That's not the issue. Ms has improved drastically on dx. How many games use all the features of dx11? I can't think of any. The reason isn't ms. When the largest installed graphic chips are intel onboard video and amd onboard video, game makers look for product with the widest potential user base. Nobody is going to write a game that requires an ati 65xx or nvidia gtx.
When you write for a console, the developer knows the exact hardware. Huge difference Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: "Anthony Q. Martin" <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 15:53:12 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [H] AMD says DirectX slows everything down if there driver were all that is needed, then it would have directX (or the equivalent) built in. Then they'd have to do that for every card and every card vendor. I'm sure the video card vendors wouldn't want that. And why can't MS improve on Direct X? Is PC hardware inferior to console hardware? I can't believe the abstraction layer needs to be so inefficient. How do we know they haven't just decided that since the hardware is so powerful that they don't have to work so hard on tweaking the software to perfection? Look at those pics at the link I gave...do consoles provide such high res images when you use 4 cards? When you can throw that kind of horsepower at the task, why work so hard to beat the software? On 3/27/2011 3:25 PM, Steve Tomporowski wrote: > I can agree with you there. I don't know how they would do anything > different. What baffles me is what is AMD trying to get at by saying > this? Are they going to provide some drivers that allow hardware > level access and bypass DirectX. I never really understood why there > has to be so many layers of software between the operating system and > the hardware--You have Windows, then DirectX, then the video driver. > Shouldn't the driver be the interface between Windows and the > hardware? Maybe I just don't get it. > > On 3/27/2011 2:51 PM, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: >> DirectX can either be fixed or replaced, but we don't want to go back >> to the old days. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Mar 27, 2011, at 2:22 PM, Steve Tomporowski<[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I do remember back to the days where you really had to read game box >>> to see if your soundcard was supported or if you had to depend on >>> system speaker. Dealing directly with the hardware means that >>> someone comes out the winner, like Creative in the old days. I >>> still have one game (Carnivores 2) which only has 2 selections for >>> 3D display: Software and 3dfx. >>> >>> More likely they will replace DirectX with something else. Remember >>> when Maximum PC called DirectX 'horribly broken'? >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> On 3/27/2011 11:32 AM, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: >>>> Yeah, I read it. However, the first notion that PC hardware is 10x >>>> more powerful but not 10x as good looking. That's highly subjective. >>>> >>>> Then, the notion of writing directly to the hardware .... crashy, >>>> crashy .... that was the whole point of an API in the first >>>> place....so you develop a game on the console, and then do >>>> device-level programming for different PC hardware? Not gonna happen. >>>> >>>> Developers should get MS to improve on DirectX so that those >>>> numbers come up! >>>> >>>> On 3/27/2011 10:54 AM, Steve Tomporowski wrote: >>>>> You need to read the article. The guy from AMD contends that PCs >>>>> need much more hardware power to get the same/better results than >>>>> consoles and blames directX. Apparently consoles can run 10k to >>>>> 20k 'draw calls' per frame compared to 2k to 3k for the PC because >>>>> directX does not allow mutliple objects per call. >>>>> >>>>> That is , if I've got the gist of the article correct.....;-) >>>>> >>>>> Steve >>>>> >>>>> On 3/27/2011 9:39 AM, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: >>>>>> I'm not a gamer, but I guess these guys must not be usign DirectX >>>>>> games when they generate these high-res shots on their PCs: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1530070 >>>>>> >>>>>> On 3/27/2011 9:19 AM, Steve Tomporowski wrote: >>>>>>> http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This article talks about how, with 10x the power of consoles, PC >>>>>>> games only look 1/10 as good due to DirectX. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Steve >>>>>>> >>>>> > >
