Tom's Guide | Tom's Hardware | Tom's Games
 |
 |
 |
is it possible to have dx 10 on XP? i am using 8800GT now. but i only have 2 GB ram. i am still using XP pro. i see many games memory requirement on vista is twice more than on XP. so is it possible to install dx 10 on XP?
Notice that the above article is over a year old. AFAIK, "DX10 for XP" never went beyond the alpha stage.
"And that's the fishing line, because Sharkboy said so!"
0 
I have not personally tried this, so I suggest you backup your machine or create a restore point before pulling the trigger on this.
0
If M$ included DX10 in SP3 for XP I'm sure Vista would have been even worse off. It already got a pretty bad start off. Xp would have been better at everything than Vista if it had DX10... well most things anyways.
Mattwizz3
New HTPC Project:
P4 2.6 / 1GB / 250GB
Custom Slimline 70's style case with audio selector for a '73 AMP.
0
Well MS is suppose to be coming out with DX 10.1 for Vista soon. It was suppose to be included in SP1, but for some reason MS has delayed it.
I think as soon as DX 10.1 gets released MS should give DX 10 to XP. I mean once DX 10.1 comes out there really isn't going to be a need for DX 10 for Vista anymore.
Now some say they would have to rebuild XP kernel in order to put DX 10 on it, while others have said all you need to do is tweak XP's kernel a litte. I don't know i'm no C++ expert, but what i do know is that MS could do anything they wanted to with XP and they could put DX 10 on XP, but they won't, because XP is getting phased out and that's the main reason. If this was 3 years ago and DX 10 was around that time there would be no doubt in my mind that DX 10 wouldn't come to XP.
0
Well, I read the same thing in this same forum about a year ago. Guess MS is its own king and we customers can only wait for what it does when it does.
This all could be a markettign trick too... they will release tons of powerful dx9c and dx10.0 cards world over, and then they will launch dx10.0c and all people with geforce 8xx series cards will find their cards are usueless with the dx10.0c games.
This is same story that happened with dx9.
First there was dx9a which was launched with so much hype and nvidia advertised cards like the fx5200 as ground breaking revolutions. Dx9a was not a hit, dx9b wasnt eitehr, but dx9c was the real hit that lasted atleast 3 years and is still strong.So I'm almost sure that the first few versions of dx10 wont be good, and it will take another 2-3 years for a real usabale dx10 version to be out.
Sarosh
0
Watch MS will include DX 11 only to the next generation of Windows and say it's only exclusive to that version, that's what seems to be happening with MS as of late to try to market their new products better.
0
From DX FAQ ...
"Will DirectX 10 be available for Windows XP?
No. Windows Vista, which has DirectX 10, includes an updated DirectX runtime based on the runtime in Windows XP SP2 (DirectX 9.0c) with changes to work with the new Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) and the new audio driver stack, and with other updates in the operating system. In addition to Direct3D 9, Windows Vista supports two new interfaces when the correct video hardware and drivers are present: Direct3D9Ex and Direct3D10.
Since these new interfaces rely on the WDDM technology, they will never be available on earlier versions of Windows. All the other changes made to DirectX technologies for Windows Vista are also specific to the new version of Windows. The name DirectX 10 is misleading in that many technologies shipping in the DirectX SDK (XACT, XINPUT, D3DX) are not encompassed by this version number. So, referring to the version number of the DirectX runtime as a whole has lost much of its meaning, even for 9.0c. The DirectX Diagnostic Tool (DXdiag.exe) on Windows Vista does report DirectX 10, but this really only refers to Direct3D 10."
While XP is arguably a very stable & well accepted OS, its strong immunity to the platitudinous cynicism around OS' before & after it leaves me perturbed sometimes.
On the one hand, I can empathize with XP folks who (after forking over good money for that high-end card) are quite content & aren't ready to upgrade to another OS in order to maximize the potential of their post DX9 card. On the other hand, I would think XP deserves DX10 or better - no more than Windows 9X does since DirectX is being viewed by many as an entitlement; period! After all, there are still folks -- albeit a small minority -- out there actively gaming on those platforms.
If M$ decides both from a development &
surreptitiously, business perspective to focus post-DX9 API on Vista & future Windows releases .... the fact that financial commitment might have some, if any, significant role in the decision is not so much some unimaginable diabolical twist or a shocking revelation -- it is what it is. Moreover, they made this known as far back as two years ago, so there is very little to no excuse -- these days -- for some poor sap to fork over money for his DX10 card & not only gripe, but also hope, that M$ will commit (despite technical reasons) resources to a DX10 for XP project, it is simply not going to happen.Is it fair? Probably not! But, so does Linux users not having no way access to near the same level of compatibility to Windows supported hardware & software - game titles included. The focus is on the big picture. Although, the fact that M$ introduced DX to consumers as a free API only to have to change that with Vista sure did not help. Fortunately, most games are not DX10-only.
0
"nvidia advertised cards like the fx5200 as ground breaking revolutions"
This was written 5 yrs ago:
"Considering the chip's limited performance and its comparatively low clock speeds, the DirectX 9 support is more of a paper feature than a real bonus. In practice, the chip is simply too slow for DirectX 9 calculations at resolutions of 1024x768 and above"
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews...
The FX5200 was NEVER introduced as a ground breaker. It was NOT the 1st FX card released. Manufacturer's never lead off with low end offerings...they start with higher end cards, then release the lower end cards later. The FX5800 was the 1st of the FX cards released...the FX5200 came afterwards.
Have a look at where the FX5200 ranked in theis char from 2004. Dead last:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews...
"Dx9a was not a hit, dx9b wasnt eitehr, but dx9c was the real hit that lasted atleast 3 years and is still strong"
It doesn't have anything to do with it being a "hit"...they are different revisions. That's common with DX.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX
"And that's the fishing line, because Sharkboy said so!"
0
They sold crappy cards like the fx5200 etc on the back of the launch of dx9.
Maybe they didnt make a big deal there, but it was a big deal here. Everyone would bost about how these new cards supported dx9, but it was only dx9a, which was a flop.All these companeis just made good money from the dx9 hype.
I can show you the box of my fx5200 gigabyte and my xfx 6800xt and my xfx 8500Gt and you will see that the fx5200 box is the biggest and most flashy and has tons of crap written on it like "ground breaking ralism, quality, eetc, etc, etc.
The xfx 6800xt has the smallest and thinnest box and has the least number of crap written on it.Maybe for someone who is aware of bus width and bit depth and core and clock frequencies they wil make an infromed buy, but there are many other people who fall victim to this market hype and spend their money on cards that do not deliver.
I've got tons of friends with 8600GTs and dual core cpus and they cant play crysis on good detail, so this 8600GT is a complete waste becaus all th future games are goint to be as demanding or more demanding than crysis within a years time.
The dx10 was used as a marketting hype just to make buyers bring out their money, nothing else at all.
Sarosh
0
Also I was talking about places people go to buy cards, not everyone will visit tomshardware before they buy hardware.
Tomshardware is a review site, its not a seller. The false hype is being created by the sellers of the cards, not the reviewers.Sarosh
0  |
 |
 |
This post is quite old and has been locked from receiving new replies. Please create a new posting instead.
| Ads by Google |
