I just posted another of my periodic updates on FSX progress with the DX10 update, here. http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007...-wednesday.aspxI think you will find the progress interesting, and the results of the "DX10 looking like DX9" screenshots very interesting. At least I hope so :-).

Wow, nice to see the performance boost from DX10. Now I wish I could see the graphic differences between DX9 and DX10...I am sure that will be next. Look forward to the update after Labour Day....enjoy your vacation Phil.Mark.

A couple of the links on your blog appear to be dead. Like the last DX10 shot.

I see some people are getting that link and some are not, as the hit count increases. I'll have to investigate after a bit, as the photo-server seems to lag the blog server a bit and its not clear if thats the issue or if its something else.

yes, the perf data point is nice. especially considering we are "in flight" and have done no optimization work.as far as features - early Sept.

Yeah, the links in the blog don't work for me, but if I go to http://blogs.msdn.com/photos/phil_taylor/ then I can see all the pictures and click on them and they work.Perhaps you need to create links like http://blogs.msdn.com/photos/phil_taylor/i...5/original.aspxThomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

Speaking of that other post you wrote regarding the processors, I assume you noticed that video discussing Id's tool they use to design their world? Pretty cool!http://www.guru3d.com/news.html#5720Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

Some links are not working including the DX10 comparison shot. > "Yes, ta-da, that is correct. DX10 is running faster than DX9. By 17% or so." > "So see, there is proof that DX10 might actually be ok."?? Considering there were reports from MS of a 800% increase in performance, this is a tad short of expectations. > ... "what the real DX10 feature set is ( hint, it isn

Yes, I as I already said I am investigating a couple of the links. They appear in the blog control panel and some users see them but not others. It might take me a day to figure out what the blogging sw wants me to do.Regardless of what someone else said, and I doubt 800% was a realistic target - early reports of performance improvements before we even start to optimize should be a pleasant surprise and overall good news.Who knows, we may surprise you wrt to features even if it isnt the same as the "magic screenies".As far as looking nothing different, for the "DX10 looking like DX9" milestone - what would you expect?

C'mon, nobody really expected 800% increase in performance, did they?I don't think I've ever seen more than a 20% increase in performance from one version to the next.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

I have to agree though, it doesn't look much different from DX9, yet. I hope by features you mean water, clouds, or even cloud shadows?I'm sure it will look nothing like the magic shots but if this is all we can expect than I'll stick with DX9.I hope I'm wrong...

I believe it was said by Chris Donohue in a DX10 interview on gamespot. http://au.gamespot.com/video/931252/614198...vista-interviewThe DX10 FAQ later claimed 5 times performance increase.I really hope for the surprise. But those previews showed: "real" waves with froth, grass shrubs, cloud shadows, sun bursts, much better clouds, and probably more I cant think of right now.

Well, the DX10 link finally works here and I must say...I'm totally underwhelmed. It's looking more and more like the decision to scrap Vista and stay with DX9 was a good one. Time will tell, but methinks that from a cost/benefit viewpoint, there will be little to celebrate in the end.Doug

http://au.gamespot.com/video/931252/614198...vista-interviewI expected more than 17% !!

Yes, you are wrong and didnt read the post.Those pictures speak to reaching the "DX10 looks like DX9" milestone, eg feature parity. By definition they are supposed to look the same. Does that not make sense?