Vista delays = D3D10 GPU delays ?

[JHoxley]

Quite a simple question really - figure you guys are world leaders at either knowing or speculating what the IHV's are upto

Now that the consumer release has slipped to Jan '07 (B3D thread) what, if any, impact do you think it'll have on the launch schedule for any NV/ATI D3D10 part(s)?

Unless NV/ATI have anything to do with the delay (seems some people say it's due to driver support/availability) they've probably been planning to have their kit out for the original "2H 2006" release target in-sync with Vista RTM.

So they're either going to be able to release D3D10 kit that few people can use or sit on it for a couple of months and do nothing..

I'm bored of writing code for the RefRast - I want me some hardware to play with

Thoughts?
Jack

 

[Richteralan]

It's strange that Microsoft says just consumer version is delayed though.

 

[ninelven]

Very little IMHO. Nvidia still needs a new core out there. Of course perception isn't always reality...

 

[Demirug]

It's strange that Microsoft says just consumer version is delayed though.

AFAIK this was not only Microsofts decision. The big PC manafatures like DELL, HP, etc have said that they need more time to go to Vista. Maybe the higher hardware demands are the problem or the teaching of the support staff.

 

[Richteralan]

AFAIK this was not only Microsofts decision. The big PC manafatures like DELL, HP, etc have said that they need more time to go to Vista. Maybe the higher hardware demands are the problem or the teaching of the support staff.

hm....from Dell, HP, websites.. I see their consumer desktop/laptop are pretty up to the requirement of Vista.

Maybe because of D3D10?

 

[JHoxley]

Very little IMHO. Nvidia still needs a new core out there.

So you think they might bring it to market and just have some unused functionality until D3D10/Vista actually appear?

AFAIK this was not only Microsofts decision. The big PC manafatures like DELL, HP, etc have said that they need more time to go to Vista.

I heard that as well, but it struck me as odd because I'd imagine the Tier-1 manufacturers would be desperate to get the holiday season sales in.

Maybe because of D3D10?

How do you mean? I've not seen any reason to believe that particular component of Vista is behind schedule...

Cheers,
Jack

 

[Richteralan]

So you think they might bring it to market and just have some unused functionality until D3D10/Vista actually appear?

I heard that as well, but it struck me as odd because I'd imagine the Tier-1 manufacturers would be desperate to get the holiday season sales in.

How do you mean? I've not seen any reason to believe that particular component of Vista is behind schedule...

Cheers,
Jack

Just my guess.
I mean NV/ATI may having problems with their D3D10 parts?

 

[Maintank]

I doubt this will affect the release of the DX10 generation chips.
Remember 99% of the initial purchases for the DX10 chips will be from people running on DX9 capable WinXP.

 

[DmitryKo]

Well, I don't think any vendor was going to release anything that's D3D10 capable before Spring-Summer 2007 in the first place. There are virtually no games that can possibly take advantage of it, and DDI changes in Vista will probably bring some speed improvements to good old DX9 applications as well (not to mention that first-generation D3D10 will probably offer very limited performance in SM4 to be of any real use).

I'd guess the current priority is to make their parts WDDM Advanced model compliant, so they can get some benefits fromhardware parameter validation and paging of graphics memoryin Direct3D9Ex

Some more details:
[post=675305] Another post [/post]
http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx/archives/pdc2005/

 

[Kaotik]

So you think they might bring it to market and just have some unused functionality until D3D10/Vista actually appear?

Well R9700 did come quite a long time before D3D9 came along, too, so wouldn't actually be new situation there.

Anyway, some rumors said that the consumer version delay has got to do something with the fights between EU & MS, and that slipping it to 2007 would get MS out of some limitations on the EU zone or something like that.

 

[Geo]

Nvidia was already talking about G8x being "really" a 2007 arch, with just some activity in late 2006 (maybe the flagship very late like late Nov or something?).

That sounds very "show the flag"-ish to me, and maybe even a little rosy scenario-ish (pick a date you'd like rather than one you feel confident you can hit) so I wouldn't be surprised if they happily pushed back to Vista's date.

Otoh, Jen-Hsun was saying if it was up to him they'd have the first DX10 part on the market. But then that sounds a bit cheerleaderish (an important CEO function, btw) rather than engineer-y, and it wouldn't be the first time he's made a statement like that this far out and it came back to bite him in the nether regions.

 

[Blazkowicz]

will Vista even ship with D3D10?
D3D10 can come later. who cares? 9700 pro was out monthes before DirectX 9 and it didn't hurt it a single bit.
and anyway, D3D10 means game developers have to write another renderer which will only be used on G80/R600 and later. they'll eventually do it but don't count on awesome new features only for geforce 8800 and radeon X2800 users, in the beginning.

 

[trinibwoy]

I don't see a further Vista delay impacting the rollouts of the first generation of D3D10 capable GPU's much at all. D3D10 will have ~ zero marketshare during the first generation, so the priority of a first generation part should be a full D3D10 featureset and very fast D3D9. So the devs can start building their new engines, and we can still enjoy better performance and IQ in the upcoming DX9 games - like what Nvidia did with NV40.

If you look at it that way, I don't see why they couldn't bring the first generation before Vista ships. At this stage, it would be surprising if the IHV's are still aligning their schedules with Microsoft, given the uncertainty surrounding Vista's release timing.

What's the alternative? Another refresh and minor speed bump of G71/R580 to last another year? No thanks!

 

[Kaotik]

will Vista even ship with D3D10?
D3D10 can come later. who cares? 9700 pro was out monthes before DirectX 9 and it didn't hurt it a single bit.
and anyway, D3D10 means game developers have to write another renderer which will only be used on G80/R600 and later. they'll eventually do it but don't count on awesome new features only for geforce 8800 and radeon X2800 users, in the beginning.

Well even the current betas already ship with DX10 so I don't see why D3D10 wouldn't be in the shipping retail Vista

 

[JHoxley]

So seems that the general consensus is that NV/ATI will get on with their own thing and release the hardware whenever suits them - be that on time or early. Interesting!

D3D10 will have ~ zero marketshare during the first generation, so the priority of a first generation part should be a full D3D10 featureset and very fast D3D9.

Do you mean zero marketshare from the hardware or software perspective? I've not got the details, but I was pretty sure they were planning on some launch titles for Vista that showed off the tech. The new CryTek/CryEngine one for example. If that's correct then there will be software out there to make use of (and potentially drive sales for) D3D10 hardware.

Well even the current betas already ship with DX10 so I don't see why D3D10 wouldn't be in the shipping retail Vista

That's my understanding - D3D10 is a basic component of Windows Vista. I think there is a refresh for WDDM post-release, but thats more low-level and won't really affect the features that the end-user sees (probably just performance).

Cheers,
Jack

 

[Tahir2]

It is possible some applications are not working well with Vista at this time and it has nothing to do with the development of IHV's next generation graphics processing units.

As noted before ATI did bring out the Radeon 9700 Pro that was DX9 and ahead of MS' release date.

What is significant however large volume licenses are not delayed, only the OEM Vista.

 

[{Sniping}Waste]

Untill I get some facts, I still think a fully spec D3D10 card will not work in Windows XP/2003/2000. From the changes D3D10 has its not a upgrade like we have seen with DX5 up to DX9.0C but a total diffent way of doing things. Why do you think theres a D3D10 and D3D9E? Older cards like DX5 to DX8.1 work with DX9.0C so you would think older cards would (DX9.0C based cards) work with D3D10 and not need a D3D9E. From the info thats out now I think a full speced D3D10 card will not work with Windows XP and will only work with Vista.

 

[ninelven]

RE: Yes.

 

[Geo]

So you make a habit of not reading what was actually written?


Now let's think... why would this be the case? Unused D3D10 functionality doesn't seem a likely candidate now does it? Maybe I was thinking about high quality AF, more ALU power, FP blending + AA, GDDR4, improved video decoding, dynamic branching performance, etc... What I find most remarkable is that someone could have read the above and logically (in their own mind) come to the conclusion I was talking about SM4. FPS (IQ willing) is king. The fact that it will support SM4 is merely a neccessary condition not a sufficient one, and I don't think I ever indicated otherwise.

Where did he suggest you did? He didn't ask about the motivator, just whether they'd be willing to have temporarily unused SM4 bits and pieces. I'll put you down for 'yes'. And I more or less agree, as this is the kind of thing I meant by "competitive pressures" somewhere around here (different thread I think).

The thing is when is G80 earliest date anyway? It sounds like November was it.

 

[ninelven]

GD dyslexia. My apologies JHoxley.