Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
CNW Thornike
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 21:51:00 -
[1]
I have read that the DirectX 10 of Vista allows more depth/detalization compared to DirectX 9 of XP. Is that true? Can I find comparative screenshots or maybe just a confirmation of this? I'm thinking if I should move to Vista from my XP SP3. ---
LSD is an area of the mind that could be called 'unsane' - beyond sanity, and yet not insane. Think of a circle with a fine split in it.. |
Lork Niffle
Gallente External Hard Drive
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 21:55:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Lork Niffle on 20/10/2009 21:55:08 EVE Online is DX9.
DX9 games do not use any part of DX10 since there is no backwards compatibility. You must install DX9 to play DX9 gmaes on Vista and Win7.
Vista though can offer some general performance upgrades on machines with 2GB RAM and a Decent Pentium D / Core 2 CPU. Win7 offers performance improvements across the range of systems beating XP. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics. |
CNW Thornike
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 21:59:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Lork Niffle Edited by: Lork Niffle on 20/10/2009 21:55:08 EVE Online is DX9.
DX9 games do not use any part of DX10 since there is no backwards compatibility. You must install DX9 to play DX9 gmaes on Vista and Win7.
Well my friend told me he installed Vista, played EVE with DX10 and that he noticed that improvement in graphics. That is where I took this from.
Originally by: Lork Niffle Vista though can offer some general performance upgrades on machines with 2GB RAM and a Decent Pentium D / Core 2 CPU. Win7 offers performance improvements across the range of systems beating XP.
This is good news for me, as I have Core 2 CPU with 2GB RAM indeed. Thanks. ---
LSD is an area of the mind that could be called 'unsane' - beyond sanity, and yet not insane. Think of a circle with a fine split in it.. |
Lork Niffle
Gallente External Hard Drive
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 22:03:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Lork Niffle on 20/10/2009 22:05:45 No way. The new Trinity 2 graphics engine is using DirectX 9.0. At no point does EVE take advantage of anything in DX10 and even then most of the stuff in DX10 can be acheived in DX9. He probably saw a slight performance increase with Vista having better hardware management.
There is no difference.
Nothing wrong with Vista. 6 months after Vista's release it was fine. Unfortunately it has taken this long to get any kind of market share. With Win7 so close (Oct 22nd general release), it would be better advice to get Windows 7 Home Premium; which has all the functions you would ever need. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics. |
Tyraeynissa
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 22:04:00 -
[5]
EvE does not have direct x 10 api's, ONLY direct x 9.
And, even though i had great performance on a high end machine in vista 64 bit, you will still have more in windows 7. Just get that and forget vista.
|
Zartanic
Red Federation
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 22:06:00 -
[6]
I dislike all Windows as they are invariably bloated and patronising to the user. But Vista works well on my system with EVE and always has. What your friend saw was nothing to do with DirectX 10 though.
|
CNW Thornike
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 22:08:00 -
[7]
Thanks for the replies. ---
LSD is an area of the mind that could be called 'unsane' - beyond sanity, and yet not insane. Think of a circle with a fine split in it.. |
Serpent Kamri
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 06:46:00 -
[8]
I would personally go directly to Windows 7 from XP, Vista eats your processing power like a hungry fat kid chocolate.
|
Angry Poster
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 07:01:00 -
[9]
Do not under any circumstances upgrade to Vista. It's total fail... Windows Millennium was a high quality product compared to Vista - and that's really saying something.
Performance is also terrible compared to XP. With default configuration it fills 1 GB of your RAM with idiotic graphics and effects that do nothing except make it look like it was intended for mentally handicapped 4 year olds. And even after you've configured it correctly it's still terrible when it comes to performance.
Worst operating system yet. Worst look and feel, most wasteful OS when it comes to memory and performance. Worst OS for gaming (just ignore DX10 - it's basically vapour ware that Microsoft invented so at least a few people would buy crappy Vista - definitely not worth the hassle of having to use such a ******ed OS).
|
Ambo
I've Got Nothing
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 07:39:00 -
[10]
I was reading something the other day about a study where they told people that they were watching HD content on an HD TV. In fact, some of them were watching regular DVD quality footage.
Both the ones watching true HD and those that were just told they were watching HD reported roughly the same improvement in perceived quality.
(btw, this study took place in europe, they expected that the actual improvement from HD TV would be more noticeable in the US because of the poorer quality of NTSC when compared to PAL)
The point is, when you're looking for an improvement, If you're not careful, you'll often see one even if there is nothing there. Sounds like that's what happened to your friend because as the people above have stated, Eve uses DX 9. Having DX 10 installed will change nothing. --------------------------------------
|
|
Slightly Green
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 08:13:00 -
[11]
Changing from WinXP to Win Vista caused a massive drop in performance for me. I had to double my computer memory just to get back up to where I was.
S. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2_aty_aX3Y
|
Burnharder
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 08:21:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Burnharder on 22/10/2009 08:21:47 I went from XP to Windows 7 and noticed little if any change (I run 3 clients on one machine), i.e. I still had to run them on low settings, at 1024x768. However, I bought an 1Gb ATI 4890 and now I can run 3 clients maxed out. To be honest I don't think the OS will make a huge difference over and above the actual metal it's running on.
|
Thrawn Nostur
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 11:35:00 -
[13]
Win 7 x64. USE that RAM!
|
Neamus
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 11:41:00 -
[14]
Skip Vista and go straight for Windows 7
|
Nouva MacGyver
Caldari MacGyver Communications
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 11:46:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Neamus Skip Vista and go straight for Windows 7
This.
|
Ryoji Tanakama
Caldari Firestar Drive Yards
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 11:54:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Lork Niffle Edited by: Lork Niffle on 20/10/2009 21:55:08 DX9 games do not use any part of DX10 since there is no backwards compatibility. You must install DX9 to play DX9 gmaes on Vista and Win7.
Garbage.
DirectX10 is fully DX9 compatible. This doesn't confer any benefits to EVE, but you do not (and cannot) have to install DX9 on Vista to run EVE.
|
Thuranni
Queens of the Stone Age Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 11:57:00 -
[17]
Originally by: CNW Thornike [ Well my friend told me he installed Vista, played EVE with DX10 and that he noticed that improvement in graphics. That is where I took this from.
Some people seem to think that Dx10 will magically make any game look better. A friend of mine installed Vista and swore that World of Warcraft (Yes, the game with the seven year old graphics engine) looked better. I naturally saw no improvement.
EVE shouldn't look better on Vista than XP in any way whatsoever.
|
BurnHard
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 12:02:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Thuranni
Originally by: CNW Thornike [ Well my friend told me he installed Vista, played EVE with DX10 and that he noticed that improvement in graphics. That is where I took this from.
Some people seem to think that Dx10 will magically make any game look better. A friend of mine installed Vista and swore that World of Warcraft (Yes, the game with the seven year old graphics engine) looked better. I naturally saw no improvement.
EVE shouldn't look better on Vista than XP in any way whatsoever.
I didn't actually notice a huge (if any!) difference between Crysis DX 9 and DX 10. I had to switch to DX 9 for the end game because it crashed with DX 10! Anyway, DX 10 does things that DX 9 cannot, in hardware, so in theory it can be more efficient, but I'm betting that (1) developer inexperience with DX 10, coupled with (2) driver inefficiencies for DX 10, result in the difference between the two being minimal to zero.
|
Jin Nib
Resplendent Knives
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 12:10:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Angry Poster Do not under any circumstances upgrade to Vista. It's total fail... Windows Millennium was a high quality product compared to Vista - and that's really saying something.
Performance is also terrible compared to XP. With default configuration it fills 1 GB of your RAM with idiotic graphics and effects that do nothing except make it look like it was intended for mentally handicapped 4 year olds. And even after you've configured it correctly it's still terrible when it comes to performance.
Seriously doesn't this bother anyone when it comes to your parents or something? It does me, But they honestly think that the product is acting in their best interest. They even notice the performance hit but they just don't get it. Frustrating to say the least.
-Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
Korizan
Red Mercury Incorporated
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 12:19:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Korizan on 22/10/2009 12:21:41
Personally I moved over to Vista because the IOS is a lot more stable. And on my computer I definitely saw a improvement in performance.
However on older computers, well it kills them. Now from I heard so far Windows 7 is the best of both worlds.
Stability of Vista and the performance of XP on lower end computers. Fact or fiction I am not sure.
I am however struggling to find the differences between Vista and Windows 7. As windows 7 is supposed to contain less bells and whistles. but I will admit I haven't checked that deeply into it, having already upgraded to Vista and I am in no rush to shell out more money on a new OS.
|
|
Amanda Troll
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 13:12:00 -
[21]
Originally by: CNW Thornike This is good news for me, as I have Core 2 CPU with 2GB RAM indeed. Thanks.
I would skip Vista and move to Windows 7 64 bit and also get 2Gb of ram if your going to change OS's and your system is capable of running the 64 bit version of windows.
Moving from a 32 bit OS to a 64 bit OS will improve performance and also allow you to run double the ram. This may also allow you to run EVE with higher video settings.
|
Jarna
Amarr Eternal Frontier
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 14:16:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Angry Poster Do not under any circumstances upgrade to Vista. It's total fail... Windows Millennium was a high quality product compared to Vista - and that's really saying something.
Wow, that is just about the most inane statement about any Windows OS I've ever heard.
Vista is tons better than Millenium ever could be. What did you do? Try installing it on an old PC or something? I have a Compaq laptop (which is not powerful by any means), and it ran fine (I have since installed Windows 7 on it; evaluation version that is legal till March 2010).
I worked for HP Tech Support just after Vista came out; 95% of the problems were unrelated to Vista but were direct results of the user's stupidity. If don't care if you're the Head Hancho in an IT department, if you managed to make Vista work worse than ME, that's your own problem, not the OS's.
Even before Service Pack 1, Vista wasn't as bad as everyone thought it was. It had it's issues, of course; it definitely wasn't Windows XP, but it was leagues better than ME. ------------------------------
EVE players are just as immature as WoW players. |
Kiviar
Caldari Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 16:03:00 -
[23]
In my experience 90% of the complaints about vista boil down to "argle bargle! I tried to install it on my five year old computer and it didn't work well!"
I admit that vista had a hard birth. It took years longer to complete, and when it was out driver support was not there. However, now, driver support is there, its more streamlined and will run fine on a computer that isn't in some way powered by victorian steam age technology. ---
|
Washell Olivaw
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 16:53:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Kiviar in some way powered by victorian steam age technology.
Virtually everything is. The steam turbine and the hydraulic turbine are victorian inventions and used in every gas/coal/nuclear/biomass powerplant and hydroelectric dam.
Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
|
Ordais
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 17:13:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Kiviar In my experience 90% of the complaints about vista boil down to "argle bargle! I tried to install it on my five year old computer and it didn't work well!"
I admit that vista had a hard birth. It took years longer to complete, and when it was out driver support was not there. However, now, driver support is there, its more streamlined and will run fine on a computer that isn't in some way powered by victorian steam age technology.
Win7 runs perfectly fine on old and low-end hardware, netbooks anyone? (yes, MS had to deliver them with XP not Vista.....). This shows how bad Vista was.
Now, with SP3, its pretty much ok, but its too late. Vista-SP3 is basically Win7. Win7 is what Vista should have been.
|
Barakkus
Caelestis Iudicium
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 17:14:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Kiviar In my experience 90% of the complaints about vista boil down to "argle bargle! I tried to install it on my five year old computer and it didn't work well!"
I admit that vista had a hard birth. It took years longer to complete, and when it was out driver support was not there. However, now, driver support is there, its more streamlined and will run fine on a computer that isn't in some way powered by victorian steam age technology.
It's not the performance issues mostly, it's the fact that they took everything you're used to and shoved it somewhere else, and hid normal routine tasks and settings in 5 million different layers of **** to go through. Their planning of the actual interface for Vista sucked ass and keeps it from being any good.
|
Slapchop Gonnalovemynuts
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 17:48:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Slapchop Gonnalovemynuts on 22/10/2009 17:48:16
Originally by: Washell Olivaw
Originally by: Kiviar in some way powered by victorian steam age technology.
Virtually everything is. The steam turbine and the hydraulic turbine are victorian inventions and used in every gas/coal/nuclear/biomass powerplant and hydroelectric dam.
Isn't that just nuts? In the age of space stations and mars rovers, nanotech and microprocessing etc. we are still using 100 year old technology to power all our crap --------------------------------------------
Quote: EVE-Online... Too rough for ya? Don't like it? GTFO...
|
Pearre Dash
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 22:35:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Slapchop Gonnalovemynuts Edited by: Slapchop Gonnalovemynuts on 22/10/2009 17:48:16
Originally by: Washell Olivaw
Originally by: Kiviar in some way powered by victorian steam age technology.
Virtually everything is. The steam turbine and the hydraulic turbine are victorian inventions and used in every gas/coal/nuclear/biomass powerplant and hydroelectric dam.
Isn't that just nuts? In the age of space stations and mars rovers, nanotech and microprocessing etc. we are still using 100 year old technology to power all our crap
150.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |