ATI's R700 To Support DirectX 10.1

As ATI's R650 launch gets closer and closer, more rumors and official information begin to surface. This also applies for the upcoming R700 GPU, which is supposed to revolutionize the graphics card sector. The latest developments point to the fact that the R700 multi-core chip will support the improved DirectX version 10.1 (rumored to be renamed to DirectX 11).

The tessellation engine implemented in the R600 GPU and further developed with the R650 model will reach version 2.0 by the time the R700 is released. The tessellation feature isn't supported by any graphics API, but Microsoft promised that this nice addition will be included in the 10.1. Game developers think that the tessellation support could also be easily introduced into the OpenGL API. As you may already know by now, the hardware implemented tessellation support will allow game developers to create extremely detailed terrains and characters with only a few polygons. In order to obtain the incredible amount of detail, the GPU will tessellate a reduced number of polygons, in up to 15 segments per polygon. ATI has already demonstrated how this process works in their Ruby technological demo that comes with the HD 2900XT cards, but it's fair to say that any actual game implementation won't get to be released until late 2008.

ATI does not intend to radically transform the R650 GPU, so we won't get to see the multi-core technology sooner than the R700. According to ATI, the next-gen chip will be made out of a number of smaller chips. This number of chips will determine the targeted market sector: a single chip will represent an entry level card, two chips will make up a mainstream one, while four to eight cores on the same die will make for high-end solutions. The multi-core architecture should also feature the CrossFire support, leading to configurations of sixteen GPU cores in the case of two high-end R700 graphics cards.

As for the soon-to-be-released R650 model, ATI claims that it has slightly redesigned the core in order to greatly improve the texturing power issues that came with the R600. We should also expect some previews of he R650 GPU soon.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/ATI-039-s-R700-to-support-DirectX-10-1-55321.shtml

:shock:

I didn't understand 1 word of that, but it sure sounds impressive. pundog

It means that DricetX10HBO as well as the card enabled with it only. Even if it's by a .1 ver.

DirectX 11?  I have never seen a version of Directx to be improved upon (and thus become outdated and obsolete) so quickly.  Why can't they just have DX10a, DX10b, and DX10c like they do with DX9?makingmusic476

PC's are laughable, all technology talk, and only one next gen game so far, Crysis, consoles will get FAR better than any PC game in 2008 and probably 2009, and only then PC games will move far ahead, maybe

Right now games like Mass Effect, Fable 2 etc put any PC exclusive game to real shame, even with DX10.1 or DX25 used

It is like having the best tech now, and use it after 2-3 years

all I can is do not buy a graphics card now - do not buy a 8800 or a x2900 - I don't know why people early adopted a 8800 series its a total waste and no games even support its features (save a few)...you will be crying the blues next year...I own a x1900xtx and I am perfectly content and the 8800 or x2900 does not add enough performance to warrant a purchase...

I will be able to run Crysis fine, and I am not buying Vista anytime soon either

but people want the newest and the "best" so they waste $500 its silly...

by the time its all figured out next year sometime I will upgrade to DX10 buy save your money now

PC's are laughable, all technology talk, and only one next gen game so far, Crysis, consoles will get FAR better than any PC game in 2008 and probably 2009, and only then PC games will move far ahead, maybe

Right now games like Mass Effect, Fable 2 etc put any PC exclsive game to real shame, even with DX10.1 or DX25 used

greg_splicer

It is utterly useless.
Nothing but a marketing gimmick.

No game uses DX10 yet, let alone anything above.
There will be at least 2 new generations of cards out before we see use of DX11. haols

Indeed, for the next 1-2 years, we will get like 10x the next gen looking titles on consoles like 360, PS3 than on pc, see Fable2, Mass Effect, Lost oDyssey, Gears etc

It is utterly useless.
Nothing but a marketing gimmick.

No game uses DX10 yet, let alone anything above.
There will be at least 2 new generations of cards out before we see use of DX11. haols

what is this talk of DX11 its DX10.1 DX11 isn't even in development...

The tessellation feature isn't supported by any graphics API, but Microsoft promised that this nice addition will be included in the 10.1.

Thats all its doing is the tessellation...it improves textures while maintaining a low poly count but its still DX10...if you need to upgrade you graphics card now buy a 7800GT and save your money till next year when each company releases their new cards (the 8800 and x2900 are crap)

[QUOTE="haols"]It is utterly useless.
Nothing but a marketing gimmick.

No game uses DX10 yet, let alone anything above.
There will be at least 2 new generations of cards out before we see use of DX11. Medjai

what is this talk of DX11 its DX10.1 DX11 isn't even in development...

The tessellation feature isn't supported by any graphics API, but Microsoft promised that this nice addition will be included in the 10.1.

Thats all its doing is the tessellation...it improves textures while maintaining a low poly count but its still DX10...if you need to upgrade you graphics card now buy a 7800GT and save your money till next year when each company releases their new cards (the 8800 and x2900 are crap)

To quote the article:

"The latest developments point to the fact that the R700 multi-core chip will support the improved DirectX version 10.1 (rumored to be renamed to DirectX 11)."

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

To quote the article:

"The latest developments point to the fact that the R700 multi-core chip will support the improved DirectX version 10.1 (rumored to be renamed to DirectX 11)."

makingmusic476

article smarticle :) they will name it DX10b or DX10.1 something there is not way this incremental change deserve a full new number

[QUOTE="makingmusic476"]To quote the article:

"The latest developments point to the fact that the R700 multi-core chip will support the improved DirectX version 10.1 (rumored to be renamed to DirectX 11)."

Medjai

article smarticle :) they will name it DX10b or DX10.1 something there is not way this incremental change deserve a full new number

[QUOTE="Medjai"][QUOTE="makingmusic476"]To quote the article:

"The latest developments point to the fact that the R700 multi-core chip will support the improved DirectX version 10.1 (rumored to be renamed to DirectX 11)."

makingmusic476

article smarticle :) they will name it DX10b or DX10.1 something there is not way this incremental change deserve a full new number

[QUOTE="makingmusic476"][QUOTE="Medjai"][QUOTE="makingmusic476"]To quote the article:

"The latest developments point to the fact that the R700 multi-core chip will support the improved DirectX version 10.1 (rumored to be renamed to DirectX 11)."

pundog

article smarticle :) they will name it DX10b or DX10.1 something there is not way this incremental change deserve a full new number

exactly...although I think it was DX5 to DX6 way back in the day that swtiched within a year but that was a whole different era they would not do something like that now

It is utterly useless.
Nothing but a marketing gimmick.

No game uses DX10 yet, let alone anything above.
There will be at least 2 new generations of cards out before we see use of DX11. haols

But you will need an update of dx10 to take advantage of the R700 gpu, but its true that its gonna be a while before its important for gaming since  its so powerful 

The 360 uses a tessellation engine in the Xenos.

The 360 uses a tessellation engine in the Xenos.

PS3_3DO

unified shaders and tessellation Xenos FTW

[QUOTE="PS3_3DO"]

The 360 uses a tessellation engine in the Xenos.

Medjai

unified shaders and tessellation Xenos FTW

Indeed. Now we know the 360 GPU is way more advance than the RSX in the PS3.

[QUOTE="haols"]It is utterly useless.
Nothing but a marketing gimmick.

No game uses DX10 yet, let alone anything above.
There will be at least 2 new generations of cards out before we see use of DX11. michael098

But you will need an update of dx10 to take advantage of the R700 gpu, but its true that its gonna be a while before its important for gaming since  its so powerful 

[QUOTE="Medjai"][QUOTE="PS3_3DO"]

The 360 uses a tessellation engine in the Xenos.

PS3_3DO

unified shaders and tessellation Xenos FTW

Indeed. Now we know the 360 GPU is way more advance than the RSX in the PS3.

this might come out wrong but it just seems like MS is more intune with the industry and puts more forethought into their device...not say give people the Cell with no support tools and expect them to make great games...Edge is cool but to my knowledge Sony had nothing to do with it but I guess Sony really had nothing to do with the Cell if you think about it except throw a ton of money at IBM

PC's are laughable, all technology talk, and only one next gen game so far, Crysis, consoles will get FAR better than any PC game in 2008 and probably 2009, and only then PC games will move far ahead, maybe

Right now games like Mass Effect, Fable 2 etc put any PC exclusive game to real shame, even with DX10.1 or DX25 used

It is like having the best tech now, and use it after 2-3 years

greg_splicer

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

greg_splicer

consoles are already complety obsoslete, x360 = gf 7600gt, and x360 only has one game now that looks better than pc games or so lemmings say, geow, but when unreal 3 comes x360 will look dated, its funny that farcry does something geow doesn't don't you think?  not destructable environments in geow

[QUOTE="Medjai"][QUOTE="PS3_3DO"]

The 360 uses a tessellation engine in the Xenos.

PS3_3DO

unified shaders and tessellation Xenos FTW

Indeed. Now we know the 360 GPU is way more advance than the RSX in the PS3.

but behind even a geforce 8600 :lol:

[QUOTE="PS3_3DO"][QUOTE="Medjai"][QUOTE="PS3_3DO"]

The 360 uses a tessellation engine in the Xenos.

imprezawrx500

unified shaders and tessellation Xenos FTW

Indeed. Now we know the 360 GPU is way more advance than the RSX in the PS3.

but behind even a geforce 8600 :lol:

does the 8600 do tessellation? and you say above 360 GPU = 7600GT? care to rephrase that because you are way off their buddy

Hardware tesselation is nice for smoothing terrain, not much more than that.

Would be more useful if it was present when only vertex lighting were possible. With pixel lighting you can't distinguish between a
low and a high poly count so easily.

That's just a improvement on the TRUFORM that ati cards have since the R200.

Render to Vertex Buffer is way more useful than that (and ATI cards have that since the 9600).

Since both are much accesible from OpenGL than DX, it's nice that Microsoft decided to put support for them on DX. 

[QUOTE="haols"]It is utterly useless.
Nothing but a marketing gimmick.

No game uses DX10 yet, let alone anything above.
There will be at least 2 new generations of cards out before we see use of DX11. Medjai

what is this talk of DX11 its DX10.1 DX11 isn't even in development...

The tessellation feature isn't supported by any graphics API, but Microsoft promised that this nice addition will be included in the 10.1.

Thats all its doing is the tessellation...it improves textures while maintaining a low poly count but its still DX10...if you need to upgrade you graphics card now buy a 7800GT and save your money till next year when each company releases their new cards (the 8800 and x2900 are crap)

Tesselation don't improve texture quality. It only sub-divides a polygon, making more polys from them. You could use it to smooth a poly patch. 

[QUOTE="haols"]It is utterly useless.
Nothing but a marketing gimmick.

No game uses DX10 yet, let alone anything above.
There will be at least 2 new generations of cards out before we see use of DX11. greg_splicer

Indeed, for the next 1-2 years, we will get like 10x the next gen looking titles on consoles like 360, PS3 than on pc, see Fable2, Mass Effect, Lost oDyssey, Gears etc

No. The only amazing looking games out of those are ME and Gears. The others don't impress me. Every multiplat looks better on the PC. Nice try Nasos! 

[QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

imprezawrx500

consoles are already complety obsoslete, x360 = gf 7600gt, and x360 only has one game now that looks better than pc games or so lemmings say, geow, but when unreal 3 comes x360 will look dated, its funny that farcry does something geow doesn't don't you think? not destructable environments in geow

Consoles couldn't even run M2:TW or SupCom. Anyone can make a game look great when there are barely any units on screen, with linear maps and small corridors. 

 that sounds expensive..

I hope amd can make those things cheap anyway lol.

[QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

imprezawrx500

consoles are already complety obsoslete, x360 = gf 7600gt, and x360 only has one game now that looks better than pc games or so lemmings say, geow, but when unreal 3 comes x360 will look dated, its funny that farcry does something geow doesn't don't you think? not destructable environments in geow

A. Xenos is more powerful then the 7600GT

B. there are games coming on 360 with destructable env. (example area 51...aswesome demo btw)

C. Whats the problem, although the 360 isn't maxing UE3...it's putting it good use, and it looks very good.

D. Last time I check the 8600 was no faster then the 7600GT in Dx9 games, in dx10 games this might be different...but we don't know this yet. 

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

trix5817

consoles are already complety obsoslete, x360 = gf 7600gt, and x360 only has one game now that looks better than pc games or so lemmings say, geow, but when unreal 3 comes x360 will look dated, its funny that farcry does something geow doesn't don't you think? not destructable environments in geow

Consoles couldn't even run M2:TW or SupCom. Anyone can make a game look great when there are barely any units on screen, with linear maps and small corridors.

I'm not disputing PC's are more powerful...but I hate how people say 360 can't have lots objects on screen. N3 and Kameo proves it can, and Kemeo during development in debug had as many as 16,000 procedural models on screen without slowdown. (final game = 4,000-5,000 though) 

[QUOTE="Medjai"]what is this talk of DX11 its DX10.1 DX11 isn't even in development...

The tessellation feature isn't supported by any graphics API, but Microsoft promised that this nice addition will be included in the 10.1.

Thats all its doing is the tessellation...it improves textures while maintaining a low poly count but its still DX10...if you need to upgrade you graphics card now buy a 7800GT and save your money till next year when each company releases their new cards (the 8800 and x2900 are crap)

MagnuzGuerra

Tesselation don't improve texture quality. It only sub-divides a polygon, making more polys from them. You could use it to smooth a poly patch. 

smooth a poly patch kinda in my mind improves the texture :) and I mostly meant you can keep a low poly count while maintaining texture quality (but I said improve minor mistake) o well

[QUOTE="trix5817"][QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

Innovazero2000

consoles are already complety obsoslete, x360 = gf 7600gt, and x360 only has one game now that looks better than pc games or so lemmings say, geow, but when unreal 3 comes x360 will look dated, its funny that farcry does something geow doesn't don't you think? not destructable environments in geow

Consoles couldn't even run M2:TW or SupCom. Anyone can make a game look great when there are barely any units on screen, with linear maps and small corridors.

I'm not disputing PC's are more powerful...but I hate how people say 360 can't have lots objects on screen. N3 and Kameo proves it can, and Kemeo during development in debug had as many as 16,000 procedural models on screen without slowdown. (final game = 4,000-5,000 though)

I know. It's just annoying when people think Gears takes the most power to run, which is not the case. I could make a game that looks photo-realistic, but it would only take place in a 5ft*5ft room, with only 1 character on screen. Yeah, the game is the "best looking" I guess you could say, but it sure isn't the best engine (there's more to graphics then textures) and doesn't take that much to run. 

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

Innovazero2000

consoles are already complety obsoslete, x360 = gf 7600gt, and x360 only has one game now that looks better than pc games or so lemmings say, geow, but when unreal 3 comes x360 will look dated, its funny that farcry does something geow doesn't don't you think? not destructable environments in geow

A. Xenos is more powerful then the 7600GT

B. there are games coming on 360 with destructable env. (example area 51...aswesome demo btw)

C. Whats the problem, although the 360 isn't maxing UE3...it's putting it good use, and it looks very good.

D. Last time I check the 8600 was no faster then the 7600GT in Dx9 games, in dx10 games this might be different...but we don't know this yet.

Yeah, of course the 360 can do destructable enviroments. But can it have destructable eniroments, with amazing graphics, with amazing physics, and with a HUGE area with hardly any load times, who knows, but probably not. The 8600 is much better than a 7600GT. It's around a 7900GT in comparison for DX9 games. You are definently right about the other things though.  

I am not saying the 360 has the greatest graphics out here but I am more than content with how the games look at present...I have a decent gaming rig x1900xtx, 1GB of XMSC2PT, and a water cooled single core AMD 3700+ clocked from 2.2 to 2.8GHz I am fine with the graphics of both my 360 and my PC(although I do want a dual core its just hard to find a 939 theses days) ...not like any1 cares but I am fine with what I got and I have fun with my console

I don't game nearly as much as I used to...I would rather spend my time making games then playing them at this point in my life :)

[QUOTE="Innovazero2000"][QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

trix5817

consoles are already complety obsoslete, x360 = gf 7600gt, and x360 only has one game now that looks better than pc games or so lemmings say, geow, but when unreal 3 comes x360 will look dated, its funny that farcry does something geow doesn't don't you think? not destructable environments in geow

A. Xenos is more powerful then the 7600GT

B. there are games coming on 360 with destructable env. (example area 51...aswesome demo btw)

C. Whats the problem, although the 360 isn't maxing UE3...it's putting it good use, and it looks very good.

D. Last time I check the 8600 was no faster then the 7600GT in Dx9 games, in dx10 games this might be different...but we don't know this yet.

Yeah, of course the 360 can do destructable enviroments. But can it have destructable eniroments, with amazing graphics, with amazing physics, and with a HUGE area with hardly any load times, who knows, but probably not. The 8600 is much better than a 7600GT. It's around a 7900GT in comparison for DX9 games. You are definently right about the other things though.

In very large areas, prob. not...and I fault the CPU on that...atlhough I wish developers would try to use memexport and see how Xenos does with physics.

And yeah, your right...about the 8600, maybe I wasn't looking at the GTS...can't remember.

[QUOTE="Innovazero2000"][QUOTE="trix5817"][QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

trix5817

consoles are already complety obsoslete, x360 = gf 7600gt, and x360 only has one game now that looks better than pc games or so lemmings say, geow, but when unreal 3 comes x360 will look dated, its funny that farcry does something geow doesn't don't you think? not destructable environments in geow

Consoles couldn't even run M2:TW or SupCom. Anyone can make a game look great when there are barely any units on screen, with linear maps and small corridors.

I'm not disputing PC's are more powerful...but I hate how people say 360 can't have lots objects on screen. N3 and Kameo proves it can, and Kemeo during development in debug had as many as 16,000 procedural models on screen without slowdown. (final game = 4,000-5,000 though)

I know. It's just annoying when people think Gears takes the most power to run, which is not the case. I could make a game that looks photo-realistic, but it would only take place in a 5ft*5ft room, with only 1 character on screen. Yeah, the game is the "best looking" I guess you could say, but it sure isn't the best engine (there's more to graphics then textures) and doesn't take that much to run.

and I would agree, Gears is def. based for cinamatics...and yes it looks very good. The graphics are up there, but as far as "technical" achievement on a wider scale...your are right... lots more impressive games from that standpoint. 

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="PS3_3DO"][QUOTE="Medjai"][QUOTE="PS3_3DO"]

The 360 uses a tessellation engine in the Xenos.

Medjai

unified shaders and tessellation Xenos FTW

Indeed. Now we know the 360 GPU is way more advance than the RSX in the PS3.

but behind even a geforce 8600 :lol:

does the 8600 do tessellation? and you say above 360 GPU = 7600GT? care to rephrase that because you are way off their buddy

Dont listen to him the 8600 is a piece of **** compared the the Xenos. The Xenos is close to a x1900xt while the 8600 cant even beat 200$ last gen cards.

[QUOTE="trix5817"][QUOTE="Innovazero2000"][QUOTE="trix5817"][QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

All in all, as in all PC graphics card generation, buying a DX10 card now, and will be obsolete in a year

I would rather wait for xbox720, with the DX12 tech that will ACTUALLY BE USED IN GAMES, than tech speaches

Innovazero2000

consoles are already complety obsoslete, x360 = gf 7600gt, and x360 only has one game now that looks better than pc games or so lemmings say, geow, but when unreal 3 comes x360 will look dated, its funny that farcry does something geow doesn't don't you think? not destructable environments in geow

Consoles couldn't even run M2:TW or SupCom. Anyone can make a game look great when there are barely any units on screen, with linear maps and small corridors.

I'm not disputing PC's are more powerful...but I hate how people say 360 can't have lots objects on screen. N3 and Kameo proves it can, and Kemeo during development in debug had as many as 16,000 procedural models on screen without slowdown. (final game = 4,000-5,000 though)

I know. It's just annoying when people think Gears takes the most power to run, which is not the case. I could make a game that looks photo-realistic, but it would only take place in a 5ft*5ft room, with only 1 character on screen. Yeah, the game is the "best looking" I guess you could say, but it sure isn't the best engine (there's more to graphics then textures) and doesn't take that much to run.

and I would agree, Gears is def. based for cinamatics...and yes it looks very good. The graphics are up there, but as far as "technical" achievement on a wider scale...your are right... lots more impressive games from that standpoint.

Absoultely not true at all. GeoW is easily the best technical achievement as of now. The Unreal 3 engine is the best DX 9 engine available. And there were alot more then textures going on there.  

[QUOTE="Medjai"][QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][

but behind even a geforce 8600 :lol:

Wartzay

does the 8600 do tessellation? and you say above 360 GPU = 7600GT? care to rephrase that because you are way off their buddy

Dont listen to him the 8600 is a piece of **** compared the the Xenos. The Xenos is close to a x1900xt while the 8600 cant even beat 200$ last gen cards.