I no longer feel pressurised to go DX10

Not really as unless you rebalance the game it would become far to easy with a mouse compared to the pad.

I can agree though that the mouse control doen't need to feel hobbled like it apparently does in Lost Planet.

I assume it works, great may be pushing it I can say it works exactly the same to the 360 version as long as you have the 360 pad. Rumble and all. Personally I would like to see many more games offering this kind of support (but not at the expense of mouse control).

 

I like both fruits, so tasty. Anyways, what are you intimating? Because that anand dx10 article was pretty good imo of course.

 

Although I'll agree that (for most) DX10 certainly isn't necessary......the latest crop of "flagship" GPU's is so much faster and provides such higher image quality...it'd be pretty tough to arue against it...

Take R600 or G80 (think GTS or above)......You can play nearly any game, at (almost) any resolution with insane image quality features enabled....You mention FarCry....I'd be really surprised if you weren't able to run everything at max with no framerate problems whatsoever...

Think of the DX10-component of these cards as "icing" on the cake.....If the time comes that DX10 is needed to truly experience a great new game, you have that option....On top of it all, you have DX9 performance that is nothing short of incredible...

Regardless of which camp you favor, it's hard to go wrong with the top offerings from either side...especially with prices dropping online as they have been lately...

 

Well, I felt the same way until I got a X360 controller myself. I only use it for some games but it can improve the gameplay quite a bit. For instance, I played NFS: Most Wanted with the keyb half-way through but once I plugged in the gamepad and got used to the analogue control the game felt much more satisfying. I then went back and beat NFS: U & U2 (again) with it and the gameplay also felt tighter.

In BF2 I use the controller whenever I'm piloting a choppa and I've played Rayman's Raving Rabbids exclusively with it. Especially for "console ports" and sports games a gamepad is seriously recommended. Nowadays I also use it to play games on console emulators. I know it feels weird, almost like you're betraying your PC legacy but for me it was a good decision.

Don't go for a cheap gamepad though; if you don't want to shell out for a X360 controller I suggest you borrow one from a friend and try any NFS game. The X360 controller is quite good IMO (with the possible exception of the D-pad's stiffness) and it is worth the price (the wired version at any rate). While it doesn't have quite the same quality of the SNES gamepad (my favourite of all time) it's not that far off.

 

No no no no
You want to borrow a steering wheel with forcefeedback thats what you want to do, dont listen to richard and his console inspired evilness - stay on the path of p.c righteousness and shun such heathen ways.....

/Davros quickly hides his ms sidewinder - what black, thing dont know what your talking about

 

The original poster's sentiment rings on through when you look at mainstream Vista acceptance. It's fallen flat on it's face.

Even Dell has reverted to offering XP and now Ubuntu on newer PC's, and other manufacturers are seeing reduced interest in Vista-only new OEM PC's.

Microsoft's plan to launch/migrate PC's to Vista (and DX10) was, putting it likely, a big failure.

I really don't know if one can pinpoint this due to shortcomings in Vista or just how solid and trusted Windows XP has become. I think most of it revolves around the latter, as well as the general publics' mistrust in new software (i.e. "Wait for a service pack or two..").

I'm personally looking for other options as Vista's invasive Genuine Advantage, DRM support through driver-signing management and the like aren't things I really want to support. It's a pity though as the remaining OS is pretty snazzy and forward thinking.

 

Do you have any quantitive evidence to support that claim? e.g. sales in relation to previous MS OS's for example?

For the record, I think its ridiculous that any "PC fan" would root for the failiure of DX10 and thus the technological progression of the PC as a gaming platform.

 

Well, I can prove quite the opposite -- go look at Microsoft's earnings for the quarter they launched Vista.

Here's a hint: Best....quarter....ever. By a staggering margin.

If Vista is a "failure", it's the best thing to go wrong at Microsoft in a long time.

 

Yeah, I feel the same exact way about my x1800gto every day, and I'm sure I'd feel the same with and x1950! Cheap, and reasonably futureproof pour le WIN!

 

couldnt that be a case of all the big oems saying "hello ms we are going to need 20,000 vista licenses for the comming year, we'll send you a cheque"

In other words oem's have bought large quantities of vista but havnt managed to sell them yet ???

 

Last I recall (and I could be incorrect...) you pay for the ones you sell. Meaning they have a single OEM key that they use, and each time they ship a system with that key, they are in arrears to Microsoft for that quantity. Microsoft bills the OEM via the number of keys that are activated at the plant by the licensing server (new for Vista.)

This is essentially how it's done for big enterprises now, which is what my company is doing with our Vista rollout. Put up a licensing server and any workstation on your doman will use that server as the activation server (versus the general public / global activation server online). Your internal licensing server occasionally calls home to MS to let them know how many active licenses you have. If you go over, they give you 30 days to back it off or send them a check.

So, I'm relatively sure the dollar amount was true sales and not just a big pile of licenses for later use. The next quarters' earnings haven't been released yet, so we'll have to wait...

 

is it just me or people have been forgetting there's more than 1 versions of vista?

a lot of the boxes are shipped with vista home basic and 512m ram. =.=

but i have no plan to switch to dx10 hardware this year after i read all those reviews. the lack of killer games and properly written driver sets are major turn-offs.

 

I won't get vista till I can get it cheap, so I won't get a dx10 card, so I will happily sit with my x1900AIW that I have now...

 

I don't see the connection between buying Vista and buying a "DX10 card". You can get a lot out of a so-called DX10 card without Vista.

 

Although I still do notfeel pressurised to go DX10 since starting this thread I now need to buy another video card as I have been having technical problems. As you know from my initial post I was going to eek out my SLI 7900GS for as long as possible and only upgrade to something for DX10 when 65nm parts from nvidia and Ati were out and speedy for it.

However with the immenent arrival of a new 24inch screen ( up from 19inch) and just going from an FX-55 to a Intel X6800 I find my 2 7900GS' will not do SLI on this new 680LT motherboard. When I run SLi mode I get texture tearing just before the things locks solid. I have downclocked the cards and no better. On their own or set to none SLi mode everything is fine. I have tried lots of BIOS settings, a new SLI bridge , swapping cards over, driver revisions. My PSU is 750w so that should be ok.

So 24 inch monitor on the way and Intel X6800 which sits happily all day at 11x333Mhz for 3.6GHz and I end up with a 7900GS to go with it .. Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

I have decided to retire my 7900GS cards to one day replace the AGP 6600GT with fan that does not work on my main WP / browsing system that is donkeys old ..just cannot bear the hassle of replacing the motherboard, all the years of software and harddware on it are like a house of cards ready to fall over at the merest site of a new chipset or driver.

So now I have the question, cheapy 320M 8800GTS which is pretty balanced and should do 1920x1200 with no AA or go for the speedy but unbalenced loud and proud X2900.

Actually 8800 Ultra's have now come down in price, I can see after a few beers me plumping for one of those after persuading myself it is the sensible option. Afterall, I was one of the few who bought a 5800

Hmmm, decisions decisions...

 

All the consoles have pretty much destroyed the video card market for the PC. That and all the low end and integrated video.

 

See, even though you have little interest in moving to DX10 at the moment, you find that all the best options out there are still DX10 capable

Personally I would go with the cheaper of the two which I assume is the GTS 320. Its slower, but not by a huge amount and if your only looking for a stopgap until R650 and G90 release then its probably the better option.

 

Im not quite sure of your logic there. Whats wrong with the PC video card market?

 

- Consoles are robbing all the capital for development of software.
- Majority of the hardware sold is low end.

 

Yep DX-10 cards provide the best performance and IQ in DX 9, so one need not purchase them just because they are DX-10 capable.

I am still amazed at how my overclocked GTX chews through "Oblivion" with AA + HDR and AF @ 1680x.

That being said, I do feel the X1950Pro and X1950XT are great products. My second favorite card of all time is the X1900XT I had before my GTX.

If you want a card with more shader power than the Pro and around its price with rebate, try that:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102067