For Now, DirectX 11.1 Will Only Be for Windows 8

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Good I hope Microsoft keeps it that way and hopefully there will be plenty of DirectX 11.1 games to take advantage of it. There is no need to port any part of Windows 8 to a obsolete OS. As soon as Windows 8 went retail Windows 7 became obsolete.
 
If M$ thinks that makes me upgrade some 50 business PCs to windows 8... well, guess again 🙂
If anything, it will have the opposite effect.

 
[citation][nom]wanderer11[/nom]So what will DX11.1 offer than DX11 doesn't?[/citation]A few blades of grass for Winsheep to graze on. That and further attempts to keep developers from contemplating the use of OpenGL.
 
WoW bryon could you be any more of a fanboy.

Give me a break win 7 is far from obsolete this is simply MS trying to shove people into updating to windows 8. Which won't work anyways, and they'll soon get enough backlash to make work for windows 7 also.

And if they're gonna be like this I have no problems getting a windows 8 for free. Of course I don't see dx 11.1 becoming mainstream for awhile anyways, so Ill stick with a perfectly good windows and laugh at all the idiots like yourself.
 
Considering that most games still use the anitquated DX9 (thanks a lot consoles lol) this is a non issue. Besides if M$ was truely interested in the PC gaming scene they would have released the rest of the Halo series a long time ago for the PC. With everything lately they really don't give a rats a$$ about PC gamers other than wanting us to upgrade to Windows 8, and that's really not going to happen in any significant numbers.
 
I see 11.1 being as relevant as 10.1 was. If it takes that much money for an OS upgrade for that minute feature set, then Microsoft's business model from Vista and up is unnecessary. Microsoft is just trying to find the right carrot to entice resisting users to buy their upgrade, we all know that 7 and even Vista is not incapable of running 11.1 as they all run on the same underlying architecture.

@Bryon, Windows 7 is far from irrelevant. Windows 8 is widely viewed as a sidestep and not an upgrade in any way except for their tablets and phone (what Windows 8 is obviously designed for anyway). Not to mention, most businesses will continue to run Windows 7, Vista, and even XP for several years to come as most will not touch an OS until at least SP1 comes out . When an OS does what it is designed to do and works well for the user's need (something MS lost an understanding in), then they are not apt to upgrade nor should they feel they have to for that reason alone.
 
[citation][nom]Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer[/nom]In other words, any Windows game developer not writing Metro apps will stick to targeting DirectX 9.0 and/or 11(.0), and ignore 11.1. Seems pretty straightforward to me.[/citation]

DX9.0? Why not DX9.0C which is better and still fully supported even by XP?
 
i have an Intel i5 2500k oced to 4ghz, ati 5870 oc, 8gb ram ddr3 1866mhz, samsung 830 128gb..
and i was really happy with my windows 7..

then i installed windows 8 and i have to admit, apart from metro likeness or not, that they are way faster. What do i mean? i didn't expect to see a difference in performance on the OS by jumping to windows 8 and when i prepared everything i must say! you can see a huge difference in speed, on loading programs games and switching to desktop/metro etc.

At least the memory management is way way better, couldn't believe it was possible for example,
when you right click "my computer" and select "manage" ..how long does it take to load the management console?
At windows 7 it takes some noticeable time (compared to other tasks) however at windows 8 its almost instant!

I had some strange freezes on various games (more like lagspike feels ) and i knew it was from overclocking (some games don't like OC ). At windows 8 it is almost unnoticeable.

Now DX11.1 , is most welcome, not because it will make people upgrade blablabla but because of the
"With DirectX 11.1, WARP was enhanced with (among other things) support for DirectCompute and hence it is one of the accelerators for C++ AMP"

Meaning , smaller PCs with just onboard intel or amd apu will perform way way better than on windows 7! for example netbooks and now that i think about it, it's time to test win8 on our netbook ^^
 
[citation][nom]beetlejuicegr[/nom]i have an Intel i5 2500k oced to 4ghz, ati 5870 oc, 8gb ram ddr3 1866mhz, samsung 830 128gb..and i was really happy with my windows 7..then i installed windows 8 and i have to admit, apart from metro likeness or not, that they are way faster. What do i mean? i didn't expect to see a difference in performance on the OS by jumping to windows 8 and when i prepared everything i must say! you can see a huge difference in speed, on loading programs games and switching to desktop/metro etc.At least the memory management is way way better, couldn't believe it was possible for example,when you right click "my computer" and select "manage" ..how long does it take to load the management console?At windows 7 it takes some noticeable time (compared to other tasks) however at windows 8 its almost instant!I had some strange freezes on various games (more like lagspike feels ) and i knew it was from overclocking (some games don't like OC ). At windows 8 it is almost unnoticeable.Now DX11.1 , is most welcome, not because it will make people upgrade blablabla but because of the "With DirectX 11.1, WARP was enhanced with (among other things) support for DirectCompute and hence it is one of the accelerators for C++ AMP"Meaning , smaller PCs with just onboard intel or amd apu will perform way way better than on windows 7! for example netbooks and now that i think about it, it's time to test win8 on our netbook ^^[/citation]

As much as I like Windows 8, your experience seems more founded in that your Windows 8 installation is a fresh installation and your Windows 7 installation is not. Well ,that's what it seems like to me based on the difference on performance supposedly being huge. They should be very close.
 
When games start heading to Linux via Valve/Steams lead, this will be considered another nail in MS's home computing coffin.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]As much as I like Windows 8, your experience seems more founded in that your Windows 8 installation is a fresh installation and your Windows 7 installation is not. Well ,that's what it seems like to me based on the difference on performance supposedly being huge. They should be very close.[/citation]

I was on a fresh Win 7 and now I am on a fresh Win 8. I can mirror his statements. While raw FPS didn't change much other things such as the general responsiveness of Windows and the speed at which things launch is far better it also stays more solid and fluid with a lot of crap opened. Sure I had to push it to the extreme in Win 7 to get it to bog down a bit but I run a setup with 4 monitors and do a lot of work and crap from my PC. Having a shit ton of programs and games open at any given time is the norm for me. As for the stability I personally no longer overclock so I cannot comment.
 
Once again, Microsoft says, Oh our new OS is going to be a wonder for gaming but if you want games like Halo that originally started on the PC, forget it. Until Microsoft puts their money where their mouth is, they can stick Win8 up their a$$ as far as I'm concerned.
 
Question. Who keeps pushing this idea that you're being forced to upgrade to 8? How does temporarily not releasing what everyone seems to think is a minor upgrade to a single component to the OS force anyone to upgrade? As some have mentioned already, most games still working with DX9. Thus what does it matter to anyone? As noted in the article, every other PC gaming service still works. There is not even one game thus far that only works on 8 and not in 7. In no way is anyone being inhibited by 8, so how is it that anyone can feel they're being forced to do anything? Because a new program is being released on the newest platform first? Then you might as well go buy a new car every year because chances are they'll add something else to it that wasn't there last year.

The OS is out already. Can we please just move on to real constructive criticism of the platform? Even Tom's has said through their reviews that it's not the horrid mess so many seem to think it is. How about we just get past the vitriol already and top nitpicking on every tiny little pseudo issue?
 
I see MS playing is their DX game again. They did it with DX 10 and Vista to try and strong arm gamers to adopt Vista. Long Live Open GL.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]DX9.0? Why not DX9.0C which is better and still fully supported even by XP?[/citation]
Technically, yes, 9.0c. I meant, "9.0whatever vs 10.whatever, and 11(.0) vs 11.1".

The point I was driving at is this: the two most popular OSs in the world are Windows 7 and Windows XP. Given that games that run in Windows 7 should be able to run in Windows 8 without issues, why would game developers rush to DirectX 11.1? The answer is, they won't, unless they're specifically writing Metro apps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom