Sorry your browser is not supported!

Well, the cheapest card (DX 11) that i've seen so far (ATI Radeon), costs about € 160. I don't know how much that is in dollar, however. The most expensive one (also ATI RADEON) costs € 360, and that one has more processing power than two high-end graphics cards combined.

well, ATI RADEON HD5970 is a true hi-end hardware, ~$850
but for me it costs like a airplane

Keep in mind that ATI will be releasing more budget cards during these next two months. DirectX 11 support will be much more affordable.

Rumours say that nVidia won't release DX11 cards until March. And when those come, ATI will be forced to bring down their prices, meaning even more affordable DirectX 11.

But the only problem with DirectX 11 is that it's only supported in Vista/Windows 7. XP is still an excellent operating system, which proves to be DirectX's downfall. For a product to succeed, it has to appeal to many people and be supported by a lot of people's computers. A lot of people I know who have XP have not considered upgrading to Windows 7 yet, merely sticking to a Windows 7 theme.

But as more an more systems start shipping with Windows 7 preinstalled, the user base will start to increase. I predict though, that it should be at least Q4 of 2010 before there are enough people who have OS support for DX11. By then, there would be integrated DX11-supported IGPs (Integrated Graphics Processor).

By Q2 2011, DX11 support should be to the masses. And that would be the perfect time for DX11 engines.

It is unlikely though, that TGC will make a DX11 DBPro.

I haven't a clue if my laptop supports DX10, In my dxDiag it says directx version: 10, but does not go on to say whether it works... how do you test?

Run the graphics tests as part of dxdiag. If they work, then DX10 works. But if you have DX10 then it probably is DX10 compatible anyway.

windows 7 pro/ultimate has free feauture - XP emulator. but your CPU must support virtualization. although, XP CD image for emulation is free, licensed and downloadable from M$ webpage. but of course, using win7 for games and xp emul for all other stuff is not convenient though.

plus if you saw the screenshot, $850 card can produce ~60 fps in crysis, thats enough for smooth play, but new dx11 engines will force you to buy at least such class card to play max settings, budget cards will be just wasting money.

P.S. preinstalled win7 home or premium is a bull$hit - it has no support for xp apps.

I'm going to disagree there. My sister has Windows 7 Home Premium and all of her XP apps run perfectly. Heck, even all the ones I usually use run perfectly.



That is true, however, notice it is at very high detail settings. Most gamers on this forum will be fine with just high detail settings. And like everyone knows, Crysis is a very demanding game on the GPU. It takes a real enthusiast to go out and buy a graphics card that can handle Crysis on very high details at a smooth framerate (I consider about 30 to be smooth enough, but people will disagree with me there, so for this, I'll say 60 is the 'smooth' point and say 30 is 'playable').

Of course, look at benchmarks for Dirt 2 - it's a full-fledged DirectX 11 game and even ATI's most budget card at the time I'm writing this post, the 5750, can run it at a playable framerate up to 1920x1200. However, if you're running at that resolution, I think you would opt for more graphics power than a budget/mainstream solution.

That being said, smaller monitors (like 1600 by 1200 or lower) can be driven perfectly fine with a budget card, like the upcoming 5500 series or 5600 series.

Besides, if you look at DirectX 10 games and their benchmarks (like Devil may Cry 4 for example), you can see that even a 4670, a mainstream budget card under 100 USD, can play the game at a playable framerate at 1920 by 1200.



This is true, however, the people who want to play max settings at 60 frames per second will buy an enthusiast card. This is because that suits their needs. If people are comfortable with 30 or 45, they will buy a more mainstream solution because it suits their needs. If they don't have a huge monitor and want to play it at 1600 by 1200, they will buy a more budget card, because it suits their needs.

What I'm saying is, if you really want to have 60+ FPS on maximum settings at a high resolution, you must be willing to spend the money on a high-end card - and that's what enthusiasts will do.

--

Putting that aside, look at the way TGC programmed the DX9 version of DBPro and look at how they programmed FPS Creator. On the FPSC forums, many people still have 'budget' cards (9400GT or the HD 4350 to name two), yet still have very playable (40+) framerate with source code modifications and plenty of shaders. If TGC actually do decide to make DBPro X11, and if it's anything like DBPro X9, then a budget X11 card would give a very playable framerate, even with higher level shaders. Heck, even people with integrated graphics processors from ATI/nVidia (HD 3200 or GeForce 9100) can run DBPro games at a playable framerate.

If DBPro X11 rolls around, people with DX11 supports (Windows Vista/7 paired with DX11 supported graphics processor, integrated or not) will be able to run it at a playable framerate. And given the development time of such a product, and taking into consideration that the DirectX SDK that contained DX11 was just released in August 2009, by the time TGC would have made it, people will have DirectX 11 support.

Maybe that apps already has win7 support, anyway i meant all software, not only games or small tools. although dont forget about very old games, that randomly run even on XP.

So even though I bought my DX10 card for little more than £110 a few months ago and can run Crysis at more than 60fps at 1680x1050 on max settings, budget cards are still a waste of money eh? I think not.

Not to mention the fact that DX11 still runs on my card (minus the multithreaded rendering and tessellation) perfectly fine. I see no problem with budget cards at all. Most of them are actually pretty good anyway now. You can pick up a DX11 card faster than the one I have got, for the same price I bought my DX10 card now too unless your an Nvidia fanboy who will pay that $850 for one of their cards regardless of the fact ATI always have one that performs just as well at under half the price: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-216-SP&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1515



Windows 7 has much better support for XP software than vista ever did. I've even managed to play some of my older games on Win 7 that wouldn't run on vista (just to name a few: Transport Tycoon, Industry Giant 2, Starfleet command 3), and thats just on Win 7 home premium, without the XP Mode you can download for Win 7 professional/Ultimate.

Also, think about when TGC first released FPS creator X10, there were less people around then that could run DX10 than there are now, but that didn't stop TGC from releasing it. In fact, FPSC X10 seems to be doing pretty damn well right now.

what card? i'll check it. (full config preferable)

by the way, i didn't said that dx11 and win7 are bad. i think only vista and dx10 are bull$hit. i'll definetely buy win7 pro and good dx11 card, but not now.

although, do not forget that this thread is about upgrading dbpro to new dx. and as win7 is already out, i think dbpro must move exactly to dx11. but anyway, exe must run on dx9 too! many notebooks (netbooks) are still selling with xp onboard.

That's impossible as DX9 and DX10+ are not compatible. You'd need both sets of DLL's which is the same as compiling the source in both a DX9 and a DX10+ environment.

Though a DX10+ version of DBP would be nice, even though I'm more than happy with the current version.

well, i... errgh... i meant that i would be not nice if DBP (for example) dx10 will compile ONLY dx10 apps that will NOT run on xp even if they are not using any x10 feautures.

p.s. yep me happy too ^^

p.p.s. dx11 and its multitreading function blows out dx10.
...and remember - perfomance is everything!...(GTA 2™)

Some major advantage should offer DX11 compared to X9.