'Without dropping any effects' is a hard one to answer as it depends how they're done and what resources are used. eg. On a PC game using DX10 requiring a 512 MB DX10 card and 2 GB RAM in the PC, it's not unlikely that certain aspects of the game will be dropped. However, porting a DX10 game incorporating the abilties of a DX10 class GPU is something PS3 should be able to handle quite well thanks to the versatility of Cell.By this I mean can a directx 10 game be ported to the PS3 without dropping any effects. The RSX is, after all, a directx 9 gpu, even if it doesn't use directx.
By this I mean can a directx 10 game be ported to the PS3 without dropping any effects. The RSX is, after all, a directx 9 gpu, even if it doesn't use directx.
Sorry, but you really have no idea what you're talking about. It's scary how confused people are over what DirectX means in relation to hardware. The same bits used for DirectX are used for OpenGL. Stripping out the DirectX bits would leave an empty die!Surely considering the fact that such a GPU was developed from the ground up (using the G70 as a reference) AND the fact that the designers had in mind the fact that the GPU would never run DirectX from the get-go, means that they would have designed the G70 reference, stripping out all DirectX processing capability and ramping up the OpenGL ES based processing bits, modifying with power and heat reduction in mind.. I can't imagine the RSX is a DirectX GPU by ANY means otherwise wouldn't that be an incredibly stupid waste of silicon?
One thing is sure, D3D10 games can be ported over Babbage's analytical engine with just a little stretch of imaginationBy this I mean can a directx 10 game be ported to the PS3 without dropping any effects. The RSX is, after all, a directx 9 gpu, even if it doesn't use directx.
This is an artist's conception of the difference between a dx9 and dx10 game:
http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/7285/dx10rr9.jpg
This is an artist's conception of the difference between a dx9 and dx10 game:
http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/7285/dx10rr9.jpg
I could swear that the last time I saw that picture the top was labelled "DirectX 8" and the bottom "DirectX 9".This is an artist's conception of the difference between a dx9 and dx10 game:
http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/7285/dx10rr9.jpg
By this I mean can a directx 10 game be ported to the PS3 without dropping any effects. The RSX is, after all, a directx 9 gpu, even if it doesn't use directx.
As I understand it, rather than giving your "new effects", DX10 gives you new and faster ways to implement existing effects, existing effects being pretty much anything as a DX9 GPU can probably render anything, its only limited by the speed at which it can render it.
So if a particular game used DX10 to create graphics which would be much slower using DX9 methods and that game pushed the limits of a decent DX10 GPU's power, it probably wouldn't be possible on PS3 without compromises.
Effects that really really require integer processing, if such a thing actually exists, would be very difficult to port over. Other than that I don't think there is anything in DX10 that a PS3 just couldn't do one way or another.
this has nothing to do with D3D10, it's not a requirement to have a particular dynamic branching implementation, it has just to be there.What about heavy use of dynamic branching? RSX as a G70 derivate should be pretty lame doing that.
It depends, if you try to exactly mimic on a CPU what a GPU does then you are going to fail for sure.Also I don't think you can emulate the geometry stage on CPU without suffering performance greatly (especially if filtered texture lookups are used as an input).
PC is a different beast to consoles no need to compare them
The first batch of DX10 GPU's will get there ass's hand'd to them by DX9 cards, point is FIRST generation DX10 GPU's wont be very good at all as its the GPU's makers first attempt at a new architecture.