When will I *need* a Directx 9 card?

"Mean_Chlorine" wrote in message
om...

Not a lot - Halo isn't a game with particularly impressive graphics to
begin with, not least because it was designed to run on a GF4MX core
machine (XBox).

What? The Xbox's GPU is a mix between a Geforce3 and Geforce4 - some
features not even in the Geforce4. It is certainly nowhere near a GF4MX.

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:08:07 +0000 (UTC)
Seahorse wrote:

Following prompt first aid from the medic "J.Clarke"
managed to scrawl the following bloodstained
message On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:17:22 -0500:

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 23:44:41 +0000 (UTC)
Seahorse wrote:

Following prompt first aid from the medic "J.Clarke"
managed to scrawl the following
bloodstained message On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:15:54 -0500:

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 02:20:58 +0000 (UTC)
Seahorse wrote:

Following prompt first aid from the medic "J.Clarke"
managed to scrawl the following
bloodstained message On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 06:29:56 -0500:


1. Don't cross post.

Wrong. Cross post to all relevant newsgroups. That is the way
USENET is intended to work and that way everybody sees the
post, everybody sees the responses, and there is no duplication
of effort.
Bad nettiquette as you well know.

What ever gave you that idea?

It does cause duplication of effort.

Nope. It _eliminates_ duplication of effort.

Scattergun posting is pointless.

Crossposting is not "scattergun posting".

I believe you have crossposting confused with multiposting.

No see:

http://www.netlingo.com/inframes.cfm

What of it? They don't make the distinction, which implies that they
are also unaware of it, which in turn implies that they don't know
enough about USENET for their opinion to be worth reading.

Read the RFCs.

I did, you appear not to have.

2. Xmas 04.

Wrong again. You need it when you encounter an application
that uses features not present in DirectX versions earlier than
9, you want to use those features, and you find that enabling
them on a board without hardware acceleration of those features
(thus forcing use of the software implementation that runs on the
main CPU) causes an unacceptable performance penalty.

That means that for some folks the answer is "never" while for
others it's "yesterday", and for the rest it's somewhere in
between.
To the OP the answer is "spend the bucks for an upgrade when
you encounter something that causes you to notice the lack".

Considering the distinct lack of games that actually implement
any DX9 features - 2 to date I believe, it would hardly seem worth
the effort.

If one of those games is important to you then it is worth the
effort. Do not assume that your priorities are everyone's
priorities.
By the time they become common place your card will be one if
not 2 generations out of date. The mystery features you refer to
are more likely than not disabled rather than CPu rendered,

Some are, some aren't. The vertex shaders are CPU rendered while
the pixel shaders are disabled, for example.


With the scarcity of DX9 available games this point remains moot.

Not if you happen to have one of them. The fact that there are not
many titles does not mean that nobody is running the ones that are
out.

Try reading some of the other posts in the thread. You appear to be
in a minority.

So? Martin Luther King was in a minority. Didn't make him wrong.

but like I said,
its not likely that he has a game requiring it hence my
realistic time estimate.

How do you know what he has? Do you read minds?

The law of probability.

Care to post your analysis?

You would refute it. I'm sure you don't think the sky is blue either.

Nice of you to stipulate that your analysis is refutable.

---------
Rgds Mike
Remove XXX to reply

Good judgement comes from experience.
Unfortunately, the experience comes from bad judgement.
-Anon

WWW.Dead-Fish.Com - Deep Sea Daddies...
http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollect...s=the_Seahorse



--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:20:37 +0000 (UTC)
Seahorse wrote:

Following prompt first aid from the medic "Nitz Walsh"
managed to scrawl the following bloodstained message
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:15:06 GMT:


"John Hall" wrote in message
e.rogers.com...
I
know, cause I have an ATI 9800 pro and Call of Duty looks great and
runs like butter. Gaming skills, well, that's another issue.

Call of Duty does not utilize any DX9 shader effects. It runs like
butter on a wide variety of setups, simply because the graphics
engine is well-designed.

1. Don't cross post.

Still trying to be a netcop?

2. It wouldn't be because the engine is old..?
---------
Rgds Mike
Remove XXX to reply

Good judgement comes from experience.
Unfortunately, the experience comes from bad judgement.
-Anon

WWW.Dead-Fish.Com - Deep Sea Daddies...
http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollect...s=the_Seahorse




--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:18:36 +0000 (UTC)
Seahorse wrote:

Following prompt first aid from the medic "J.Clarke"
managed to scrawl the following bloodstained
message On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:18:52 -0500:


I and many other,

How many others?

Try reading the thread.

What does "the thread" have to do with anything? It is hardly either a
random or a representative sample of the participants in USENET.

but not all users consider it bad practice as best
and ignorant at worst.

Ignorant users think that.

If the cap fits boy...

Who you callin' BOY, Honkey?

---------
Rgds Mike
Remove XXX to reply

Good judgement comes from experience.
Unfortunately, the experience comes from bad judgement.
-Anon

WWW.Dead-Fish.Com - Deep Sea Daddies...
http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollect...s=the_Seahorse



--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 13:29:49 GMT, "Nitz Walsh"
wrote:


"Mean_Chlorine" wrote in message
. com...

Not a lot - Halo isn't a game with particularly impressive graphics to
begin with, not least because it was designed to run on a GF4MX core
machine (XBox).

What? The Xbox's GPU is a mix between a Geforce3 and Geforce4 - some
features not even in the Geforce4. It is certainly nowhere near a GF4MX.


It's the basis for the GF4, a prototype or rather first generation GF4
if you will. Basically they used the XBox as a test bed ;O)

Lynley

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:17:30 +0000 (UTC)
Seahorse wrote:

Following prompt first aid from the medic "J.Clarke"
managed to scrawl the following bloodstained
message On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:38:08 -0500:


And regardless of any of that, your whining and your continued
determination to debate this point has used up more bandwidth than
the original crosspost did.

Perhaps you should try ,snipping...

Not getting out of it that easily, netcop-wannabee. You've used up more
bandwidth, just with your posts alone, than the original used.

You should cross-post only when really needed, and usually not to
more than three groups.

The RFC suggests that it is rare that more than five to six groups
will have similar enough interests for the post to be on-topic in all
of them. And"really needed" is a judgment call. Nobody likes a
netcop and nobody appointed you to the position--if the post is on
topic for the groups to which it was posted, you will be much better
thought of if you let it ride.

He posted to 5 groups.

Was his post on-topic for all of them? If so, then where is the
problem?

IMHO cross posting sucks...

When you gain more experience you will change that view considerably.

Considering the length of time I have spent online I believe I have
enough.

Well, let's see, according to Google your first post on your current UID
was about 3 weeks ago and the first post containing your sig is less
than a year old. Hardly an eternity.

Can I refer you to this page:

http://members.fortunecity.com/daves...f/13trolls.htm

No. Not interested in looking at any more of your lame newbie
sites.

---------
Rgds Mike
Remove XXX to reply

Good judgement comes from experience.
Unfortunately, the experience comes from bad judgement.
-Anon

WWW.Dead-Fish.Com - Deep Sea Daddies...
http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollect...s=the_Seahorse




--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:09:40 +0000 (UTC)
Seahorse wrote:

Following prompt first aid from the medic "J.Clarke"
managed to scrawl the following bloodstained
message On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:52:01 -0500:
=20
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 23:49:33 +0000 (UTC)
Seahorse wrote:

Following prompt first aid from the medic "Lenny"
managed to scrawl the following bloodstained message On Mon, 24 Nov
2003 09:50:31 GMT:
=20

Considering the distinct lack of games that actually implement
any DX9 features - 2 to date I believe, it would hardly seem worth
the effort.

Do note that not only games use DX9-level features.
=20
Yes, but it would seem unlikely for any other purpose.=20
=20
By the time they become common place your card will be one if
not 2 generations out of date.

Don't forget, most DX9-compatible cards run older games faster
than their equivalent DX8 counterparts, so it is still an upgrade
worth having in the meanwhile seen from that perspective.
=20
Blowing nearly =A3400

What are you smoking? Dabs will sell you a DirectX 9 capable board
for 60 Pounds. A decent brand Radeon 9600 goes for around 100. Even
the Radeon 9800s can be had for under 300.
=20
I'm talking about top of the range. You apparently are not.

Who said anything about "the top of the range"? The question was about
a DirectX 9 board, not the most powerful board that could be fitted into
an AGP slot.
=20
to play old games slightly quicker does not make a
lot of sense unless you graphics card is very old and underpowered.
If you have a very old and under=3Dpowered graphics card, the
matching low spec PC is unlikely to benefit from your new beast.=20
You would need to replace mobo, cpu etc etc.
=20
If you have a fairly modern card then currently there is little
point jumping ship for a couple of games that might have prettier or
more realistic visuals IMHO, which brings me full circle.
=20
its not likely that he has a game requiring it hence my
realistic time estimate.

I think it was more like an arbitrary time estimate. Do tell the
reasoning that led you to come up with xmas 04 as a date...
=20
Grey hair mostly...

How did you get so old and learn so little?
=20
Like Oscar Wilde said " I am not young enough to know everything"

Pity you didn't learn _anything_.

---------
Rgds Mike
Remove XXX to reply
=20
Good judgement comes from experience.
Unfortunately, the experience comes from bad judgement.
-Anon
=20
WWW.Dead-Fish.Com - Deep Sea Daddies...
http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollect...3Dthe_Seahorse
=20


--=20
--=20
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

NOTHING BUT HYPE....and when the DX9 hype is over DX10 will be out and the hype will continue...yes there is eye candy....but it
has LITTLE, to do with performance or FPS or better aim, better driving skills, easier recognition of your enemy, longer burnouts
etc etc etc



"John" wrote in message om...
Anybody know when you'll absolutely need a Directx 9 card to have any
fun with games? It seems that games like Halo and Max Payne 2 use
Directx 9 features sparingly, and therefore, it's no big deal if I
play them on my Directx 8.1 card (which is a GeForce 4 Ti 4200).

Are we talking 3-4 months maybe?

I'm just trying to get a handle on when to spend the bucks for an
upgrade.

thanks.

Well, it does have something to do with eye candy, and performance since a
DX 9 card renders all of the features of DX 9 in hardware. So you see
everything the developer intended and you have excellent performance. I
know, cause I have an ATI 9800 pro and Call of Duty looks great and runs
like butter. Gaming skills, well, that's another issue.

JK

"JAD" wrote in message
link.net...
NOTHING BUT HYPE....and when the DX9 hype is over DX10 will be out and
the hype will continue...yes there is eye candy....but it
has LITTLE, to do with performance or FPS or better aim, better driving
skills, easier recognition of your enemy, longer burnouts
etc etc etc



"John" wrote in message
om...
Anybody know when you'll absolutely need a Directx 9 card to have any
fun with games? It seems that games like Halo and Max Payne 2 use
Directx 9 features sparingly, and therefore, it's no big deal if I
play them on my Directx 8.1 card (which is a GeForce 4 Ti 4200).

Are we talking 3-4 months maybe?

I'm just trying to get a handle on when to spend the bucks for an
upgrade.

thanks.

"John Hall" wrote in message
.rogers.com...
I
know, cause I have an ATI 9800 pro and Call of Duty looks great and runs
like butter. Gaming skills, well, that's another issue.

Call of Duty does not utilize any DX9 shader effects. It runs like butter
on a wide variety of setups, simply because the graphics engine is
well-designed.