ID:181595
 Feb 4 2010, 9:52 am
|
|
It is estimated to be released on products in the second quarter of 2010. Think it is worth waiting for if I am planning on buying a gaming rig?
| |
Depends when you think of upgrading. PCIe is backwards and forwards compatible, you can plug a PCIe 2.0 card into a suitably sized PCIe 3.0 slot and vice versa.
| |
Stephen001 wrote:
Depends when you think of upgrading. PCIe is backwards and forwards compatible, you can plug a PCIe 2.0 card into a suitably sized PCIe 3.0 slot and vice versa. But it will only operate as fast as its slowest part. :( What about DirectX 11? Haven't really looked into it much, not sure what potential it has. | |
It's much like DirectX 10, which is much like DirectX 9, you get the idea. DirectX 10 was well marketed and eased some API woes, I'll give it that. I'm not sure what you're expecting though. DirectX is in itself fine, but tends to be 6 months behind the curve if you're a cutting edge developer.
And yes, it's generally accepted putting a lower bandwidth card into a higher bandwidth slot isn't doing to change anything. I can't help but wonder what kind of games you're looking to play. | |
Stephen001 wrote:
It's much like DirectX 10, which is much like DirectX 9, you get the idea. DirectX 10 was well marketed and eased some API woes, I'll give it that. I'm not sure what you're expecting though. DirectX is in itself fine, but tends to be 6 months behind the curve if you're a cutting edge developer. Right now I'm planning on getting an i7 for the sole purpose of being able to run a massive game of Supreme Commander on all high settings at +10 speed (10 seconds pass per 1 second). Unnecessary? Yes Excessive? Yes I want to do it. -.- Then as soon as SupCom2 comes out I will try to do the same, and probably be unable to. :( | |
Why not just pick up a dual/quad Opteron board, then have six cores in them, if excessive if your aim.
| |
There's actually quite a bit of difference between DX10 and DX11.
  DirectX 11 ^ http://www.overclock.net/ati/ 597046-dx11-vs-dx10-vs-dx-9-a.html | |
DirectX11 has ability to actually turn texture into 3D model, however it takes A LOT time, because of the that, it gets limited to 1 this type of model on screen, and FPS end up being 3 times lower than DX9
| |
Stephen001 wrote:
I have to say, I usually don't care about how good the grass is unless the game is boring. What if the game is about chopping individual strands of grass using a pair of kindergarten skizzorz. <_< >_> Though really I entirely agree with you. Gameplay means far more than graphics. Then again, I believe most people here would agree or they wouldn't be on BYOND to begin with. :) | |
Stephen001 wrote:
I have to say, I usually don't care about how good the grass is unless the game is boring. AJX wrote: What if the game is about chopping individual strands of grass using a pair of kindergarten skizzorz. <_< >_> (What if the game is boring?) | |
From the published speeds here it may well be worth it, but how much are cards going to cost? Also, considering where games are at right now, it may not make much of a difference in terms of actual performance.