What about Direct3D 10.1?

02:00 - Monday 16 June 2008 by Fedy Abi-Chahla, Florian Charpentier

After the campaign Nvidia has been carrying on for some time now about its uselessness, it’s not really a surprise to learn that the 200 GTX won’t support this version of the Microsoft API. This is no surprise, but still, it’s a disappointment. According to Nvidia, support for the API was considered initially, but the developers they queried said they felt it “wasn’t important.” It’s true that Direct3D 10.1 doesn’t add anything revolutionary – as we pointed out when the Radeon HD 38x0 came out, it’s mostly a matter of correcting gaps left in the Direct3D 10 specifications. Yet there are still some interesting new functions that could prove to be useful to the rendering engines, such as deferred shading – which is more and more popular – and algorithms for rendering transparent surfaces without sorting.

So yes, it might all seem a little superfluous at a time when Direct3D 10 still hasn’t shown clear superiority over version 9, but it still smells a little like an easy excuse on Nvidia’s part. Saying that Direct3D 10.1 is of no use at the present time is not totally false (though Assassin’s Creed proves the contrary), but it’s a kind of vicious cycle – without support from Nvidia, clearly the API can’t really be used seriously by developers. We’ve seen a situation of this type before, but it was the converse: When the NV40 came out, what developers were using Shader Model 3? Especially on the first GeForce 6s, where the main functions, like Vertex Texture Fetch and dynamic branching in the shaders weren’t up to par. Yet, at that time the company was claiming to be in the avant-garde of 3D APIs.

So, our opinion hasn’t changed since then. Even if it may not be useful immediately, we are favorable to the inclusion of the latest technologies in new 3D circuits, so that developers can familiarize themselves with them. We knocked ATI for it at the time, and this time we’re allowing ourselves a little rant against Nvidia.

Read More
Comments
Read the comments on the forums
samuraiblade 16/06/2008 15:40
Hide
-0+

hmm not as big an improvement as i thought. will have to wait and see on the drivers improving the cards , but the 260 gtx seems to be the much better option given the price. still , will have to see what ati bring to the fray first. patience will be reflected in price i have no doubt.

spuddyt 16/06/2008 16:45
Hide
-0+

frankly depressing, Me WANTS MRAW POWER!!!!

JDocs 17/06/2008 09:46
Hide
-0+

I am so disappointed. Now if AMD delivers on the dual GPU single memory rumour (2 GPUs on a single card but without the Crossfire problems) NVidia could have a serious problem.

mi1ez 17/06/2008 09:49
Hide
-0+

Why have they tested this system with only 2Gb of RAM? If you're testing a GPU with 1Gb of VRAM, surely you'd have more installed?

mi1ez 17/06/2008 10:27
Hide
-0+

They also have 2 conflicting prices on page 28.
For the 280GTX- $846 and $650;
For the 260GTX- $450 and $400

darthpoik 17/06/2008 14:06
Hide
-0+

Wouldn't it have been more prudent to test against a 8800gtx ultra as this is still the single most powerfull card.

david__t 17/06/2008 14:10
Hide
-0+

It might just be me but 66.5dBa is unbearable unless you have your PC locked away in a cupboard somewhere. This business of supplying substandard fans on very expensive cards is intolerable. Why don't they strike a deal with Zalman / Thermalright for example, and ship cards that are quiet / silent? I'm sure that people who have the money to buy a £500 GPU could afford £10 more for a better cooling solution that's included.

Anonymous 17/06/2008 16:26
Hide
-0+

where is that 20W to 30W idle you are talking about? The least in the graph is 199W!

Solitaire 17/06/2008 18:46
Hide
-0+

mi1ez: Probably the reason for just 2GB RAM was that it allowed Tom's to stick with 32-bit OS architecture. If they tried using more RAM they'd be stuck with 64-bit Bindows which would not be pretty - aside from really needing 8GB to give a big difference over 2GB in 32bit Vista, there's the slight issue of stable signed drivers, which these cards probably won't have for a while. Good luck trying to get Vista 64 to even "see" the cards! XD

jhoravi: that idle power would only come up on newer nVidia mobos as the card would be shut down entirely when idle and hand over to the integrated chip.

And was it me or was the Noise text copypasted over the Temperature text on the next page? Oops.

bobwya 19/06/2008 01:43
Hide
-0+

Lets try again Mr THG (uhhhm try getting your fraking website working plz)...

Now lets see this puppy in action:
http://www.evga.com/products/pdf/01G-P3-1289-AR.pdf

!!

Bob

Comments are closed on this page.
Ads

Best offers

Newsletters


  • Ask your question about IT issues
  • Post