Shader 4.0

[HardWareBoss]

nV's new G80 to use shader 4.0 and GDDR4. I have shader 1. whatever. No GDDR anything.

 

[xXDracoXx]

uh oh. Does Shader model 4 mean DX10?

 

[MadModMike]

I really don't think there is a need for implementing Shader Model 4.0, if you look at today's games, there's not even a handful that utilize 3.0 yet. Going straight to 4.0 is really pushing the pace, and that might make developers delay games longer so they can use newer technologies (Duke Nukem Forever anybody?).

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time.

 

[HardWareBoss]

DX10 coming with Vista?

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Preview of Shader Model 5.0

Or maybe the decimal goes before the 5, dunno! :tongue:

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

DX10 coming with Vista?

Yes, you'll need DX10 to run Vista.

You have that backwards, you need VISTA for DX10, but you don't need DX10 to run VISTA.

DX10 will be a separate add-on. DX9.0L (aka WGF, etc) is supposed to be the base layer for VISTA.

There's been alot written about it, check out Digit-Life, B3D, and Biz-Tech's write ups.

Supposedly the vector component will require ridiculous amounts of memory to be done right (like 256MB minimum), thus thos 512MB X1300 are making more and more sense every day.

I wrtoe a big explanation of the difference between DX10 and Vista in another forum, I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

[Vile]

Lol that's twice today :tongue:

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Here's a cut-n-paste of my statements;

DX10 =/= WGF1.0 it would be WGF2.0 if anything.
It's more like they came up with WGF1.0 for the basis of Vista/Longhorn, and then didn't like the foundation and increment part. WGF1.0 seems to still be the core, but it's reverting to IT's old name of DX9.0L. DX10 will be a separate add-on as is the case now, but unlike the current system DX10 will be far better integrated into the OS, and legacy support for DX9 and OGL will run on separate paths in compatibilty mode outside of the kernel level support, with OGL likely being significantly slower than it is now (meaning you Quake4/Riddick fans beter keep your old systems/OS). Thus annoying many developers (Carmack had stated he's focusing on DX), and probably striking a big, if not fatal blow, at OGLs future game development, and thus hurting both Linux and Apple's hopes for gaming converts, and strengthening M$' position overall.

Understand that DX10 is not VISTA and vice versa. DX10 does not need legacy support, VISTA does. And as such you won't need DX10 to run VISTA, but you will need vista to access DX10. So your GF7800/X1xxx might not work with DX10, but that doesn't mean you're hooped, you just don't get that full feature set, and maybe because of it you miss out on potential performance because it's running it through compatability mode.

To me this is a fine idea if it means DX10 works awesome for the new cards at the expense of DX9 being not integrated, that's fine with me. The idea of a unified driver almost always means compromises, so I'd rather see Windows limit support of DX to the generation it's intended for and update and optimize them independantly. Of course this likely means that the older DXs will get left behind in the future the way that the older OSs do now. It might also mean that there are compatibility issues the way there was with many things and their drivers with XP.

 

[HardWareBoss]

LOL Thanks my vid card works alot better now. 😀

 

[FACEBASH]

Argh SM 4.0 ??? yeah.. i woudl say that smaks of DX 10.. Vista. .. grrr..

And i JUST bought my copy of XP media 2005.. lol.. i hate that they dont intend to support DX 10 on older XP Os.. that just bites..

 

[raven_87]

@APE

Anyword of a DX extension for WXP?

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

@APE

Anyword of a DX extension for WXP?

Haven't seen anything about it yet. I would expect that they would so you could use your R600/G80 to it's fullest when it arrives even if you are on the old system, however, with the way that it is it may be only DX10 receives the full features, and then XP receives limited additional support.

 

[Samsa]

Darnit Ape. How do you know all this stuff already? I mean...where do you get your news, because I'd like to find out about this stuff as fast as you do.

 

[lordroddington]

but how well will the g80 run it? i wonder if it will be like running shader model 3 stuff on the geforce 6 series, which wasn't quite powerful enough to run it well. good selling point for it though, just like sm3 was for the geforce 6 series.

 

[WINDSHEAR]

you say DX10 won't be supported on Windows XP? That's dirty... really dirty. I like my XP and don't intend to upgrade it. Worse than that, the new Vista that they are trying to cram down our throats is full of spyware. Ever heard of the Sony Malware scandal? What a bunch of crap...

 

[Vile]

What happens if you have a DX9 video card and DX9 installed (on XP, for example), would it be better to have a DX9 video card with DX10 installed on Vista?

 

[dvdpiddy]

ati is much better with shader model programing i heard.

 

[chuckshissle]

So Nvidia's upcoming 7900 series card with be armed with Shader 4.0?

I wonder how good is the new shader 4.0 compare to the 3.0.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

So Nvidia's upcoming 7900 series card with be armed with Shader 4.0?

Nope, the changes to the transistor packages alone would be so much more complex than the GF7800 that they would be risking alot in making a transition to 90nm and changing architecture, I think they learned from their (FX5800) and ATI's (R520 3rd party issues) bad experiences doing that.

The SM4.0 cards will be the R600/G80, although knowin them, they may get something mid-level out by the fall for VISTA, just as a test card/chip IMO.