|  | | ATI to Beat Nvidia in DirectX 11 Chip Race |
Nvidia Corporation was the first to market with its DirectX 10 graphics processor, but its arch-rival ATI, graphics products group of Advanced Micro Devices, may be the first with its DirectX 11 graphics chip. According to rumours, code-named ATI RV870 graphics processing unit will be launched in late July, whereas Nvidia’s code-named GT300 is projected to be released in October.
The new generation of graphics processors with DirectX 11 capabilities will not only further boost functionality of chips, but will also bring new levels of performance. Since there are months before the launches of both RV870 and GT300, specifications of the newcomers have not leaked yet. According to Heise Online, AMD plans to release its RV870 in late July or early August; meanwhile, according to The Inquirer web-site, Nvidia’s GT300 will only be shipped on October 15, if everything goes as planned.
Read the entire article at X-bit Labs. | | 20 Comments | | | ATI was/is the only manufacturer who had dx10.1 gpus. I have on of these ;-) | | | | Nvidia really failed with DirectX 10.1 support. Instead of releasing new GPUs, they released the same stuff over and over again. Enthusiast like innovations! We like to have the latest technology. We don't like rebranding and renaming. | | | | I think nvidia's whole angle on this was dx10.1 sucks and physx rocks, they blew off 10.1 and are trying to force physx down everyones throat, althogut ATI really could do a better job in the advertising/marketing dept | | | | Im pretty sure ati will release theirs first,
but if not, i dont care, ati will probably release a better gpu even if there not first
plus dx10.1 is nice  | | | | Can't wait for the DX11 hardware. At last it will have a native load-balancing and multi-core support. | | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Regeneration  Nvidia really failed with DirectX 10.1 support. Instead of releasing new GPUs, they released the same stuff over and over again. Enthusiast like innovations! We like to have the latest technology. We don't like rebranding and renaming. | Thats because 10.1 was a waste of an update. and the nvidia cards could already do 75% of it.
They are technically Dx10.1 cards, nix the ability to apply AA to a deffered rendered image.
ATI may release the first Dx11 cards.
But will they be as fast as the first Nvidia Dx11 release? | | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by dammit45 Im pretty sure ati will release theirs first,
but if not, i dont care, ati will probably release a better gpu even if there not first
plus dx10.1 is nice | You don't even have half a clue what dx10.1 adds over 10, so stop commenting. | | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by squall_leonhart Thats because 10.1 was a waste of an update. and the nvidia cards could already do 75% of it.
They are technically Dx10.1 cards, nix the ability to apply AA to a deffered rendered image.
ATI may release the first Dx11 cards.
But will they be as fast as the first Nvidia Dx11 release? | They are NOT 10.1 cards.
Either it mets the requirements or not - there are no 'maybies' there.
Besides - it's not only about AA.
Cite from SIGGRAPH :
"What are the changes? DX 10.1's goals are to offer the "complete" DX 10, giving developers better control over image quality and making mandatory some of the things that are optional in DX 10. For example, 32-bit floating point filtering is optional in DX10 (16-bit FP filtering is mandatory), but will be mandatory in DX 10.1. Also, in DX 10, the number of multisample anti-aliasing samples is optional—DX 10.1 will make 4x AA mandatory, and require two specific sample patterns. Graphics cards can offer more sample patterns, and developers can query them in their shaders. Graphics cards that are DX 10.1 compliant will have to offer programmable shader output sample masks and multisample AA depth readback. Game developers will be able to index into cube maps and perform bitwise copies from uncompressed textures to block-compressed texture formats."
Basically the requirements are :
-Mandatory 32-bit floating point filtering.
-Mandatory support for 4x anti-aliasing
-Shader model 4.1
Besides - we already have seen some nice performance gains from 10.1 (remember the beta patch that added the use of dx10.1 to assasin's creed but was pulled back by NVidiots request). | | | | [QUOTEYou don't even have half a clue what dx10.1 adds over 10, so stop commenting.][/QUOTE]
damn, trolling is your best quality isn't it? | | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by PrEzi They are NOT 10.1 cards.
Either it mets the requirements or not - there are no 'maybies' there.
Besides - it's not only about AA.
Cite from SIGGRAPH :
"What are the changes? DX 10.1's goals are to offer the "complete" DX 10, giving developers better control over image quality and making mandatory some of the things that are optional in DX 10. For example, 32-bit floating point filtering is optional in DX10 (16-bit FP filtering is mandatory), but will be mandatory in DX 10.1. Also, in DX 10, the number of multisample anti-aliasing samples is optional—DX 10.1 will make 4x AA mandatory, and require two specific sample patterns. Graphics cards can offer more sample patterns, and developers can query them in their shaders. Graphics cards that are DX 10.1 compliant will have to offer programmable shader output sample masks and multisample AA depth readback. Game developers will be able to index into cube maps and perform bitwise copies from uncompressed textures to block-compressed texture formats."
Basically the requirements are :
-Mandatory 32-bit floating point filtering.
-Mandatory support for 4x anti-aliasing
-Shader model 4.1
Besides - we already have seen some nice performance gains from 10.1 (remember the beta patch that added the use of dx10.1 to assasin's creed but was pulled back by NVidiots request). | Thats fanATIc bullshit at best. the Dx 10.1 was removed because it was BROKEN, not because nvidia wanted it gone. The developers were interested in adding it, but decided not to after learning that lighting and shadows would require a full rewrite to work properly with the new render mode.
Graphics cards that are DX 10.1 compliant will have to offer programmable shader output sample masks and multisample AA depth readback. Game developers will be able to index into cube maps and perform bitwise copies from uncompressed textures to block-compressed texture formats."
Basically the requirements are :
-Mandatory 32-bit floating point filtering. - Nvidia can do
-Mandatory support for 4x anti-aliasing - Nvidia can do
-Shader model 4.1 - Define shader model 4.1? do you even know what shader model 4.1 is? i doubt it. Its nothing more then the inclusion of the ability to grab samples from textures which have defferred shading applied and filter them correctly.
NVIDIA IS DX10.1 COMPATIBLE. Yes, they can even perform antialiasing on a deffered target when its done properly. | | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by squall_leonhart Thats fanATIc bullshit at best. the Dx 10.1 was removed because it was BROKEN, not because nvidia wanted it gone. The developers were interested in adding it, but decided not to after learning that lighting and shadows would require a full rewrite to work properly with the new render mode.
Graphics cards that are DX 10.1 compliant will have to offer programmable shader output sample masks and multisample AA depth readback. Game developers will be able to index into cube maps and perform bitwise copies from uncompressed textures to block-compressed texture formats."
Basically the requirements are :
-Mandatory 32-bit floating point filtering. - Nvidia can do
-Mandatory support for 4x anti-aliasing - Nvidia can do
-Shader model 4.1 - Define shader model 4.1? do you even know what shader model 4.1 is? i doubt it. Its nothing more then the inclusion of the ability to grab samples from textures which have defferred shading applied and filter them correctly.
NVIDIA IS DX10.1 COMPATIBLE. Yes, they can even perform antialiasing on a deffered target when its done properly. | Compatible maybe but they don't have the full instruction set for DX10.1...And if they did Nvidia would for sure be advertising as such.
It's a mute point anyway DX11 is just around the corner. | | | | dx10 vs dx10.1 = incremental update, the additional features will be included in dx11 anyway
hence why Nvidia probably decided to do the intelligent thing from a business perspective and skip it so they could focus on investing resources into dx11. |
Last edited by Syncroneyes; April 23rd, 2009 at 05:52 PM..
| Quote | | | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Syncroneyes dx10 vs dx10.1 = not much difference
hence why Nvidia probably decided to do the intelligent thing and skip it so they could focus on investing resources into dx11. |
Yes, they skiped to so the could invest their resources into rebranding. For christ sake they can't even fix the issue with their chip production. So what makes you think they are 1. intelligent and 2 forcusing on DX11?
Nvidia has screwed themselves by focusing on physix which is a closed standard instead of making better hardware and chips. | | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by darthcyclonis Yes, they skiped to so the could invest their resources into rebranding. For christ sake they can't even fix the issue with their chip production. So what makes you think they are 1. intelligent and 2 forcusing on DX11?
Nvidia has screwed themselves by focusing on physix which is a closed standard instead of making better hardware and chips. | Ah - you posted before i could edit! - anyway, Nvidia beieve it or not, are capable of making intelligent business decisions but they are just too short sighted. Like aquiring PhysX - something that benefitted them in the short term but in the long run, you're right its a closed standard, so it will have only limited uptake. | | | | Never mind the arguments just enjoy the anticipation....3-4 months to RV870....I feel an upgrade coming on.  | | | | i'll enjoy the card comparisons no matter the brand, so bring them on. | | | | | | P.S - Have you considered that if Nvidia didn't buy Ageia/Physx there would be the risk that ATI would by them instead, and thats a risk they quite rightly were not willing to take. If ATI bought Ageia first it would have given them a real boost to their market position and maybe it might have made the difference as to who is the market leader today... | | | | It never would have, and never will benefit either.
No developers are really interested in complex physics that would make actual use of the technology. Its nothing more then ragdoll improvements.... | | | | all power to opencl and havok physics...the way forward. | |
|
