Disappointed With Industry

[Otto Dafe]

While I don't think this is necessarily too different than the dx8 -> dx9 leap in terms of time-frame, I do think the bar for adoption is pretty high. I just upgraded my rig in the fall, but to get a dx10 rig going I'd need at minimum:

Vista
DX10 card
new monster power supply (really, 700 watts, this is madness)
new case (card wouldn't fit)
new board (card would crash right into the SB heatsink)

Which is what, $1500? This compared to DX9 -- the month I thought HL2 was coming out I bought a 9800pro for 300 bucks and popped it in -- voila!

And then I waited a year for HL2, but that's neither here nor there.

 

[Tim Murray]

While I don't think this is necessarily too different than the dx8 -> dx9 leap in terms of time-frame, I do think the bar for adoption is pretty high. I just upgraded my rig in the fall, but to get a dx10 rig going I'd need at minimum:

Vista
DX10 card
new monster power supply (really, 700 watts, this is madness)
new case (card wouldn't fit)
new board (card would crash right into the SB heatsink)

Which is what, $1500? This compared to DX9 -- the month I thought HL2 was coming out I bought a 9800pro for 300 bucks and popped it in -- voila!

And then I waited a year for HL2, but that's neither here nor there.

I'm not entirely sure about that. 700W? I'm running a 8800 GTS with a 460W PSU without any problems. Case, okay, if you want to run a GTX. Board, again, I'm not entirely too sure; my GTS is right next to my southbridge's heatsink, but it hasn't been a problem.

 

[BRiT]

to get a dx10 rig going I'd need at minimum:

Vista
DX10 card
new monster power supply (really, 700 watts, this is madness)

As for power requirements, you will be fine on a top quality PSU of 550 watts. The Corsair HX620 will work fine.

For reference I present the following from XBIT Labs 1000 Watt PSU Review:

Intel-based system (Power Draw 442 Watts):

• Quad-core Core 2 Extreme QX6700 CPU (Kentsfield) overclocked to 3.5GHz
• Two Foxconn GeForce 8800GTX graphics cards in SLI mode
• ASUS Striker Extreme mainboard (LGA775, NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI)
• 2GB DDR2-800 SDRAM (Mushkin XP2-6400PRO, 4 x 512MB)
• Two Western Digital WD1500AHFD hard disk drives in a RAID0
• Various trifles like a DVD-ROM, fans, etc

We installed Windows XP SP2 on these systems and ran Stress Prime 2004 / Orthos for the CPU and 3DMark 2006 for the graphics card; these two programs were running simultaneously in the third test mode. Here are the PSU power consumption numbers (using a Tagan TurboJet TG1100-U96; we measured its power draw from the wall outlet and multiplied the result by this PSU’s efficiency factor, about 0.83):

 

[Geo]

Although I can't really blame you for not reading every portion of my PC hardware version of War & Peace, I'll cut you some slack and post the bits here where the flames touched Microsoft...

Okay, fair enough. I think it was the initial context being a current lack of DX10 games that kind of threw people a bit on that point. As Tim mentioned using DX9 as an example, it's not actually unusual yet for this point in the cycle. But re-reading it, I can see where you're going and it's actually more of a forward-looking midterm point than a right this minute point. But then that also makes it a speculative point, as I don't know just how well informed you are on development efforts underway. Not everything gets announced early.

 

[Otto Dafe]

Yeah, I think I had that 700W figure in my head from the leaked 2900xt manual, which I don't even know if it was authentic. Still IMO this transition may well be easier on devs than the last, but perhaps harder on consumers. By all expectations won't the first AAA DX10 title (Crysis) beat out the first AAA DX9 (um, HL2?)? And as to consumers, I guess I just think things are trending away from, "you have a PC, 3d card? you can play this", to a more gaming-enthusiast-only sort of phenomenon. I suppose that's a rather truistic observation -- and probably made at the inception of 3d hardware -- this trend seems to me though to be ever more extreme.

Edit: And to address the topic, what I mean to say is I think your disappointment may persist for some time, due to the kinds of monster requirements game consumers are expected to meet these days.

 

[_xxx_]

Frankly, the only difference to the DX8->DX9 transition is that DX10 is Vista only, all the other things you wrote about are more or less the same.

I do agree that until Vista matters we will have the next gen/refresh out there, thus the current DX10 discussion is rather useless.

As for Vista and DX10, I mentioned that enough already - not going there and never will either. No HW or games can get me use Vista.

 

[pelly]

But re-reading it, I can see where you're going and it's actually more of a forward-looking midterm point than a right this minute point. But then that also makes it a speculative point, as I don't know just how well informed you are on development efforts underway. Not everything gets announced early.

As far as the development cycle with regards to DX10 games, let's just say I'm pretty well informed.

My grip here is that we have had DX10 (for better or for worse) and at least one hardware option for a DX10 card for 6 months (albeit, minus some solid drivers). Today, I can't count even three DX10 games...

Hence, my whole "focus on big market (DX9+below) and eventually get a DX10 title out" instead of a "focus on getting a next-gen title out asap (DX10) and still support big market (DX9+below)" point...

So many of you have chimed in with responses to the DX10 software aspect of the initial post...anyone care to share their thoughts on the hardware aspect?

 

[Tim Murray]

So many of you have chimed in with responses to the DX10 software aspect of the initial post...anyone care to share their thoughts on the hardware aspect?

What's there to say, besides 2900 XT is disappointing and 8800 Ultra is very disappointing? The latter is a bigger disappointment to me, since it's not even clocked high enough to register as a boutique product.

I think what's more important right now is that 8600 GT/GTS is somewhat disappointing compared to 7600 GT, and we'll see how RV630 does in that market.

 

[digitalwanderer]

So many of you have chimed in with responses to the DX10 software aspect of the initial post...anyone care to share their thoughts on the hardware aspect?

Sure. It costs too much and there isn't enough reason to buy it yet.

 

[Demirug]

You're still limited to IHV-specific extensions for the time being, though.

There are already EXT versions for most new features. But ATI doesn’t support them yet and OpenGL is still a pain in the ass compared to D3D10. Maybe Mount Evans and Long Peaks would help.

 

[ChrisRay]

To me its hard to see the advantages of DX10 currently. I dont dispute that they are there. I've seen the technical documentation. The demos, and the supposed scenerios where it'll improve performance and IQ.

But to me DX10 currently has alot of disadvantages.

1) Its expensive to implement. The 8500/8600GTS performance was no surprise to me at all. Its hard to make a midrange product that will make money when you have such a huge feature list to implement. From an enthusiast Point of View. Performance and features ((IQ, Bandwith saving, Energy efficiency)) are more important than the DX10 stamp. The G80 just happened to deliver most of these with the DX10 stamp as well. That is why I am rather fond of 8800GTX cards.

2) Its not only expensive from a transistor PoV. Its expensive from a power point of view. The HD2900XT and 8800GTX cards ((yes the 8800GTX is fairly power efficient. But its still enough to heat up a room)) consume too much power and output too much heat in my room. If you want the performance under DX10 you have to put up with the additional power/heat required to run it.

I tell you when the 9800 Pro/5900 series was out. I wasnt constantly worried about how hot my room would get for the performance I am getting. Yes I run SLI so thats an even bigger consideration these days.

3) You gotta have Windows Vista. I didnt really want to buy 2 copies of Windows Vista Ultimate full installs. But doing what I do and needing to stay on top of hardware and software I felt obligated to get Windows Vista. And while I have enjoyed Windows Vista for the most part. I dont think the price justifies what you get. The main compelling reason for me to get was DX10. And I'm not convinced its unable to be implemented on windows XP. Other than that there novelties and security featured of Windows Vista that makes it a nice little package. But theres tons of freeware and patches which can give Windows XP fairly similar functionality and security. And for 400 dollars for a full install of Windows Vista ultimate ((per machine)) I question the value behind it.

 

[Jawed]

I'm still bemused that the first truly, ground-up D3D10 game, 3DMk07, hasn't been released yet.

Also, when it is released, I'm sure it'll sell a lot of copies of Vista. Though sadly, people who play 3DMk07 tend to play nothing else.

Jawed

 

[trinibwoy]

Did you just use the words "game" and "play" in reference to 3dmark....?

 

[ban25]

My grip here is that we have had DX10 (for better or for worse) and at least one hardware option for a DX10 card for 6 months (albeit, minus some solid drivers). Today, I can't count even three DX10 games...

The development cycle for high-end games these days is 2-4 years. You can't honestly expect to see three DX10 games in only 6 months when even developers have only had DX10 hardware (G80) for less than a year. Now, you will see DX10 games this year (games utilizing specific DX10 features, anyway), and more next year. So relax.

 

[Reverend]

pelly, TBH I don't really know what to make of your OP.

I ignored most of the parts concerning hardware and ISVs since I think most intelligent folks would be able to make up their own minds based on reviews but regarding the first part of your post (re Vista, DX10, DX10 games), I would like to ask you if you had done any kind of investigations.

First of all, Vista/DX10 is half-a-year in retail.

Have you talked to MS' Vista/DX10 evangelism team? Have you talked to a wide range of developers about DX10, from the time they were approached by MS regarding DX10/Vista? I'm not championing Vista/DX10 (in case you misread) -- I don't foresee getting it even when I upgrade from my existing AGP system and probably won't this year -- but reading your post I can't help but feel that for this kind of carefully written rant there appears to be little evidence of you having done the things I asked above (which has to do with only the DX10/Vista issue).

Just MHO.

 

[pelly]

but reading your post I can't help but feel that for this kind of carefully written rant there appears to be little evidence of you having done the things I asked above (which has to do with only the DX10/Vista issue).

To be brutally honest myself Reverend, I have to question why you'd make a comment like the one above. Short of posting an in-depth article outlining the situation in detail with direct input and quotes from developers (which would obviously be done at Hot Hardware and not in a forum), I'm not sure what you'd expect from a rant in a forum. I can understand disagreeing with a point and offering a counter-point from another perspective. Rather, it appears as though you're publicly dismissing my opinion(s) with no solid rebuttal or counter.

Regardless, to address your obvious concerns I have made great efforts to understand the situation. With almost a decade in this industry as an editor and having founded my own market research firm covering gaming and the HW community, I've certainly gone to great lengths to be as informed as possible on the subject. Despite knowing a good amount on the subject, I realize there are clearly others who know more (developers themselves, employees at MS, NVDA, AMD, etc..) At no time did I claim to be the utmost authority. Rather, the thread was clearly illustrated as a frustrated rant which should have acted as a catalyst for solid discussion...If for some reason there is something you take issue with that concerns me and not the subject at hand, feel free to PM me and we can hear each other out without having such a publicized discussion.

Either way, DX10 didn't just show up on a roadmap a year ago...and I stand by the statements I've made thus far. As expected with any public forum, everyone here is more than welcome to agree or disagree.

Just MHO.

 

[Zengar]

To be honest, I don't really find 8600 series to be dissapointing. Yes, they are not better in games then the last generation, but you must also accept, that the new API provide very solid changes. To make it short, with new DX and OpenGL extensions, you can do things much more effectively, offloading more and more work on the GPU. If programmed right, this cards should run just fine at resolutions like 12x10.

About Vista: DX is not the only graphics API, you know. It is perfectly possible to acces new features from XP, using OpenGL. I only wish ATI would take it more serious...

 

[Demirug]

About Vista: DX is not the only graphics API, you know. It is perfectly possible to acces new features from XP, using OpenGL.

Right but games that are already written for DX9 would more likely get an additional D3D10 renderer then a OpenGL renderer.

IMHO in its current state there are not many advantages in using OpenGL for game development. DX10 have a much cleaner API design. I know that Long Peaks and Mount Evans are on the road to help OpenGL out of this situation.

 

[Zengar]

Alas, that is true...

 

[ector]

I find it hard to be disappointed when the industry is continuously churning out cards with performance that would be unimaginable only 5 years ago.

Of course, I could use another 30000x the power, but you take what you can get