DX9 vs. DX10 with Lost Planet
Yesterday, Capcom released two demo versions of their upcoming game Lost Planet: Extreme Condition. One version is designed for DirectX 9-classs graphics cards and the other for newer DirectX 10-class cards like those in NVIDIA's GeForce 8 series and ATI's Radeon HD 2000 series of products. There has been a bit of a buzz surrounding the release of this demo, not only because it is the first that uses DirectX 10, but because it currently works poorly on DX10 ATI hardware. The situation with ATI's hardware and this demo will likely be worked out with future driver releases over time, however, so we're not going to dwell on that here. Instead, what we want to explore is whether or not there is any real advantage to running the DirectX 10 version of this game over DirectX 9.
|
DirectX 9
|
;)
DirectX 10 |
;)
DirectX 9
|
;)
DirectX 10 |
;)
DirectX 9 |
;)
DirectX 10 |
;){kind=link}
The screenshots above were taken with the DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 versions of the Lost Planet demo running on GeForce 8800 GTX using the latest Windows Vista drivers available from NVIDIA. The game was configured for a resolution of 1280x720, with 8X anti-aliasing and 16X anisotropic filtering enabled. If you flip through the screenshots and compare the two versions, you'll see that visually they don't differ very much at all. The motion blur effect is more pronounced in the DX10 shots and it gives the game a more realistic look that's not conveyed well over still captures. Other than that, those of you with DX9-class video cards really aren't missing out on much, if anything at all with this title. In addition to the visual similarities between the two version, also look at the framerates reported in each scene. As you'll see, the DX10 version performs far worse than the DX9 version. It's so much worse, that we're sure many of you would trade off the slight visual advances of the DX10 version for the much smoother framerates of DX9.
Of course, DX10 games are in their infancy at the moment and its going to take some more time for game developers to fully exploit the API and produce games with much better visuals than DX9. It seems that time just hasn't come yet.
Comments
|
A little anti-climactic to fire up a "DX10 game" only to find it doesn't look any different in DX9 and runs slower... but hey, the tech pretty new and the game is a conversion from the Xbox, so what can you expect? |
|
Considering how new DX10 is, and the relative immaturity of NVIDIA's and ATI's DX10 drivers, you had to know that this was going to be the case at first.
|
|
Well at least I don't feel so bad for getting my 1950PRO those few months ago (about 2 weeks before the 8xxx series was released)...it'll last me a while longer :)
|
|
Only difference I can see is with the lighting in the first screen shot pair. |
|
sort of disappointing. well hopefully it's just an issue with the game being ported to the pc ( could be like rainbow 6 vegas for pc as it ran pretty choppy because it was a direct port from the 360). |
|
I have ti say I am definetly satisfied with my x1900XT, I mean sure some of the textures look a lil nicer, maybe the lighting is a lil cleaner, but in the end the cost for performance, hell the COST in dollars doesn't work for me. |
|
http://ati.amd.com/developer/demos/rhd2000.html? <- more demos |
|
With all the hype regarding this, it surely would have been nice to be blown away by the differences DX10 had to offer. This is surely a bit of a let down. |
Post a Comment
