DirectX 9 compared with DirectX 10 in pictures

[sRc]

then you wont be able to HW accelerate DX10 introduced features, thats all

[Midnight]

ok this link is complete bullshit. Thanks for wasting my life.


However one thing I'd like to point out is that this is NOT a good example of what directX 10 will be. so you can't immediatly think that it will suck in fact you can't think poop until you buy it or see it for yourself.

Oh and gently caress microsoft and vista I just got this xp poop down. course even that required enormous modifications.

Maybe we'll get lucky but rest assured microsoft will continue to do what it does best and people will continue to use that to their advantage.

and that dudes right you'll have to reinstall XP or switch to mac or linux or something else if you don't want vista on your next PC.

I'm due for a new graphics card by the end of next year anyway so big deal about the x10 cards.

I never understood why everyone gets there panties in a bunch about stuff that hasn't even come out yet... as if any of you can even master directX9 yet.

ps opengl blows.. but maybe the next version won't but I doubt it.
and it doesn't matter what operating system you use it's what you use it for don't be so geeky.. a tool is only as good as it's user.

[EmmanuelD]

Well it seems the first picture is an artist's rendition

This is where it goes mad. DX10 doesn't have a reference rasterizer?

I smell marketing hypeness.

And the DX9 renders are quite ugly IMHO. Don't tell me that games are limited to this horrible, overused water shader they show on the first picture - which is also guilty of numerous other problems). Someone in the gamespot article comments says that the engine is quite old, and seing these shots, I'm not very far from saying he is right.

[3ddev]

Those pictures are all so different that the comparisom is unfair. Just a few more lighting effects, a few more waves. That's all. It can all be done in DirectX9. Now many programmers are expected to learn a new DirectX( Not for the lucky Irrlicht users though! )! The face test is the worst example- a model face versus a few face images. I really don't think DirectX10 is going to be that much better than DirectX9 at all!

[EmmanuelD]

Those pictures are all so different that the comparisom is unfair. Just a few more lighting effects, a few more waves. That's all. It can all be done in DirectX9. Now many programmers are expected to learn a new DirectX( Not for the lucky Irrlicht users though! )! The face test is the worst example- a model face versus a few face images. I really don't think DirectX10 is going to be that much better than DirectX9 at all!

DX10 rendering capabilities are higher than DX9, so we can expect better graphics for DX10 games. Anyway, the whole point of DX10 is not its "incredible awesomness" but lies in the unified shader model. Everything else is eye candy - and eye candy is done by artists, not programmers.