/931665_20070109_screen003.jpg

The conspiracy theorist group that believes Microsoft did all this just to make money just doesn't get it. This was actually a very smart move by them. It's past time for a new operating system to arrive that can better optimize the gaming experience for us all.

XxDeadlyxX
01-24-07, 06:15 AM
Gee I cant get over how well the engine breaks up the wood in the third screen. HL2 had set spots in wood objects etc where it can break, and it was very limited in this regard. If they can pull it off, Crysis will be 'destructible environments' done the right way :cool:

I'm already very impressed by the CES videos.

PeterJensen
01-24-07, 06:37 AM
wow some nice screens. And Xion X2 is 100% right.