DirectX 10 is freaking dooping fabulous

The following article depicts images and information which has been verified to be fake. This is not an accurate comparison between DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 as some of the images were not rendered, in fact, purely painted concept art.

If you need any convincing that DirectX 10 is worth it or not, then this will blow you away. Throw away OpenGL, trash your DirectX 9 graphics card, it’s time to upgrade to cinematic-quality real-time computer generated graphics!

Hover over the image to load hover image. Please wait patiently.

DirectX 9 & 10 comparison
From the DirectX 10 Whitepaper on the Windows Vista Team Blog.

As you can see from the comparison between the two screenshots, this is not fake. There is no structural changes between the two images; except only lighting, weather effects and the water. Infact, the reflection and refraction of mountains in the water didn’t even change, just the water texture! But the difference is nothing short of amazing.

These renders come from the Microsoft Flight Simulator X game. If infact, and only if, the DirectX 10 version is a real-time rendered screenshot straight from the game, then it gets me thinking, why not a virtual wallpaper? In the early betas of Windows Longhorn, there were hints of a 3D rendered wallpaper called “Aurora” which showcased moving light auras. If Microsoft can leverage the power of DirectX 10 to the desktop, literally, then the possibilities of 3D wallpapers are endless.

Edit: Some people say the DX10 version is purely a pre-rendered concept screenshot. However, the Windows Vista Team Blog claims it was “created using Microsoft Flight Simulator X in DirectX 10”. Regardless if it was pre-rendered or live-rendered, it would have used the capabilities in DirectX 10.

DirectX 9&10 comparison

Updated: Changed face model to F.E.A.R.’s game model to better reflect the capabilities of DirectX 9. This is not a direct comparison and should be taken as a guide.

DirectX 9 & 10 comparison
DirectX 9 & 10 comparison
The above article depicts images and information which has been verified to be fake. This is not an accurate comparison between DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 as some of the images were not rendered, in fact, purely painted concept art.

128 insightful thoughts

  1. Umm, what is supposed to be special about this? And also- better than OpenGL? Nice try, but not this time.

  2. the above are mentally blind and probably survive of cheaply made apple hardware

    well any way it is very good and when it hits the shelvs it shall be looking better

    mac osx has been infact hacked silly apple meh n00bxors!

  3. I personally love it. The fish at the bottom is a great example. Its texture actually extrudes instead of just being a skin to give an illusion of bumpiness. The lake one is absolutely gorgeous, and the heads one… just wow. Also learning about that 3D dynamic background makes me very excited. Just imagine your background being a tavern, with people walking around, entering and leaving. It would bring a new level of heart-warmth to my desktop.

  4. As a professional game artist who deals with every aspect of texturing/shaders/materials/geometry across 6 consoles I can tell you this comparison is pretty meaningless.

    All the dx 10 screenshots (with the exception of the crysis shot (of the faces), perhaps) could be done in dx9 (albeit more expensively).

    Unless you have a technical understanding of whats going on, its difficult to tell you why a dx9 shader looks worse than a dx10 shader. They just picked some arbitrary screenshots with bad art.

    Dx10 is superior to dx9, but this doesn’t really tell you why or how.

  5. “Mentally blind”…. like the countless millions of people who believe anything coming out of Microsoft’s doors is a must-have, brilliant, revolutionary concept…. triple YAWN. Everything Microsoft has ever done has already be done before (and done better)…. they just throw a billion dollars at marketing.

    The ZUNE!! ZOMG iPOD KILLER, does IT run DirectX 10??????????

  6. Maybe i’m just crazy, but I bet if DirectX 10 was being developed by Apple or as an open source project, there would be a lot more praise and a lot less microsoft hate. Oh and, none of you can prove anything either…

  7. Without a video, screen caps are meaningless. You could do this in DX9, it’s just a matter of what the VIDEO looks like…I’m willing to bet this is nothing more than geewiz and not reality.

  8. It’s got nothing to do with being an Apple fanboy. Sure, I own a Mac but I play games on my Game Cube, DS, PS2 and XBOX 360.. and sometimes on my PC. And I’m still not all that super impressed. But then, it’s not the graphics I care about anyway. I werves me some good gameplay, graphics is just icing.

  9. Yeah, it’s pretty neat – those of us who do CG for a living (and are demosceners for a hobby) have been working with the nvidia coding demos, with effects like this and better than this, for the last 2 or 3 years.

    All running in real time, of course. This pic is absolutely possible, in realtime, at full resolution. If you refuse to believe that, it’s because you’re wasting your time gaming when you would be graphics hacking.

    For a cool desktop renderer, try ‘Drempels’. It’s a nifty rendery thing that works now, on XP. You can even get the source and put whatever you want in it’s framework.

  10. I’m guessing you’re all mac lovers and scared that opengl will die. Well good for you, i hope it does die, because it always has been and always will be an inferior piece of utter useless software. Don’t be jealous that opengl is a piece of tripe.

  11. This is sweet and can’t wait for Halo 3 with this, or I hope it does and sometime before I dead. But I am curious why their are people that do not like this or are not excited about this. The new macs will able to take advantage of this also since they will have dual boot to windows.

  12. Regardless of how it is done, whether more polygons or better textures, but if they can do this in real-time and get it running smoothly, then the end result is all that matters!

  13. Sorry to ruin your hype, but that FS X screenshot is not from the game . It is made by a computer graphics artist – thou it looks very cool and similar to that DX9 screenshot.

  14. Pingback: Euan's Rants
  15. I don’t think DX10 is anything too special but when I see DX9… jeez its about time for an update!

  16. and how exactly do you find that out Mr. Foo… as far as i know their arent any DX10 cards out yet, so unless u’re on a dev team or work for ati/nvidia i doubt you’ve been able to confirm this either way

  17. haha, DirectX 10 is so great it turned the fat white guy with a cactus into like a black guy’s head! now that’s hi-tech. I bet opengl can’t do that! *yawn*

  18. For all of you PC haters; you get yourself a dual AMD64 processor machine with 4gb of RAM and 2 x Nvidaia 7900 512m graphics cards in SLI and tell me that it doesn’t beat the ass off ANY mac!

    As for the DX 9/10 comparison; yes a lot of it can be done in 9; but we’ll have to wait and see what it brings…

  19. The first picture had rays of light shining on shadowed landscape. The water in the direct x 9 screen had landscape reflected in the water. The direct X 10 version had more realistic waves, but the reflections were wrong. Water on the wave which was angled towards me should have shown sky in the reflection and some of the ground beneath the waves. Instead it showed me the mountain, just like in the direct X 9 version.

    ok, the faces were cool, but the first face was a game face, who knows what the second face was, but it was much more complex, and you probably wouldn’t see 1000 like faces in game play. I have seen graphics like the same face back in the early 90s from pre-rendered content, and they had better lighting.

    If I had modeled that fish I would be pissed, you screwed it up, the lips are all wrong. You just increased the magnitude of the bump map, whoop de do.

    -TheYeti

  20. Can’t remember if it was Maximum PC or PC Gamer, but they indicated that the “screenshot” of the mountain & lake was in fact an artist’s rendition of what they expect DX10 will be capable of.

  21. Why did you not compare same images for dx9 and dx10? That way, we can really tell the difference. I say this is marketing stunt.

  22. Why did you not compare same images for dx9 and dx10? That way, we can really tell the difference. I say this is marketing stunt.

    Because I don’t have a DX9 version of the same rendering.

  23. Wow, over 5 years, and this is all they can do with DirectX 10? Looks more like marketing hype than anything.

    I think our company will move over to OpenGL 2.0 because Microsoft just doesn’t have it anymore…

  24. Ok, lets get something straight. The first image supposedly from Flight Simulator X, the “DirectX 10 version” is an Artist’s interpritation of what DirectX 10 will look like. This was stated in Maximum PC Magizine. Compairing the fat guy from F.E.A.R. to those faces (even though impressive) has no relation whatsoever and shouldn’t be here. Lastly the fish. The DirectX9 version looks like someone just turned down the quality on thier DirectX9 graphics card, then put is back up to full for the “DirectX 10 version”

    – Love Jehuty16 =P

  25. This really isn’t that impressive. The water on the Flight Sim X DX10 version looks really good. That’s about it though… Is that all a DX10 card will get me is better textures/lighting?

  26. This looks like the same terrain rendered in Bryce and then again in terragen. This is meaningless without video.

  27. One word – SHAME!

    Great spin! You just rubbed DX9 in the face, didn’t you? Well fact is, DX9 is not as incompetent as you made it. The fat guy is prime example. OMG that is DX8, just look at it! That is soooooo obviously DX8 level graphics and TURNED DOWN. And you pair it up with DX10 turned up?

    You know, even the 4 year old GeForce FX 5200 Dawn demo looks better than any of the “DX9” proofs you’ve shown here:

    http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_dawndemo_home.html

    …and yeah, we’re talking about Shader Model 1.0 here…

    Let’s get the facts straight. Shader Model 3.0 can do almost everything Shader Model 4.0 can do in terms of the final result. Yes it lacks Geometry Shaders so SM3 will lag behind SM4 in terms of performance. But so what? If you could SLi say 8 SM3 GPUs, there’s nothing stopping SM3 from rendering very similar results that you shown in DX10.

    What DX10 really improved on DX9 is performance, expandability.

    hmmm.. i wonder if ppl will do these kinds of exaggerated comparisons when DX11 comes out – beauty DX11 vs the ugly DX10

    anyway, this article just ticked me off by insulting DX 9 so badly.

  28. No one is insulting DirectX 9. I’m sure like every demo material, comparisons are chosen to show the best of the difference. But having said that, there is nothing too unrealistic about these comparisons. These demoes are DirectX 10 running on DirectX 9 hardware.

  29. DirectX10 running on Directx9 GPU huh? lol i think u got everything mixed up.

    well for me u know this is not a fair comparison. everything seems so waterdowned in the 9 version, and everything seems so levelled up in the 10.

    the second image, the ugly guy, is not the same as the 10 example of invidiual faces. case in point – the 9 version has NO ANTIALIASING, whereas 10 has.

    and….. ummm why is the hair in the ugly dude image look like a block of cream? Radeon X1xxx and geforce 7xxx both can render realistic hair, so i really dunno what you’re on about…

    lol and hey… Xbox 360 runs DirectX9… so dun tell the whole world that this is the limit of xbox 360? more like the xbox 360 can render the “directx 10” images…. seriously….

    overall… like others have said above… this is a poor comparison…

  30. @Michael McMillan – Those faces are, as you call it, “game faces”. They appear in the up comming game Crysis. They are rendered in real-time in the game, though not 1000s at once. It’s an FPS, so mabye a couple dozen people on screen at most. However, same goes for the FEAR DX9 screenshot.

    And as for the fish, it’s not just “increasing the magnitude of the bumpmap.” Bump mapping only affects lightning, while these are actually 3D bumps on it, which can’t be achieved through either bump mapping or parralax mapping (since you can see the spines sticking out over the standard mesh). And the lighting is much better in the DX 10 version. It’s not as shiny as the DX 9 one.

    I agree completely with your points about the water though.

  31. Those replies near the top of this page, are by a bunch of dumb asses, who dont know what the hell their talking about. Their is no overly done photoshop, for that Flight Simulator X comparison. That is the freking real thing. And it “is” amazing. And the comparison between FEAR graphics and the new Crysis graphics are also freaking amazing.

  32. This is a completely meaningless comparison.
    DirectX 9 can do pretty much everything DirectX 10 can, but with higher hardware requirements.

    Now, for those images:

    The “DirectX 10” version of the first image is not a DirectX 10 rendering.
    A similar rendering can be achieved with DirectX 9, though.

    The second DirectX 10 image demonstrates detailed artwork, not the capabilities of the DirectX 10 API.
    The same face models can be rendered using DirectX 9 with little difference.

    The third DirectX 10 picture…
    It’s been done a million times using DirectX 9.

    I’ve seen better things done in DirectX 9.
    The only reason pathetic little fanboys haven’t, is because the only technologies they’re aware of are those implemented in computer games, which are meant to be run on their average hardware.
    To all DirectX 10 fanatics: you haven’t seem even a slice of the capabilities of DirectX 9 and won’t see even a slice of the capabilities of DirectX 10 either.
    Computer games won’t look as good as those pictures anytime soon.
    It just doesn’t depend on the API that much.
    Advanced techniques and high quality models reqire high end hardware.
    Some gamers do have such hardware, but most don’t, so the developers don’t even bother.

  33. It’s been said a bunch of times, and I will say it again, the comparison is worth nothing.

    The first scene uses a majorly different water shader, which you would find perfectly capable of running under DX9 (if it indeed uses the new geometry shader it would be emulated, but for just water it’s not a major overhead). The sky is nothing that’s not been done before DX10, the terrain in the background features some more shadows, also done before in DX9.

    The faces comparison compares a model of maybe 100 vertices with a model with literally thousands of vertices, so that’s no good. And as said above, Nvidia demo’s from a while ago demonstrate similar results.

    Only the fish presents what seems to be a worthy comparison. The new geometry shader as opposed to bumpmapping, but even here it seems the lightning conditions have slightly changed (either the light is aimed differently, or they removed the specular component, making the DX9 version more ‘shiny’).

    I’m not saying DX10 is a bad thing (I personally do prefer OpenGL though), but this comparison is worth nothing. Go look up some tech demos and see what’s already possible, then compare.

  34. To Long and anyone who cares about the real situation here:

    Quote from Long:

    “No one is insulting DirectX 9. I’m sure like every demo material, comparisons are chosen to show the best of the difference. But having said that, there is nothing too unrealistic about these comparisons. These demoes are DirectX 10 running on DirectX 9 hardware.”

    As a matter of fact, even though you didn’t explicitly insult DX9, you implicitly insulted DX9 by not giving DX9 a “fair go” at showing it’s full potential. You turned down the graphics for DX9, obviously. and turned all the way up for DX10? How is this even a comparison?

    OK, I’m gonna go into finer detail. DX9 has two modes – DX9-compliant, and DX9-compatible. DX3D10 (referred to as DX10 to ease reading) has one mode only – DX10-compliant. That means, no cap-bits or optional capabilities for DX10. It will have all the features available for every DX10 card. Performance is the only differentiator for DX10 cards.

    DX9-compat does not contain all the feature set in the DX9 specification. DX9-compliant does. For the fairest comparison, you should have the *SAME* rendering for both DX9-compliant and DX10-compliant.

    So… are the Dx9 images rendered from DX9-compliant or DX9-compatible? Well I can guarantee you 2000000% they are DX9-compat. Why? why do I even have to say this? GeForce 5200, with it’s “old and vintage” DX9-compliant Shader Model 2.0, was capable of rendering Dawn in real-time – all the way back in 2002. Yeah it’s been 4 years but look at her hair, does it resemble anything like the Fat Bastard “DX9” image you’ve shown. The Dawn demo didn’t take *FULL* advantage of DX9 yet, as the GeForce 5xxx cards had sucky performance.

    GeForce 7800’s Luna is a better representation of the full potential of DX9, but still not quite there yet. watch the video and see for yourself.

    http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_luna_home.html

    For FSX – I can tell you that the engineers at MS didn’t take full advantage of DX9 if that shot was true. Well I can’t blame them, they have to build so many scenes for every single corner of the…. say Earth…

    —————–

    All I want to tell you is that DX9 is a very advanced and mature architecture. It is very capable of rendering extremely realistic graphics such as the movie Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within.

    Yes DX10 is an improvement, but I can tell you the improvement will be less on “rendering complexity” and more on efficiency – efficiency so that more human-like objects can be rendered at the same time compared to DX9. So—– if 1 DX10 GPU can render the Crysis demo in real-time, it might take 2 DX9-compliant GPUs to do the same thing.

    so pleaaaaaaaseeee.. don’t insult something that has brought us so much grahpics joy for the past 4 years… would you do these kinds of comparisons when DX11 comes out? (Oh DX10 sucks so much, DX11 is the REAL cinematic-quality technology, see these comparisons -_-)

    P.S. Procedural Shading, FP32 color precision, and HDR (high-dynamic-range) – first introduced with DX9, is enough to render Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within – with negligible differences.

  35. They have this same shot of fsx in Maximum PC this month. This is a graphic artists interpretation of what directx 10 will look like vs directx 9.

  36. Come on guys. It’s ONE comparison and they did their best at compairing it. Really, get it yourself if you REALLY want to know the comparison then post your own site with it.

    The fact is, it may not be the best comparison out there, but it’s ONE.

    Man, you guys take this WAY to personally.

    – Concerned Citizen –

  37. Pingback: Euan's Rants
  38. Uhm, the picture of the guy holding the cactus..the mouse over..those “DirectX 10” rendered heads? No sorry, those are from the CGI mini-movie from the Animatrix, “Final Flight of the Osiris” I do believe.

  39. Microsoft seem to fool it users (again) just to sell another copy of vista. If you look at the original page at http://blogs.technet.com/windowsvista/articles/447226.aspx then it is very obvious that they just put a bad pic (they call it DX9) and a nicer pic (they call it DX10).

    Those 2 rendered backgrounds with the moutain and water is just another Microsoft trick to fool users into vista. DX9 can render it much better then that, but would it help to sell Vista better? nah, I dont think so. Just use lower rendering settings and call it DX9 :)

    We know that Halo graphic sux and the comparison from halo head (DX9) and Crysis head (dx10) just shows that. If you look at ‘Halflifes 2 Episode One’ graphic (oh yeah, its DX9 !) you will see just as good as they write ‘only DX10’ can do. Sorry, but rubbish should go straight into the garbage.

    Don’t believe everything and everyone, even if it seems trustable. Don’t trust me either. Just take a look yourself and ‘sense it’.

    Good Day!
    Jow

  40. These examples aren’t very good, but there are better ones available. Take a look at Crysis footage, specifically the tech demo. That footage uses real DX10 in real-time and specificly labels the improved features of dx10 over 9 that are used. (ex. volumetric shading, active mapping, tons more unique object support, geometric shading, etc.)I don’t recommend the in-game footage currently available just because the player is making it obvious that he/she is trying to show off the features, and because they are overglorifying one of the enemies in the game (common trait of trailers of games still in beta). The graphics you see in all the videos are all real-time though, and are extremely impressive.

  41. “whoever said that the amd64 system with sli will own any mac, take a look at the Mac Pro, pwned? i think so…” NOT! that mac is good…for a mac but if against a proper pc purly shit on a stick not only that but a rip for $1457.58 you can get 5.2 dual core 64 AMD, dual 7900 gts, 540w power suply, 2 gb of ram and a case,cd drive,hard drive,mother board,suond card and so on if you like mac i think you should see a doctor you fucking retard!!!

  42. A comparison could be made the day the Wine team starts implementing DirectX 10 – from what they say, it should be ‘relatively easy’ once they switch to WGL – meaning that owners of OpenGL 2.0 cards may have full DirectX 10 support using libwine under Windows XP, or using Wine under Linux…

    Read the WWN #320 on winehq.org for more details. Of course it’s still preliminary – but considering we’re talking about guys who’ve reimplemented all Direct3D versions, they may know what they’re talking about.

  43. Too bad that the DX 10 image is an artist rendition of a mountain. The information was rleased in the september issue of Pc Format by a developer team. Microsoft flight simulator will be using DX 9 for the most part, as DX 10 is still only in early development.

  44. “DirectX10 running on Directx9 GPU huh? lol i think u got everything mixed up.”
    Using the DirectX SDK you, developers can render in a software emulation mode with the DirectX Sdk. The DirectX redistribute is not capable of this. Basically it allows you to render anything in DirectX 10 mode, even if your system doesn’t have the right hardware. But this very sssslllloowww. It’s obviously a picture.

  45. Doesnt really prove alot, id like to see more about this.
    I have it on good faith dx10 will be a huge hit as my
    fav mmorpg is writing a seperate client specifically to
    benefit from the new gfx, little pissed my 7800gtx is
    garbage again though :(

    lol, i just love microsoft hating nublars.. go back to your
    linux where nothing is compatible and stay there.. no need
    to come on here and whine about your own stupidity.

  46. a ja was pierdole głupie angole:) możecie mnie cmoknąć w pałe 😀 yes yes yhym ofcourse:) pierdole was serdecznie 😛 jesteście włochatymi chujami to właściwie pędzlami:D nic nie wiecie nic nie umiecie pojebańce poprostu:]Pędzle pierdolone w odbyty a niech was zerzra binladeny cwaniaki kurewskie możecie nakicać :] jednym słowem grettings and SERDECZNIE CHUJ WAM W DUPE !!!!!!!!!!! :]

    Kwiatek from POLAND

  47. @Ben L.: thats called displacement and it’s possible in realtime since ages…

    comparing fear with crysis is like comparing quake 2 with quake 3 it’s stupid… no crysis shot is done with DX10 because there is simply no real working hardware for this yet, all images are just emulated…

    and comparing an ugly Flightsimulator shot with an enhanced shot isn’t that wise either, the water and sky effects are also possible with DX9, they just need more work

  48. >>“whoever said that the amd64 system with sli will own any mac, take a look at the Mac Pro, pwned? i think so…” NOT! that mac is good…for a mac but if against a proper pc purly shit on a stick not only that but a rip for $1457.58 you can get 5.2 dual core 64 AMD, dual 7900 gts, 540w power suply, 2 gb of ram and a case,cd drive,hard drive,mother board,suond card and so on if you like mac i think you should see a doctor you fucking retard!!!

    Intel architecture > AMD intel architecture.
    Intel roadmap > AMD Road Map
    Mac Pro > the pc you just described

  49. The “presumably” DirectX10 examples could easily be achieved using DirectX9 and even probably down to DX7 and most likely all you would need for the finishing results is nothing more than to add the finishing settings and allow it to render in something as simple as Bryce3D etc.

    What should be shown is realtime rendering video’s showing with DX9 then DX10, pictures prove nothing in the DX world.

    Try again!

  50. Google for: “DirectX 9” “DirectX 10” “Throw away OpenGL”
    Now tell me guys, do you trust spam?

    Some of these images compare standard DirectX 7/8 renderings with something that could be achieved with advanced DirectX 8/9 renderings. The point is that theyr’e fake.
    If Microsoft is behind these posts then these guys must be really desperate to promote Vista this way.

    And what does “Throw away OpenGL” mean?
    DirectX 10 is not yet available and it’s features are allready available under OpenGL.

    I wonder if it’s possible to connect these posts with Microsoft. If we can do that then Microsoft could be sued for false advertising or something like that 😉

  51. Didn’t read all of the comments but a lot of the people that left them have no clue what they are talking about. If you actually want to know why DirectX 10 is superior to DX9 or OpenGL for that matter read the siggraph white paper by David Blithe on the subject. The images that you showed don’t really explain the reasoning, but DX10 is not just an API it also is a requirement for graphics cards and by not being backwards compatible manages to be 10 times faster in many cases.

  52. For those who want the Mac/PC debate and fanboy insults (Are they really insults, anyway…) The Mac is now essentially a PC. Plain and simple. Where the PC has a 100% advantage is with SLI/Crossfire. I have a Mac Pro with 2 x Dual Core Xeon 2.66Ghx and an ATI X1900XT. Nice card – Nice machine. I get about 9k on 3D mark 06. I get 11k on my PC with one GeForce8800GTX and 17k in SLI with my e6600 Oc’d from 2.4Ghz to 3.6Ghz aircooled, 2gb PC 8000 DDR2, 300Gb SATA II.

    The point is, I can run anything on both without breaking a sweat. I can overclock the PC and it’s video cards. I can’t however, overclock the Mac. The video, sure, but only to the PC’s stock speeds.

    Direct X 10 is nothing until there is supported software. The only thing that is currently out now is a lame direct x 10 demo from nVidia. The only thing DX10 really does is change the 3d data is processed within the GPU.

    The images above are fakes. They are professional painting, renderings, and conceptual images. Look at the video for Crysis. It looks GOOD. Compare that to the pictures here, those head renderings are WAY off. Think about it before you jump the gun on what to actually expect.

  53. Well now thats a great crap! well i’m not a apple lover (i hate it, starting by Jobs)! i’ve played a lot of titles, DX7,8 and 9 titles! Well some dudes around here say that DX10 beats Playstation 3 and Xbox360… well why don’t you go to gamespot.com and compare the Splinter Cell Double Agent screens (the X360 and the PC ones) All i want you to do is to check that Chrysler 300C! The screenshot gives you the answer! First of all those pictures are concept-art! Why? i tell you! close to the right shore of the lake where those pine trees are, you can se in the watter some little waves, if you check out carefully you can still see them on the suposed DX10 picture! the fish was edited! the faces? well please, i’ve seen much better faces on DX9 its all a matter of textures! Microsoft and the Gaming industry, and i mean the graphic chips producers are bullshiting us!This is a great maneuver to sell Vista thats why it’s an exclusive! Xp is more than able to run the crapy DX10! I made better look videos using 3D Studio in my X1600! DirectX-10 was not necessary!

  54. Pingback: ׵ѡ
  55. DX10 does beat PS3 and Xbox360 because DX10 came out after PS3 and Xbox360. So there for its impossible for DX10 to be on PS3 and Xbox360 all it is on the PS3 and Xbox360 is that they pushed DX9 to its limits on quality.

  56. And the above images are fake but not totally fake because i have the game FEAR and the graphics do lokk somtin like that but look at the guys arms and hands. It is a real screen shot but the screen shot was edited.

  57. Ok every is like fuck windows hating people ur a bunch of dumb asses

    look at what microsoft has you doing….. o shit
    i need to veiw my games in high def. I shell out 200+ dollars for just that
    they have a fucking monoply
    all they care about is your money
    so what will they do
    start phasing out Xp a perfectly(ish) good system
    so bill gates gets more fucking money
    he has too dam much allready

    i think that there is also nothing wrong with open gl and dx 9 and like some one has said above this post
    I like games for the game play

    graphics are just a side item

  58. has anyone noticed that if you stair at the picture of the tree’s and the water (in directx 10) top picture, that it appears to move.

    I think i’ve just been at work toooo long today… :(

  59. Alright, look I use these machines everyday as a PC tech, work on computers from windows 98 through windows vista, not to mention I am running Vista Ultimate as of two weeks ago on my own computer, and I have one thing to say to those who are like ‘there is no difference from dx 9 to dx 10’ or ‘forget vista’ before you even use it or have a computer capable of even running it the way it was meant to run………SHUT UP! For cryin’ out loud, please don’t talk about stuff you don’t know.

    Who cares if the shots above are concepts or actual shots, or whatever. Look up crysis for example, run that video. Go to Nvidia and download the Lost World demo and play it on a capable DX 10 machine, or run games such as Supreme Commander in dx9 then dx10 and compare, or heck just run 3d mark 06 on dx 9 and 10 and compare….the direct x 10 will blow you away, unless you are some stubborn hardass who thinks you are the center of the universe and there is no way you could be wrong….in that case save yourself and don’t post stuff you know nothing at all about.

  60. To be honest, i think DirectX 10 is wonderful. But you must keep in mind – especially when comparing to OpenGL – its just because its new – and really – its about time.

    Oh, and btw… OpenGL is not really that bad. A few engines i’ve tried have gone from about 350 – 450 and 200 – 270 when i’ve tried them (First one, irrlicht + Q3 BSP demo. I forget the second one. I might look it up and post it if i can find it.)

  61. Well I needed no convincing after looking at the first couple comparison shots on this page. It’s obvious that DirectX10.0 shows considerably more detail and is a bumpup in realism BUT…the last couple of comparison shots on this page of the anglerfish, I was like, so what? The directX10.0 version doesn’t look all that better than 9.0. I’d take that last one off here if I were you.

    I’d also like to offer a warning to all new computer buyers out there! Some of the newer vista-OS laptops that meet most of the minimum reqs. for the newest graphics-intensive games WONT play some games like Tomb Raider Anniversary Edition UNLESS they have at least DirectX 10.0, so be careful! It’s worth doing your homework before you buy.

  62. I would like to extend my apology for something I just wrote regarding Tomb Raider Anniversary for PC. I gave some wrong information. Apparently as I was told by tech support, TR Anniversary Edition will run on systems supporting DirectX 9.0 and TR’s other minimum game requirements, but if you have a new computer that is running DirectX 10.0, you might want to think twice before buying the game because it might NOT work on your system. I couldn’t even get it to install. Moreover, I found out the hard way that some store clerks try to sell Vista users on Vista-supported games since they know that some winXP games don’t work on VISTA… bottom line is, make sure absolutely ALL the game specs are supported by your system before you buy. This sounds obvious, but in my case I didn’t realize that my directX 10.0 would keep my game from running, when all my other specs lined up great. Hope this helps someone.

  63. Huh i have looked over these comments and all i have to say is you guys do not need to judge sumthing u have not played on so that being said play a friend that bought it or sumthing but chill with the “it is photoshop” “bullshit” “that is just a screen shot i wanna see a video” well if u want to see the video go buy it or try it and chill with the complaints.

  64. I really don’t get why there are so many Microsoft haters out there. I mean, sure, just about everything they do is copied from someone else, but they’re brilliant on the business side, and for that reason, they deserve what they get.

    I’m sick of seeing Apple fanboys who just can’t stop boasting about how great Apple is… So much so in fact, that they have to reuse the same arguments over and over just to try to justify their enthusiasm.

    I’m sorry if this is news to you; but Apple is just as money-hungry as Microsoft! If Apple had the same financial affluence as Microsoft, they too would be monopolizing the industry. Both Microsoft and Apple are on the stock market, so by rights, both are money-machines. Neither of these companies have room for ‘retirement’ or ‘slowing down’. They’re always going to want more money because that’s how the shareholders like it.

  65. Yeah, microsoft is good at making money. But they are also good at chaifing my ass. I just built a computer to play games on and now they are gonna make everyone move to vista just so they can play the new games and microsoft makes more money. At least apple dosnt do that. Windows xp is so much more stabile and vista is slow and sucks balls. I mean the name VISTA is so gay.
    And now i’m gonna have to get a 512 mb graphics card thats direct x 10 ready.
    And get a frickin vista upgrade disc.

  66. All effects applied in D3D v.10 are possible with D3D v.9, if mapped, lighted, and placed correctly. D3D v.10 really doesn’t do anything worth switching to Vista for. I’m sure it has potential. (By potential I mean the ability to rip ideas from OpenGL.)

  67. Here are my thoughts…

    As any search on directx 10 seems to come up with dubious screenshots and silly troll-fights, I wonder how these ‘features’ will benefit developers…

    Maybe evil bosses need to push software to the unsuspecting (and autistic) gaming community through their respective henchmen standing around insulting each other with their weapons replaced with pictures of
    a)photoshopped images or
    b)games that don’t yet exist.

    I can’t imagine Crysis being much fun if all the aliens and North Koreans do is bitch at each other and call each other ‘haters’, until someone shows up with the ‘bumpyfish’ picture and the world explodes… …bumpily.

    Unfortunately I’ve just realised the fruitlessness of this post, as leaving comments under an article has about the same world changing power as scratching the entire works of Shakespeare on a sloppy turd just before you flush.

    Man, I’m stipud.

  68. You apple fanboys shut the hell up! Yes i admit it, DX10 is realy good. Now that i have seen the videos on youtube i became impressed! Lots of potential, beats any game console on the market and more the stupid war for Graphic Engines tht Nvidia started is over, since the dx10 controls the deal! You wanna know why DX9 sucks? It’s easy! Why in the name of God a dude that i know with a Celeron 2.6Ghz + 512MBDDR400 + Gforce Fx5200 beats my PC with a P4 Extreme 3.0Ghz + 1.75GBDDR400 + Radeon X1600 PRO 512MB while playing GTA San Andreas? It’s easy, the logo on the game start-up says it all! The way it means to “make you buy one if you wanna play”, you all know this logo, Nvidia logo! God bless de DX10 cause if i have one Radeon HD i can play the same games with the same performance (GPU’s of the same level on both trade-marks) without having to buy a new graphic card every time that a game comes to the market with the Nvidia logo! I am sick tired of trying to play video games that don’t work with my card just because Nvidia says to and pays to! This is why i realy don’t like Nvidia, cause they don’t make cards better, they just cheat on PC users! This Nvidia thing don’t match with the subject of this forum, but since DX10 will put one end to this crapy Nvidia game monopoly i’ll just say, God Bless DX10 and God Bless ATi and all other GPU makers that cannot grow in the market because of the huge Nvidia tentacles that are controling everything, THANK YOU MICROSOFT!

  69. Apple fanboys. That includes everyone who uses and/or supports OpenGL? Really?

    I feel offended. I support OpenGL because:

    1. Its easy to program with – I don’t have to deal with some fucked up technology (And if you don’t admit COM and its family are fucked up, then either your fucked up or you work at Microsoft)

    2. Its multi platform. This complements the hope that Microsoft will not be the only major figure on the market when it comes to home computing. While 10% of desktop computers run Linux, it won’t really help Linux gain a name for itself that average users will hear. We need commercial support too, and the more commercial support, the more users, which draws in more developers to help solve some of the major issues going on (be it design flaws or missing features)

    3. Its unlimited. aside from fixing design flaws, OpenGL card manufacturers can adapt to any new feature that card manufacturers come up with. They should have a forced standards system, though, and not one which pumps out extension specs as slow as the previous one.

    4. Its fast. While most programs don’t use it optimally, minimizing the amount of batches can make OpenGL fast as hell. This doesn’t fix the design-flaw speed problem, but luckily OpenGL 3.0 will.

    So sure, DirectX 10 is temporarily cool, but its not magically amazing. The hardware is still hella-bigger than the last round of hardware and its not magically cool just because of DirectX 10. I smell *MARKETING HYPE*

    I know how much you people ‘love’ your shiny graphics, but I like a world where I can put what i want on my PC without losing all of its abilities. But to get back to my original point:

    STOP CALLING ALL OPENGL SUPPORTERS APPLE FANBOYS >_> I’m closer to a Linux zealot but i pretty much support anything thats not going to f over computing freedom so basically anything free is better than nothing. Linux just happens to be the best OS you can get without paying for this stupid ‘license’ thing – But the real advantages come out to when we aren’t using approved applications only because Microsoft had a nice deal with Intel or whoever to implement DRM for applications.

    Now for the ignorant idiot above me, who thinks that NVidias trying to control everything… You look like an ass.

    See, NVidia doesn’t piss on everyone who doesn’t use Windows. That is actually a good thing. Basically, Microsoft keeps pumping out their shitty-excuses-for-an-opengl-implementation(tm) with every version of Windows and puts out of date headers inside of their development software. You know, it’d be different if their implementation of OpenGL built on DirectX wasn’t a complete pile of shit, or if they would have denied the claim that OpenGL can’t work with Aero and will not use any above 1.4 extensions quicker (God knows they wanted to scare away the developers without lying, and that rumor was perfect. Thanks.)

    So I’m sitting in Linux comfortably with my DirectX 10 card and its doing my geometry shaders, too. So if soon enough I’m gonna have the speed of DirectX 10 and since i already have access to the new features in the G80 nvidia cards, why would i waste anymore time going into windows vista just to see explorer freeze up and have my graphics card drivers repeatedly crash? And don’t you tell me I’m overestimating or i have viruses. Windows installations die over time – They can’t fix it with any amount of software. Its a design flaw that lets it happen. And you know, even if there were easy ways to fix it they certainly require software that costs money. Don’t we pay enough for Windows when it fails to work anyways?

    God what a great day when we had OpenGL games and screensavers and absolutely nobody said “OpenGLSuxLolAppleFanboyGNUFanboyetcetcetcetcshutupidiotNoyoumicrosuxwhatevcyborgbill” because they most likely didn’t know anyways… To be honest with you, its a load of shit that marketing hype is controlling the computer world so much. So finally, drop it. OpenGL needs to be here and it needs fans or else they’ll be no one to improve it – Microsoft needs competitors or they will shove it down our throat with DRM. Go ahead and tell me I’m being paranoid, but it already almost began happening with TCG…

  70. FAKE.

    I can’t believe how obviously photoshopped the flight sim images look. The first image is easily recognizeable as a game image, the rollover is painfully photoshopped (look how the reflection of the mountains is simply overlayed with a photograph of real water)

    And the F.E.A.R. image…

    That’s a comparison of a great static rendering (the multiple heads) to an IN GAME image from a 3 year old game on god knows what settings. Maybe if F.E.A.R was ONLY designed to showcase model heads it would look that good.

    This article provides nothing but unequal comparisons and absolutely no reliable information. Anyone trying to really show something off would provide multiple shots of the SAME SCENARIO with some kind of comparable results (and no I don’t mean duping people with photoshopped crap). Why don’t we see some moving video of that in game amazing water.

    Oh yeah, you can’t fake video footage that easily.

  71. And to people saying “shut up saying it’s photoshopped until you see it in real life”

    Why not apply that logic to the article and not believe the hype until YOU see it in person. Stop defending something that you haven’t seen either.

    It’s called skepticism, and believe me, it’s for the better of humanity.

  72. DX10 is a complete shambles, its supposed to be faster and better looking, but so far all the DX10 games look the same but cost you 40fps, you can stick DX10 up its own arse its useless, move on to somthing thats good and actually works like its supposed to……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….NEXT!

  73. i dont get how changing the textures shows any of the graphics capabilities. why not get a standard xp pc to run a game then reinstall vista and direcx 10 on it then show a video comparisson?
    I know why i wouldt work youd have to change the entire hardware to even think about running vista an it wouldnt surprise me if it takes twice vistas requirements to run dx10 games. if you ask me i say wait til some genius comes up with a linux alternative…


  74. OpenGL 3.0?

    That should fix the speed issues, other than that NVidia users can already use DirectX 10 capabilities in OpenGL.

  75. DirectX 9 vs DirectX 10
    I have been working on game engine which used DirectX 9 API, and i can assure you that whatever rendering API you use ( DX9, DX10 or OpenGL ) cant make that differences. For all those noobs outthere DirectX 9 API is set of functions that programmer can use to utilize the hardware capabilities of GFX cards when making games. So this is TOTAL BULSHIT !!!! Ill commment just first picture.

    Sky:
    DX9: There is low quality texture image
    DX10: Some high quality texture image
    Conclusion: WTF!!! They changed a image of a sky to a better one so DX10 is better???? They will both render the same result if same image was used.

    Sunrays and shadows:
    DX9: There is no light in scene!!!!!!! You can check that by viewing nearest hill for shadows. If lightning is disabled there wont be any shadows.
    DX10: Yeah there is light source in scene. BRAVOO!!!!!
    Conclusion: How can you compare two “SAME” scenes where one has lightning and other not???? Good job for DirectX 10 , they made him to automatically add the light sources :)

    Water:
    DX9: Just reflections.
    DX10: WOW!!!!!
    Conclusion: Same water, only difference is that DX10 has high quality texture blended with reflection.

    Overall conclusion:
    This all is fraud!!!!! This isn’t same scenes!!! DX10 IS BETTER THAN DX9 ONLY BECAUSE IT SUPPORTS SOME HARDWARE CAPABILITIES THAT DX9 DOESN’T AND HAS SOME NEW FEATURES. THIS IMAGES ARE MARKETING TRICK. IF THOSE WERE SAME SCENES THEY WILL LOOK SAME IN EITHER API.

    P.S. I laughed to death when i saw a 3rd and 4th images. How can you compare that? Thats same as comparing two different shoes!!

  76. They are not blind…their web brouser is not woriking with some css stuff so it canot show the other picture so they only see the dx9 picture

  77. I think most of the ones that don’t like the difference is the ones that don’t have DX10. Most likely they can’t afford to buy it so they will make bad remarks about it. Me on the other hand have bought a New Computer with Vista and DX10 on it and I am very pleased with my decision. Oh and yes DX10 is much better that DX9 because I have looked at games both ways. I have the option to run some of my games both ways DX9 or DX10, and when in DX10 the games look a lot better. Better meaning ‘more and better looking grass’ ‘greater looking reflections”great smoke and steam”gives meaning to water’, could go on and on but you get the picture. So all you people that can’t afford to upgrade your computer don’t slam MINE cause I’ve got something you can’t afford. Just work some overtime and build you a New Computer, and don’t forget to load Vista and DX10. Thank You.

  78. Well then Mike Moody, I have Vista, I have Dx10 and let me tell you, it utterly sucks.

    Yes it improves your graphics slightly, yes it allows you to use a whole new variety of rendering systems…. however, it just simply takes to many resources.

    My system running on Dx 9 runs smooth like butter on anything I throw in it, on Dx10 certains games get their quality decreased ALOT. Meaning I have to turn down my settings to lower then what I had on Dx9.
    This is ultimately stupid.

    Now before you say anything about my system being cheap, allow me to retort.
    My system:

    Quad Core Processor 2.40Ghz each core
    NVidia EVGA 8800 GTS graphics card
    4Gb DDR3 team Elite RAM memory
    Asus P5K-E motherboard
    320Gb SATA hard drive

    If this system loses it’s stability then I can’t even start to imagine with slightly older systems.

    Also you gain nothing with this, on Dx9 this system runs CoD4 from 70 to 250FPS, on Dx10 with the same setting it runs on 10 to 65FPS with no notable graphical gain.
    And I won’t even go into crysis, although it’s the benchmark of graphics, and it’s the game that most utilizes Dx10 the graphical gain isn’t that big also.
    And the FPS drop from fifty to FIvE frames per second,with exactly the same settings. It is absolutely unforgivable.

    (other games tested: Clive Barkers Jericho Dx9 50-150FPS, Dx10 2-10FPS; Unreal Tournament 3 Dx9 60-62FPS, Dx10 10-20FPS)

  79. Findell,

    I absolutely agree with you. Got the same results with my games. My system lags slightly behind yours so the difference is even more obvious with the FPS decrease.

    So until then, I’m sticking with DX 9 until then. Smoother FPS at full settings is better than choppy FPS at full settings.

    I’ve also downgraded back to XP. Vista slow things down for me even with my new system.

  80. Well I stand by what I have said, My system is
    1-Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.0Ghz each
    2-XFX GeForce 8800GTS
    3-EVGA 680i Motherboard
    4-2XwesternDigital 10,000 RPM Harddrives
    and like I said I have no problem. I love Windows Vista and all the games that I play on it, Which include “Microsoft Flight Simulator X with Acceleration” “Crysis” “Call of Juarez” “Dirt” and many more older games. I did find out one thing with the 8800GTS you need to be running at a higher resolution like “1280×1024” or “1600×1200” and things will work better. You need to make sure you have your graphic card set up correct too. After doing this you will notice that the game looks better and feels better. I tried the lower resolutions and they just don’t work right.
    So I can only say to you guys is get a better machine. That is if you want your games to work right.
    But the big thing is don’t knock something just cause your computer will not run it right. It takes a little knowledge to make it right you just need to learn how to do this. Or you can stay in the Dark Age forever “your pick”. Me I like staying on the cutting edge.

  81. Direct X 10 is barely a reason to use Vista. Why would you use an operating system that has already had many bugs found and if it follows in the footsteps of all its predeccesors will probably never leave what some might call the “beta” stage of its development. How many games can you run without DX10 and even without windows? There isn’t really anything to make DX10 better just Micro$ofts standard backwards incompatibility. If you want a graphical alternative to Vista I’ve heard Linux Xgl has more graphical features than Vista. Is Vistas’ desktop a spinning cube? oh and also just to throw this in there, anyone know the virus ratio of Linux:Windows?

  82. Ha Ha Ha, what a moron, Does anyone know the ratio of “Windows users to Linux users”? The last time PC Mag. posted it was like 95% Windows to 3% Linux and 2% other. Yea go ahead “Dagoth Pie” use something you got for FREE and try and tell the world your smarther than the rest of us. If you read my post on up the page, it has to do with people like you. Just cause you can’t afford something don’t knock me cause I can. I upgraded to a new computer with Vista and a good 8800GTS card. The world will keep going forward “where will you be”?
    All operating systems have bugs in the first stages, ” remember XP service pack 1 and then service pack 2″? Every game that comes out has a Patch that follows and then another Patch till they get all the bugs out of them. Thats the way of life. I run Vista now and have no problems with it, all the new games work just fine on it and I get great FPS on all of them with GREAT views from DirectX 10. So stay where your at if thats what you want but for me I’m moving ahead with the best out there. Try flying Microsoft FSX in DX9 and then in DX10, you will see the difference. My machine runs it perfect with out of this world Graphics.

  83. Please guys this is not a “Perfect World” forum. This is a forum for Direct X 10. Now if Perfect World is a DirectX 10 game then tell me something about how it does with DirectX 10 compared to Direct X 9. The subject is just how GREAT DirectX 10 is. It is GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!

  84. Your right Mike Moody, sorry. And, as for it playing on directx 10… it’s the ultimate game!! But I recommend that you have a 512mb graphics card or higher in order to play it at its best (That goes for anyone who plays it) and as for directx 10… “Perfect”!

Comments are closed.