DirectX 11 to be revealed this month

I didn't say DX10 was better than 9, I basically said, that vista has become a much better OS than XP, Of course if your a 32bit fanboy then XP is your better choice, but if you like to have all of your OS tools ready and waiting with the abillity to upgrade your system whenever you want (with ease) then Vista x64 is a much stronger system, Of course the people who have vista x86 may be very dissapointed, but If they had used sence and gone with Vista x64 they will never want to downgrade to XP, and with the need to have more memory getting higher everyday I think even the XP Hardcore Fanboys will need to use sence and make the Upgrade - - - I also have a copy of XP x86 in a box with the rest of my old kit, and I've tried it on my system with my latest specs and I can definately say that its gone past its best before date, I agree that Vista wasn't the biggest step up that the OS's have ever seen, But it definately was worth the upgrade!! - just dont think that DX10 is everything in Vista x64!!.

Comment by NikoBellic at 4:08pm 17th July 2008

It doesnt matter what your OS is. I have an 22" HD monitor and i can watch my HD heroes episodes in 720p . So wtf are you on about. XP uses less ram for a start, so how does vista make it faster? Vista caches all the ram, and takes a little longer to load up and shut down than an xp operating system does. XP is limiting? sorry but the only thing it lacks is the ability to have dx10, and to be honest, for the likes of me and my friend playing W.I.C. i being the dx9 and my friend the dx10 (when enabled) i was far better off with a minimum of 28 fps not a minimum of 5.

Comment by Lightning_Pete at 6:01pm 16th July 2008

I can't help but laugh at these people who are still using XP, It makes no sence At all any more, 1. there is no HUGE performance difference now that Vista has been updated. 2. XP is way too limiting 3. XP is optimised to be a low res low quality OS, where as vista is optimised for the new world of HD content and High res everything.... (XP-640x480, Vista-1920x1080)

Comment by NikoBellic at 3:35pm 15th July 2008

Office 2007, WHS connector, Windows DVD Maker to name but a few. yes they are all available through XP but work better in Vista. Have installed Vista yourself? What problems have you had with Vista and DX10 PokerMuppet?

Comment by crazyceo at 9:07pm 13th July 2008

lol... and that sidebar is available for XP... although the 64bit version of Vista is certainly interesting. Waiting until I buy more RAM first though.

Comment by PokerMuppet at 8:42pm 13th July 2008

YOu know everyone didn't upgrade to Vista because of its 64 bit edition or its Direct X 10 capabilities. We only upgraded because of the funky side panel with the clock!!! That and the chess titans game!!! Well thats why I upgraded!!!!

Comment by Nickuk1987 at 8:24pm 13th July 2008

I get the point of this article and will be looking forward to it. I tied in my point of view about XP/Vista because DX10 is only available on Vista and DX10 just seems to have never got off the ground. DX11 may well be the opposite and be the next great step. I think it will be available through Vista in time for two reasons mainly. 1) Windows7 is way too far off and if they are showcasing DX11 now then it must be running on Vista. 2) Microsoft must have learned something by the fiasco that has happened over DX10 only being on Vista. As for updating, if my hardware and software is running fine as it is why should I upgrade? Maybe not you crazyceo, but there are others here that have said that XP users are holding things back. I would also like to know how exactly your other programs have benefitted by upgrading to Vista.

Comment by PokerMuppet at 7:38pm 13th July 2008

This topic isn't about XP, Vista or Windows 7. It's about the first look at DirectX 11 this month. No one is saying you should all buy Vista, Win7 (When out) or a two pound black ribbed nobbler. XP and DX9 may well be fine for you but it's not for others. Vista and DX10 work fine on every machine in the house with different specifications. I play different games and work apps and have seen vast improvements in upgrading to Vista. This isn't me saying you should all upgrade, it's me saying I've updated and upgraded 6 pc's and they have all benefited from the upgrade. There isn't one program or app that hasn't benefited from it. Back to the topic then. It will be interesting to see what DX11 looks like at Gamefest 2008.

Comment by crazyceo at 7:08pm 13th July 2008

I agree with PokerMuppet. Why upgrade to Win whatever with DX11 when XP and DX9 suit me just fine. Business may need the extra features, but I don't. Who cares when they release it, the fact is it's coming, but I won't be on the bandwagon unless I feel I need to. Spend a few hundred on a new OS if you want to, but I'll spend my money elsewhere.

Comment by ballman6711 at 3:00pm 13th July 2008

Anyone know WHEN DX11 is likely to be out? I'm guessing >1 year? In which case it's all pie in the sky to me lol.

Comment by Binks12 at 11:00am 13th July 2008

No I haven't. Yet again, getting back to the topic. This is just about the next evolutionary step of DirectX and the benefits it could potentially give. This isn't about XP or Vista since DX11 will probably be out with Win7. You stick to whatever you want to use while the rest of us move on.

Comment by crazyceo at 4:11pm 12th July 2008

Its only been what 2 years since the Geforce 8 series came out and a little longer since Direct X 9 revolutionised PC gaming. Now since the release of the Geforce 8 series the only good things we have had recently are probably the Geforce 9800 GX2 and the Geforce GTX 280. Now we are rushing headlong into Direct X 11. After the disaster of Direct X 10 and the crappy 9800 GTX doesn't anyone think that were advancing technology too fast and not actually checking if there is any difference to its previous versions. Hardly any games are using Direct X 10 at the moment. And even those games hardly look different from Direct X 9 games. DX10 is really like icing on a bun. DX11 could end up being the cherry on top next!!!

Comment by Nickuk1987 at 11:27pm 11th July 2008

microsoft: lets screw with DX sum more, then more companys will just program their games for the xbox360 lol. if we keep kicking the downed PC gaming dog , hopfully it will give up & die.

Comment by sativabud at 10:48pm 11th July 2008

Quote 'There is no viable reason not to upgrade to Vista other than cost'... Sorry mate but it looks like you have it backwards to me. I don't buy or do things just because it is there to do. I see no reason for me to upgrade to Vista and DX10 at the moment, so I won't. I will update my software or my hardware when it doesn't do what I want it to and I am left behind. How exactly are XP users being left behind at the moment?

Comment by PokerMuppet at 10:12pm 11th July 2008

According to Guru3D (http://www.guru3d.com/poll/images/blue.jpg) over 70% of the enthusiast community has a DX10 class card, of these all the Radeons are DX10.1 capable and include Tessellation, while compute shader and HLSL exist in both CUDA and Brook+. I'm guessing that Larabee will be the first DX11 part.

Comment by Initialised at 8:16pm 11th July 2008

There is no long term future in XP other than low cost laptops for developing countries. Are you saying that no one is buying new PC's? Vista good or bad is the way forward whether you like it or not. The reason game developers aren't releasing new games on PC and leaving it to Consoles is purely hardware driven. PC gaming has always been far easier to hack or crack and copy than consoles without the need to modify the hardware. The question is "When will the consumer upgrade their system to be able to play this new game?" Crysis proved that it wasn't a DX9 or DX10 thing because so few cards could handle it in either. Again, getting back to the topic. This is just about the next evolutionary step of DirectX and the benefits it could potentially give.

Comment by crazyceo at 3:59pm 11th July 2008

It has everything to do with Vista/XP since whatever has the highest users, the higher the chance the game is going to be made for that DirectX native too that operating system. What if DirectX 11 is Windows 7? Are you going to say that WIndows 7/Vista/XP are not going to matter? It all matters.

Comment by C7ouD at 2:35pm 11th July 2008

Progress is good. We could all cling to our comfort blanket of XP Pro and DX9. But why? If developement had stalled as much as the XP brigade then we would still be using Pentium 75's. There is no viable reason not to upgrade to Vista other than cost. This really isn't about XP or Vista so don't go there. This topic is about the next evolutionary step in DirectX and the benefits it could potentially give.

Comment by crazyceo at 2:23pm 11th July 2008

This just pushes all the other product providers to get their ass into gear and make sure their next in line is compatible. Remember when the 8 series from Nvidia came out and nothing was DX10 compatible. Vista hadn't even come out. This time it looks like DX11 will be ready for when they can bring out compatible hardware.

Comment by crazyceo at 2:15pm 11th July 2008

I absolutely agree, though the point is there are no games built on Direct X 10 from the ground up - why? Most users are Windows XP users, with piracy being as bad as it is, companies are not going to make a game which is only available too a small portion of the public and a product that will be a victim to piracy ontop of that. Companies are only interested in cash, what Microsoft should have done is incorperated Direct X 10 into Windows XP then game companies will produce games using Direct X 10 as the base and the patch being Direct X 9. But wait! That will not happen, why? Because DirectX 10 is a selling point for Vista, so ofcourse they are not going to implement it into an operating system they do not really want too support anymore. The companies are their own enemy. Creating DirectX 11 as apposing fixing Direct X 10 is not a fix. Direct X 10 has a bad reputation at the moment, it doesn't offer anything more than Direct X 9 than what we have seen and it is also hardly used. Direct X 11 is going to be Direct X 10 relreleased with better marketing - they have already started. My main arguement is of the people who have bought graphics cards, brand new cards just released in the last month or two are allready abundant! Think of companies which might have done a system upgrade, all of it added together with the recession starting up does not bode well for the customer and at the end of the day that is what gets all of these companies the cash to prosper and run. I cannot see how ATi/NVIDIA are at all impressed with this and even the Graphics card resellers. For an example - XFX spends cash to sell new cards, XFX looses cash over Direct X 11 being announced due too people not being interested in allready dated hardware, XFX then go onto NVIDIA, which NVIDIA then go onto Microsoft. Tell me, what good are Micosoft with no hardware?

Comment by C7ouD at 1:53pm 11th July 2008

First off, Crysis is not a good show of DX10. Because it doesnt use it. Neither are any of the games "patched" to use it because that is not how DX10 is intended to be used. It doesnt include some new fancy effects. Its a whole new way of rendering a scene. Also can people please look back at history. DX7 and 8 were both plagued with problems concerning support etc. until 9 came along. Which TBH was DX7 SP2. DX10.1 seems a bit stupid but nm thats another argument. Given release cycles i'd be surprised if DX11 is released within the next 18 months. It really isnt uncommon for people to be working on product versions 2 steps ahead of where they are. Hell at the release of 2003 Office Microsoft had been working on 2007 Office for 6months. And anyone who doenst believe the next incarnation of windows has some solid foundations laid is just being laughably stupid. Think of any major product out there in computing and they all have the next incarnation being developed. Its just nice too see the M$ is willing to show off pre-alpha releases of software to companies and hopefully get games developers learning how to use the new API. Thats the problem with DX10. Not the actual software but the fact that no-one knows how to use the API properly. Just go and find a decent book on coding for DX10. There still arnt any good ones.

Comment by reashlin at 1:01pm 11th July 2008

Have you considered the possibility that DX11 IS MS fixing DX10? You can't just change a DX version once its released, anyone who has writted games using it already would be up in arms. Also Crysis proves nothing about the performance of DX10. The performance of DX10 will be unknown until games are writted in DX10 from the gorund up, rather than simply adding a DX10 layer on top of DX9. When a frame is initially rendered in DX9 then polished further with DX10 effects it will obvioulsy be slower. For once I'm all in favour of MS turnign up late to a party and forcing people to play their games. The compute shader should stop the imminent disaster of Intel, Ati and Nvidia all implamenting different ways of talking directly to the GPU. Look at folding@home for example. Wouldnt it be nicer if you had a GPU client that ran on any DX11 card rather than requiring different clients for different hardware? [at this point... NotFred prays that paragraphs work in comments these days... or this will look like a hideous wall of text.]

Comment by NotFred at 12:14pm 11th July 2008

engadget.com claims DX11 has been dropped from Windows 7. So if they are right are we are looking at Windows 8(?) I dont believe they are right as it would be strange to talk about details of DX11 if it wasnt part of the upcoming W7 but I guess only time will tell

Comment by jonisaksson at 10:10am 11th July 2008

This seems to me to be MS giving us a look at a DX that will be release with Win7. It's following the same pattern as Vista (looks great in previews, gets released, takes a fair bit of flack, not as popular - ie doesn't sell as well as hoped/not developed by 3rd parties enough - so they work on the next version pronto) I reckon the new Win will make some use of it as it does seem to be a fairly graphic-intensive OS - moreso than Vista's Aero - I do agree with the couple of people who see a link between this and LarryLadyboy, XP64 wasn't released until Intel had released 64EMT architecture - even though AMD had 64-bit capability for a good whie before then - or it could be similar to nVidia's Gelato which enables the GPU as an additional co-processor for certain tasks (mostly rendering at this point), but the "new capabilities" spoken of could be a universal, easy(ish) way to use GPU/shader units as additional processors or something similar. I do sympathise with those who have DX10.hopeful and are a tad annoyed at the lack of decent support/products, I would be if it was me, but MS can only do so much, if game devs don't have access to the technology before the public do, they can't star producing software that takes advantage of it quickly enough, and we all know s/w does take a while to develop - unless you have an Agent Smith-like ability to clone programmers or whole development teams!

Comment by EdArch at 12:21am 11th July 2008

I really cant see what the fuss is about, why panic? Look at DX10, only a handful of games take advantage of it, and even then they dont take anything like full advantage of it. Plus the fact that it has taken so long for even those handful of games producers to jump on the band wagon! I mean, there are still NO games that are solely DX10 compliant so DX 11 compatible games must be a good way off yet. I honestly dont believe DX11 / Windows 7 will simply leave DX10 / Vista a 'dead' software / technology. I believe that one day, something will 'click' into place and DX 10 / 10.1 will take off.

Comment by Mo_misterrosco1e at 10:48pm 10th July 2008

I wonder what the frame rate hit for that will be? DX10 was bad enough

Comment by l3v1ck at 8:16pm 10th July 2008

* edit * i mean thinking about 10 not 11 *

Comment by conorakamook at 7:47pm 10th July 2008

""Think about it, now that they have said this, people are not going to buy new graphics cards when they know it is going to be outdated within a few months?"" Exactly, i was going to buy a 4850 TOMMOROW!! but now they're talking about 11, i'll wait it out now, i just feel a little sorry for people that brought a card recently for the future, i mean who would of thought we'd be talking about 11 after 10 hasn't been out even 2 years, 2 years into direct x 9 no one was even thinking about 11!!

Comment by conorakamook at 7:45pm 10th July 2008

""Think about it, now that they have said this, people are not going to buy new graphics cards when they know it is going to be outdated within a few months?"" Exactly, i was going to buy a 4850 TOMMOROW!! but now they're talking about 11, i'll wait it out now, i just feel a little sorry for people that brought a card recently for the future, i mean who would of thought we'd be talking about 11 after 10 hasn't been out even 2 years, 2 years into direct x 9 no one was even thinking about 11!!

Comment by conorakamook at 7:45pm 10th July 2008

But will require the gfx chips to be totally redesigned ala the DX10 cards. I guess it's a Microsoft version of CUDA, to level the playing field to developers somewhat.

Comment by joeamnesiac at 7:32pm 10th July 2008

Direct X 10 doesn't give any improvements over Direct X 9, that was proved with Crysis and if anything, it is more demanding on hardware. I cannot understand why people are defending this? Microsoft are a $58 Billion company, I think they can act, produce and DO generally better.

Comment by C7ouD at 6:58pm 10th July 2008

before posting. Seem to be a fake video

Comment by jonisaksson at 5:51pm 10th July 2008

Well I dont know if this is real but there is a video on youtube where nVidia shows off the difference between DX10 and DX11 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lz7ApglZ2BQ

Comment by jonisaksson at 5:26pm 10th July 2008

just because they are developing dx11, doesn't mean dx10 isn't being looked at, however we still dont actually have any proof dx10 needs looking at, lets wait until we actually have a dx10 game to test it with (instead of the dx9 ports we currently have) before saying it's broken, thats like saying the pc is broken as gaming platform based on running a piss poor console port on it.

Comment by NewParadigm at 4:54pm 10th July 2008

with MS for this. I am by no means a MS fanboy but this to me doesnt seem anything strange. Any software company want to tease with new upcoming releases. Working for a very large software company myself, I know that when we release a new version of our software, the next version is already in the works and been so for awhile. It is just the nature of how software development works. I am sure MS does the same thing as us and leave a big chunk of the development team on the just released version to focus on improving that the rest gets moved to the new upcoming version. I think the only unusual thing is that they openly tell us about it. How can openness be bad thing?

Comment by jonisaksson at 4:42pm 10th July 2008

to stop game devs like UBI starting to try developing for the MAC (ive read a rumour that UBI is working on developing FC2 for the MAC!) I hope that they do go ahead with developing for the MAC so microsoft dont just concentrate on the consoles competition and start to focus on the PC again! (although they are trying to improve on DX I haven't seen much other work, such as making all the GFWL features free - maybe they could just add a small ad section at the top of the screen to fund that!)

Comment by NikoBellic at 4:36pm 10th July 2008

The alternative and what should be the main aim would be concentrating on fixing what they already have. Wait, that would require time and money, none of which Microsoft is interested in loosing, so they start on DirectX 11. Simple, mundane, facts.

Comment by C7ouD at 4:31pm 10th July 2008

I'm not sure why people are so against this; all that's happened is MS has announced we'll get a first look at DX11, a standard which is some years off. The alternative is what - that they stop developing DirectX? If you want a static box that never changes, get an Xbox.

Comment by Sifter3000 at 4:11pm 10th July 2008

I just hope the market starts rising up agains them, I really do, atleast I wish, from an idealist POV. Think about it, now that they have said this, people are not going to buy new graphics cards when they know it is going to be outdated within a few months? It is absolutely astonishing and it is just typical Microsoft, damn that company.

Comment by C7ouD at 4:02pm 10th July 2008

A W7 Exclusive to make us buy that... M$ stop doing this to these old pensioners, they like old stuff thats outdated, so dont force them to make the move to the next OS, I have Vista because I wanted Vista x64, Not because DX10, that was just an extra bonus, although I would of upgraded even if XP supported DX10!.

Comment by NikoBellic at 3:53pm 10th July 2008

lol, anybody have a swear sensor?

Comment by C7ouD at 3:45pm 10th July 2008

there hasn't even been a proper game released for DX 10 yet. I smell a rat though, the main feature of DX11 is clearly going to be the compute shader, which by the sound of it is exactly the kind of thing Intel are pinning their larabee hopes on. Anyway, they are showing it off as 'in development' It'll still be years before we actually see it available to the masses

Comment by NewParadigm at 3:42pm 10th July 2008

Ah... the old ones are always the best. Long live SpinalTap...

Comment by PokerMuppet at 3:43pm 10th July 2008

One louder

Comment by hardwidge at 3:37pm 10th July 2008

I have no idea why the picture for this isn't an amplifier going to 11.

Comment by Sifter3000 at 3:25pm 10th July 2008

I'm looking at you C7ouD. Sorry, I'm an arse. ;-)

Comment by lxstuart at 3:20pm 10th July 2008

Dude when will you learn that sometimes they make mistakes and there is a fundimental issue with either Hardware (nVidia's 5000 series) or Software (DX10, Vista) that they cannot fix and look to replace as soon as it is viable, hence talk already of Windows 7 and now DX11. Now maybe, just maybe some of you will stop bitching about moving over to DX10 when there is obviously a reason why they have left it to gather dust. Long live the XP resistance.

Comment by PokerMuppet at 3:16pm 10th July 2008

DirectX 9 lasted what? 6 Years? DirectX 10 has a bad reputation so instead of fixing it, they are going to release something which is not going to be supported by nothing at all. Well done Microsoft, you still as stupid as you have always been. ***EDITED - please refrain from coarse swearing in the comments section***

Comment by C7ouD at 3:17pm 10th July 2008

Considering they couldn't get 10 or 10.1 right, and the complete lack of take-up overall, and that most hardware doesn't run it properly, why bother? Get 10 working right first, or is it another vista type thing, release something that only works a bit, then skip to the new thing?

Comment by Rkiver at 3:10pm 10th July 2008

• One top four motherboard maker will die, says MSI
• AMD plans supercomputer with 1,000 GPUs
• Nvidia announces GeForce GTX 285
• Creative takes wraps off Zii processor architecture
• Nvidia announces stereoscopic 3D glasses
• BFG unveils hand built Phobos gaming PCs
• UPDATED: LiveJournal announces mass layoffs
• Top 10 PC games chart
• Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 gets 500GB on single platter
• Creative reveals new Zii processor

These are the most popular news articles over the past seven days.

• Phenom II overclocked to 6GHz
• GeIL unveils Cyclone RAM cooler
• Rumour control: GeForce GTX 260 GX2 in January
• Nvidia cuts price of 216 SP GeForce GTX 260
• VIDEO: PC version of Mirror’s Edge features hardware PhysX
• Get Half-Life for less than a dollar on Steam
• IBM plans to build virtual human brain
• RivaTuner 2.20 adds SLI and CrossFire support
• VIDEO: ArmA II trailer released