Next Generation Emulation banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Level 9998
Joined
·
9,384 Posts
Slow down Rap. Youre saying my personal computer is slow!?!
No. Everyone's computer is slow compared to Microsoft's standards for Windows Vista. :p What? You have a Core i7 965 running at 4.5GHz 24/7 with some 12GB of DDR3 and tri-SLI GTX 280? Get real... ;p I'd seen what they did to the OS ever since it was in beta... thanks a lot. :evil: Vista Aero used to run even on integrated onboard graphics from decades ago by Intel...
 

·
Level 9998
Joined
·
9,384 Posts
What man? :eek:nthepull

Anyway, Windows 7 is gonna get a netbook version, which I bet is only going to be distributed through netbook manufacturers.

Also... I bet it's going to get pirated to the point where you see torrents with over 11,000 seeds of a 700MB file. And it's going to be soooo loved because it doesn't have all of the boasts and stuffs of the full install.

And then Microsoft would start pushing out netbook versions for every Windows "upverse" after that. ;p Apple might see the opportunity, regret it, then pull off a $500 tiny macbook with a netbook version of Mac OS X 10.7

Then the rest is history... :p
 

·
Level 9998
Joined
·
9,384 Posts
It was the best of 2008. GT5 has no road map, sadly... no release date even. Just expected dates.

Plus I think GT5 gotta do more than GT5P if it wants to take back the crown, or BurnOut Paradise will just lead another year.
 

·
Level 9998
Joined
·
9,384 Posts
Guys, there's 7 off topic posts in a row, while the OP's question hasn't been fully answered yet (at least he didn't let us know, so), please keep that in the Burnout thread :)
Roger. :)

Am I glad you said that, though. Off-topic stuffs have been popping up lots lately.

But most likely in a way that costs much more rendering power, thus FPS?
Not necessarily? If what I think is right... then it might not cost that much. What MS is doing, basically, might just be implementing their own optimized versions of some codes over the old foundations. In other words... something like an extension or implementation of what had already been there the entire time. They do have the time and resources to research something like that, after all.

Just how ATi cards can cut corners with the AA implemention of DX10.1, thus reaching higher FPS, which nVidia didn't really like in "their" Assassin's Creed? I don't think that these new features are completely worthless. It's just a case of wishing that your GPU will still be fast enough by the time these DX11 and DX10.1 features will be implemented widespread in games.
Yeah... but with current developers' attitudes towards these new technologies, and considering how short-lived DX10 had been, I don't think that would happen. Ahh... if only we had more DX10 games, maybe they would have invested more time in DX10.

Ironically, it's stilll irrelevant, since I'm on Windows XP. I plan to make the switch with W7.
Mmm... W7...

I've heard that there's a netbook version coming. Here's wondering how hardware support will be like, because... likely, getting it as a gaming OS won't be too bad if it had the essentials intact.
 

·
Level 9998
Joined
·
9,384 Posts
That one will have a 3 applications limit of what can run at the same time. If I look at my taskbar, that's not going to work. Sound + mouse + wireless, and then I still need my game to start. Where the heck am I going to fit Daemon Tools in? ;)
Mm... last I heard it wouldn't have that cap, so you can run as much as you want. I mean... otherwise, my XP Home install on my Eee would still pwn them? ;p I know they wouldn't let that happen.
 

·
Level 9998
Joined
·
9,384 Posts
DX10.1 is just supposed to do DX10 slightly faster, however whereas PhysX is rare, DX10.1 is non-existant, the only major release I know of that used it was Far Cry 2...and it actually had support for it patched out lol.
Nah, Far Cry 2 DX10.1 was a rumor. :p And there are a few stuffs that run pretty cool in DX10.1. The latest ATi demos and Assassin's Creed for instance.

Also DX10 is far from a dud, Assasins Creed and Far Cry 2 proved that. Far Cry 2 runs MUCH smoother than on DX10 than DX9.
Depends on the hardware. ;)

Usually it's the DX10 version running better than the DX9 version on Vista, yet the DX9 on XP owns them both.
Yep. That's true. ;D Windows 7 still couldn't deliver it, which makes me kinda think that developers are being lazy about their DX10 implementations.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top