DX10 picture..

[Mace 1,902]

>Yep time certainly will tell. Fall to be more specific (the>"wow" is not quite "now", I guess). Not fall. Winter.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

[AWACS 12]

I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but when did they say the DX10 update will be released?Jeff

[Geofa 108]

In the words of Ben Franklin :An optimist is always continually disappointed but a pessimist is always pleasantly surprised!http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[DadJokeCinema 145]

>Battlefield 2142 >Doom 3>Falcon 4>Civilization IV>GTR2>Papyrus Nascar Racing 2003>>John Carmack opinion on DX10 and Vista. I have respect for>John, he's not about smoke and mirrors and has a very>impressive technical depth.>>http://www.dailytech.com/John+Carmack+Spea...article5665.htm>>A good read.>>Rob.>>I admit, I've only tried GTR2 from that list and noticed no difference. I'll give Doom 3 a shot (although trust me, it won't stay on my hard drive for long :() and I'll see if I can find my old Papyrus disk. That was a great great sim.EDIT: By the way, robains, although you've (admittedly) been hard on ACES so far, I appreciate your ability to intelligently discuss this and offer your insight without bashing or flaming.

[aerdt 0]

According to the FSX PM, the DX10 update will be ready sometime after SP1 (April) and before FSX Adrenaline (November).Pat

[rstough 524]

I have seen a few preview games that are being built taking advantage of Vista and Direct X 10 and it absolutely stunning. So I would say this picture will be pretty close to what you will get.You can search on gamespot.com to see some of the differences.But it will most likely require a pretty strong machine to get this effect.

[Guest LSflyguy]

Rob, in response to your following quote: >>I hope Phil Taylor rethinks SLI support modes -- there is more>optimization to be gained there than I think he realizes. It>would be a huge benefit to add the flexibility for up scaled>hardware.As I understand it, nVidia's current approach to SLI eliminates the possibility of having a multi-monitor setup. Given a choice between making FSX compatible with SLI, versus retaining the multi-monitor capability that is popular with many FSX users, ACES made a wise decision to forgo SLI. If at some future date nVidia decides to make SLI compatible with multiple monitors, then ACES may rethink its approach. Also keep in mind that FSX is highly CPU-bound, and may not need SLI to achieve good graphics performance. So I'm not sure if there would really be a "huge benefit" to adding SLI capability in FSX. (In its current state, FSX shows a small benefit in AA from using SLI at very high resolutions, according to a recent HardOCP review. But it did not show a performance increase in other areas.)

[StamPilot 4]

>That's an artist's rendition I believe, not an actual screen>shot.>What a pity. Would be great.

[Guest robains]

Yes I have been hard on Aces, but ultimately I care -- I guess I'm an optimist ;)I've been hard on Microsoft the company and the direction their execs are moving the company. Their obsession with market share and being able to retain their "leverage" has IMHO NOT provide the goods the consumer really needs or wants.I'm also a strong advocate for choice.I know many of you don't like what I say nor how I say it, some of you wanna debate regardless, but there is nothing wrong with questioning me or Phil or Microsoft or anyone that posts here so long as you at least attempt to be civil and present your views.I do try to present what I know about the technology I use day in and day out. As a software engineer, I know there really are no limits other than time. I have 27 years of software engineering experience and just as involved in hardware technology over those years (I have to be). As far as FS I started with SubLogic. Do I make mistakes, yes I do -- we all do.Rob.

[jcmissionary 6]

"1. 2X frame rate performance improvement (using equal quality settings - no cheating Aces)2. Significantly improved visual quality over FS9"These two, IMO, will make or break FSX in terms of it becoming the 'mainstream' flight sim. If we still see poor performance after DX10, I guess we'll have to see if FSXI will save the FS franchise.However, even if DX10 meets and surpasses all expectations, there will still be quite a few who won't/can't upgrade to Vista to take advantage of it. Even the cost alone will be enough to deter more than a few. For example:New DX10 Video Card: $300-$400 (I hope that there are some DX10 budget cards out be then, but right now I'll assume that there won't be)Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade: $160Memory upgrade: $100 (assuming one is running with 1GB of RAM already)Right now, you're looking at nearly $600 to get DX10 functionality, and this is assuming that you're happy with your current configutation, and are only needing to upgrade the above items.I hope that FSX-DX10 is successful, I really do. I think it has a lot of potential. However, I still remain skeptical of whether or not ACES can deliver on giving us ground-breaking visuals, while keeping performance up. Time will tell.

[Guest tcable]

Vista in and of itself appears to warrant 2gb of RAM to be useful in running apps.There will be more mainstream DX10 cars by the time the patch arrives- nVidia is set to release some in Q2 and ATI has a number of skus listed that are midrange hardware.Add in CPU prices in Q3 (Quad cores for the masses- under $300!) and it'll be a good year. FSX is just ahead of the hardware.

[Geofa 108]

I remember spending $3500 to upgrade my computer to a 486 66 mgz in the early 90's and nearly $2500 to my first pentium-each time because I wanted the new version of fs to run better. When you add inflation into the math we sure have bargains now. If it had only been $600 back then...http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[slashed2 53]

I had to chuckle at that. Clever.Ian.

[Guest robains]

I think $2000 would be more accurate for FSX DX10 upgrade. nVidia's 8800GTX is power hungry (requires two PCI-E power connectors) -- I know my PC is a little extreme, but I have a 1000 Watt PC Power & Cooling PSU (in addition to a separate 300 Watt PSU for the TEC CPU cooler setup) -- under load (aka FSX running) I'm at 590-612 watts (non-SLI). So part of the upgrade cost should factor in a high power PSU.ATI's DX10 card is reported to be even more power hungry (300 Watts just for the card) than nVidia's -- Crossfire and/or SLI. In fact, the DX10 cards are such high power consumers that they plan to release new power line spec's for which PSU companies will have to incorporate.If DX10 version of FSX does improve multi-CPU utilization then a quad core CPU would be beneficial. Intel have their 1333Mhz chipset ready to go. Quality memory that run at these bus speeds is pretty expensive. Realistically, if one wants to upgrade for DX10 FSX and Vista then they really are looking at a complete new system with the only salvageable components being; Keyboard, mouse, monitor, DVD drive, hard drives -- motherboard, memory, CPU, GPU, and PSU will most likely need to be replaced.$100-$400 for Vista$400-$600 for DX10 video card$200-$500 for quality PSU$200-$400 for 2GB quality RAM$200-$300 for motherboard$600-$1000 for CPUMin: $1700Max: $3200Rob.

[Geofa 108]

I plan to stay with my present system (pIV 3.2 ghz)as I am happy with performance now, expect better with the patch, and until a newer and hugely greater system blows mine off the map no reason to upgrade. 1st time for me actually.So the cost so far for me has been-1 more meg memory $100,Vista Ultimate for $200 and I will buy a dx10 card when needed.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg