computer advice
- Thread starter orcot
- Start date
- Status
Windows XP is an eight year old operating system. There will be no Direct X ten (or beyond) for XP. There will probably be many other ways in which it begins to show it's age in the next couple of years. This is another issue to consider when choosing an operating system.
Running a good quality power supply has always been part of a good custom computer. But it became especially important when the AMD Athlon Socket A CPUs became popular. They outperformed their Intel counterparts, but at the price of being power hungry. A good quality 300 watt PSU was considered the minimum back in 2001 for running a Thunderbird or a Duron. An Intel P3 didn't really need more than 250 watts.
Now the video cards and multiple core CPUs all need more power than ever.
In general people still do that, unless they realise just how crappy the cheap ones tend to be, although there are some real gems out there too as even the cheap companies get it right occassionally.
The thing is people replace their computers so often and the components change so it probably doesn't make sense to get a top of the range one either.
Actually if you have a look on the direct x website it lists the supported O/S's and xp is listed under DX10, and also 10.1 IIRC.
Chances are 32bit systems will be understandably left for dead with the advent of 64bit, however I'd expect more support for xp 64, at least for another 18months, same as vista. After which, windows 7 will take over.
His system won't last more than 3 years really if he keeps up with any new games, however if he doesn't then it'll last longer, and directx won't be so much of a factor anyway.
Really? My old PC is nearly 6 years old, 285W PSU, 1.8ghz Duron(I think, definitely AMD). I think it's a cheap PSU too but I didn't build it, this was before I took an interest. It still runs without issue.
Will DirectX 10 be available for Windows XP?
No. Windows Vista, which has DirectX 10, includes an updated DirectX runtime based on the runtime in Windows XP SP2 (DirectX 9.0c) with changes to work with the new Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) and the new audio driver stack, and with other updates in the operating system. In addition to Direct3D 9, Windows Vista supports two new interfaces when the correct video hardware and drivers are present: Direct3D9Ex and Direct3D10.
Since these new interfaces rely on the WDDM technology, they will never be available on earlier versions of Windows. All the other changes made to DirectX technologies for Windows Vista are also specific to the new version of Windows. The name DirectX 10 is misleading in that many technologies shipping in the DirectX SDK (XACT, XINPUT, D3DX) are not encompassed by this version number. So, referring to the version number of the DirectX runtime as a whole has lost much of its meaning, even for 9.0c. The DirectX Diagnostic Tool (DXdiag.exe) on Windows Vista does report DirectX 10, but this really only refers to Direct3D 10.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb219721.aspx#Will_DirectX_10_be_available_for_Windows_XP
Look at the difference it can make, http://www.novatek.com.au/news/confirmed-dx-10-games.html
And the first DirectX 10 only game is now being released now, http://news.bigdownload.com/2009/03/04/stormrise-pc-to-be-directx10-1-windows-vista-exclusive/
Last edited:
Apparently the microsoft link for directx 10 only takes you to the runtime download and not directx 10. I should be surprised at microsoft, but I'm not.
Regardless there is always this idea:
http://www.techmixer.com/download-directx-10-for-windows-xp/
There are plenty of these about too so it shouldn't be an issue for him, and as you say they're only just starting to release the games now. It's really only intended as a temporary solution until windows 7 anyway, which shouldn't be far away.
I'd say windows 7 over anything, but as far as I know it's currently only a beta test release. I'd say it's unwise to partake in it at this stage, but when it arrives properly it would be wise to purchase yourself a copy. In the meantime xp64 is more than adequate, why spend extra money on vista as an unstable resource hogging stopgap? Especially when it's likely to be replaced shortly with a longterm solution. I think it's an unneccessary expense.
Of course he could just wait until windows 7 comes out and forget about a new PC for now. Although 7 may yet turn out to be as equally disappointing as Vista, you never know.
Hell if windows 7 actually arrives on time and is a decent product at release he might as well go extra cheap and live with win xp 32bit for 6 months. The money saved can be put towards 7 when it comes out. Could be a big "IF" though, so I'm not holding out hope on that and I wouldn't advise others do.
brokenpower
Registered Senior Member
I run DX 10 on XP pro.
The heart of DX10 is the new WDDM driver model.
DirectX 10 is a major inflection point for Windows graphics, so Microsoft wanted to make sure that it laid solid foundations – this is where Microsoft’s new driver model comes into play. Although it’s not directly part of DirectX 10, it’s a backgrounder that’s worth covering. Microsoft claims that the Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) offers “unprecedented stability and performance”. It is a new way of designing drivers - meaning an end to ForceWare and Catalyst Control Center as we know them. Whilst the applications might stay similar on the surface, the backend of display drivers will now be significantly different.
In order to achieve this unprecedented stability and performance, Microsoft’s graphics platform team split the driver into two key components: User Mode Driver (UMD) and Kernel Mode Driver (KMD). Instead of having the display driver sitting in a secure part of the operating system’s kernel, Microsoft has moved as much of the code out into the User Mode portion of the driver as possible. This allows many more features to be implemented directly into the pipeline.
With WDDM, Microsoft has also completely virtualised the graphics hardware with the introduction of GPU threading and video memory virtualisation. GPU threading or scheduling is exactly what it suggests – it means that you can have multiple processes sharing the GPU’s capabilities at any point in time.
In Windows XP, the driver dictates that you can use a single application without running into occasional problems like a DEVICE_LOST scenario during a display mode change – this is essentially where a 3D application would freeze if you switched to another 3D application. With Windows Vista, the desktop is a 3D environment, meaning that you’d end up with application crashes much more often without threading and scheduling advancements.
The need for WDDM was highlighted by this and the fact that Vista makes use of lots of 3D applications at any one point in time. This is especially true with the emergence of General Purpose GPU (GPGPU) applications that make use of the GPU’s massive parallelism. Both ATI (now a Division of AMD) and NVIDIA are working towards utilising the GPU for more than just 3D graphics. In fact, we’ve already seen AMD’s Stream Computing Initiative accelerate the Folding@Home client, while NVIDIA has announced its CUDA Technology on GeForce 8-series video cards. Both companies have talked about physics accelerations on the GPU via Havok FX, too.
Aside from GPU threading, WDDM can improve performance by using system memory as video memory through virtualisation. This basically means that the display driver has access to ‘infinite’ memory capacities by virtue of the fact it can swap data from high-speed video memory into system memory as and when a 3D application requires more memory.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2006/11/30/directx10_future_of_pc_gaming/1
Nothing is going to make the new driver model compatible with XP. Software workarounds will only add overhead.
DirectX 10 is a major inflection point for Windows graphics, so Microsoft wanted to make sure that it laid solid foundations – this is where Microsoft’s new driver model comes into play. Although it’s not directly part of DirectX 10, it’s a backgrounder that’s worth covering. Microsoft claims that the Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) offers “unprecedented stability and performance”. It is a new way of designing drivers - meaning an end to ForceWare and Catalyst Control Center as we know them. Whilst the applications might stay similar on the surface, the backend of display drivers will now be significantly different.
In order to achieve this unprecedented stability and performance, Microsoft’s graphics platform team split the driver into two key components: User Mode Driver (UMD) and Kernel Mode Driver (KMD). Instead of having the display driver sitting in a secure part of the operating system’s kernel, Microsoft has moved as much of the code out into the User Mode portion of the driver as possible. This allows many more features to be implemented directly into the pipeline.
With WDDM, Microsoft has also completely virtualised the graphics hardware with the introduction of GPU threading and video memory virtualisation. GPU threading or scheduling is exactly what it suggests – it means that you can have multiple processes sharing the GPU’s capabilities at any point in time.
In Windows XP, the driver dictates that you can use a single application without running into occasional problems like a DEVICE_LOST scenario during a display mode change – this is essentially where a 3D application would freeze if you switched to another 3D application. With Windows Vista, the desktop is a 3D environment, meaning that you’d end up with application crashes much more often without threading and scheduling advancements.
The need for WDDM was highlighted by this and the fact that Vista makes use of lots of 3D applications at any one point in time. This is especially true with the emergence of General Purpose GPU (GPGPU) applications that make use of the GPU’s massive parallelism. Both ATI (now a Division of AMD) and NVIDIA are working towards utilising the GPU for more than just 3D graphics. In fact, we’ve already seen AMD’s Stream Computing Initiative accelerate the Folding@Home client, while NVIDIA has announced its CUDA Technology on GeForce 8-series video cards. Both companies have talked about physics accelerations on the GPU via Havok FX, too.
Aside from GPU threading, WDDM can improve performance by using system memory as video memory through virtualisation. This basically means that the display driver has access to ‘infinite’ memory capacities by virtue of the fact it can swap data from high-speed video memory into system memory as and when a 3D application requires more memory.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2006/11/30/directx10_future_of_pc_gaming/1
Nothing is going to make the new driver model compatible with XP. Software workarounds will only add overhead.
brokenpower
Registered Senior Member
Again
I CAN and DO run direct X 10 on XP.
Nothing is impossible with a little know how and a lot of modding (with NO overhead)
I CAN and DO run direct X 10 on XP.
Nothing is impossible with a little know how and a lot of modding (with NO overhead)
well inspite of what you guys all said (and i do thank you for your advice in my thread) i ended up installing 64 bit vista and its running beatutifully. Unfortuntly i need a faster internet connection as all the downloads i have had to do (and am STILL trying to do) like itunes are taking forever
As far as it being resorce hoge it has been sitting around 16% with me running multipe downloads and installs, up to 50% but thats because im running Never Winters Nights 2 at the moment. Havent had any problems that running compadibility with XP hasnt fixed
As far as it being resorce hoge it has been sitting around 16% with me running multipe downloads and installs, up to 50% but thats because im running Never Winters Nights 2 at the moment. Havent had any problems that running compadibility with XP hasnt fixed
The WDDM driver model is not compatible with Windows XP, and never will be.
Since the functionality introduced in WDDM is Kernel-Mode, there is no chance this could be implemented into Windows XP unless a total rewrite of the XPDM is initiated. The reason for this is that developers don't have access to the underlying hardware directly, only through the usage of APIs such as Direct3D or OpenGL. This conversion of XPDM, naturally, will not happen since Windows XP is being deprecated in favor of Windows Vista.
While there have been attempts at porting Direct3D 10 / DirectX 10 over to Windows XP, this will always continue to be the main problem.
Alternative Solution
Using Direct3D 10 as it is provided in Windows Vista in Windows XP is impossible. Yet there is a possibility to achieve the same graphics quality on hardware that supports it on Windows XP; by using the OpenGL® API instead. OpenGL allows the developer to access the same functionality provided by Direct3D 10 by using so-called IHV provided extensions but that's an entirely different article. Also, note that this would only provide the same features which Direct3D provides and none of the WDDM functionality unless you find a way to emulate the Kernel-Mode functionality in User-Mode in Windows XP.
http://scriptionary.com/Is_Direct3D_10_on_Windows_XP_Possible
Further reference, http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2006/11/30/directx10_future_of_pc_gaming/1
http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007/06/28/dx10-on-xp-round-2.aspx
To support DirectX 10, Microsoft would essentially have to put all the work that went into Vista kernel back into the XP kernel and, well, pretty much turn it into Vista. I can’t see any reasonable argument that they should do all that and give it out to people just because they are “nice guys”. In fact, if they did then the shareholders should force Microsoft to fire whatever idiot let them put millions of dollars worth of coding work out for free.
No, Microsoft is not going to release DirectX 10 for XP. No, it doesn’t make any sense for them to do this from either technical or business standpouints. No, Microsoft doesn’t owe you anything because you paid for XP – you’ve already got 5 years of free upgrades so explain why you should get more?
Since the functionality introduced in WDDM is Kernel-Mode, there is no chance this could be implemented into Windows XP unless a total rewrite of the XPDM is initiated. The reason for this is that developers don't have access to the underlying hardware directly, only through the usage of APIs such as Direct3D or OpenGL. This conversion of XPDM, naturally, will not happen since Windows XP is being deprecated in favor of Windows Vista.
While there have been attempts at porting Direct3D 10 / DirectX 10 over to Windows XP, this will always continue to be the main problem.
Alternative Solution
Using Direct3D 10 as it is provided in Windows Vista in Windows XP is impossible. Yet there is a possibility to achieve the same graphics quality on hardware that supports it on Windows XP; by using the OpenGL® API instead. OpenGL allows the developer to access the same functionality provided by Direct3D 10 by using so-called IHV provided extensions but that's an entirely different article. Also, note that this would only provide the same features which Direct3D provides and none of the WDDM functionality unless you find a way to emulate the Kernel-Mode functionality in User-Mode in Windows XP.
http://scriptionary.com/Is_Direct3D_10_on_Windows_XP_Possible
Further reference, http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2006/11/30/directx10_future_of_pc_gaming/1
http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007/06/28/dx10-on-xp-round-2.aspx
To support DirectX 10, Microsoft would essentially have to put all the work that went into Vista kernel back into the XP kernel and, well, pretty much turn it into Vista. I can’t see any reasonable argument that they should do all that and give it out to people just because they are “nice guys”. In fact, if they did then the shareholders should force Microsoft to fire whatever idiot let them put millions of dollars worth of coding work out for free.
No, Microsoft is not going to release DirectX 10 for XP. No, it doesn’t make any sense for them to do this from either technical or business standpouints. No, Microsoft doesn’t owe you anything because you paid for XP – you’ve already got 5 years of free upgrades so explain why you should get more?
Last edited:
brokenpower
Registered Senior Member
http://www.technospot.net/blogs/download-directx-10-for-windows-xp-from-alky-project/
go there.
It's not exactly how i do it, mine is a custom mod.
but there ya go.
That's all im going to say on the subject.
go there.
It's not exactly how i do it, mine is a custom mod.
but there ya go.
That's all im going to say on the subject.
As brokenpower says, people can and do run it on xp, and there are a lot of websites on how to do it. It may not run to it's fullest potential I grant you, but it does run.
Anyway with windows 7 coming this is a moot point as everyone will purchase that anyway. Vista shouldn't be recommended when it is about to be surpassed.
I call bullshit. Prove it.
Running DX10 requires drivers that are not available for Windows XP, and never will be. Enabling some of the graphics features is not DX10. Edit: And a screenshot saying DX10 means nothing as well. The most important part of DX10 is the WDDM driver model. I would have hoped that this was made clear by the above quotes and links. The most comprehensive article I've found.
The above applies doubly to Windows XP. XP is fine, it's stable, but it is going to be increasingly left behind as games and applications take advantage of the WDDM model, and other improvements.
And look at the reviews on Newegg for XP64!
Last edited:
brokenpower
Registered Senior Member
- Status