Hello everyone, quick question.
I'm getting a laptop soon but I don't want the awful piece of crap that is Vista and instead want XP, which is fine but...
Since GW2 doesn't require DX10, does that mean I can go with my shiny beloved XP instead of the crap that is Vista?
GW2 / Vista / XP / DX10 question
Ephraim Floreaux
Brianna
Yep, you can use XP, just have to run the DX9 switch for GW2, will be just fine.
isamu kurosawa
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brianna
Yep, you can use XP, just have to run the DX9 switch for GW2, will be just fine.
|
In all likelyhood due to the time gw2 entered development, along with anets intentions to make the game compatible on a majority of systems the game will most likely be deisgned for dx 9.0c anyway.
Brianna
It's obvious.
GW2 will support DX10, but it will also be able to support DX9 for trouble shooting purposes and people with older computers.. I think somewhere Gaile even said herself it will support DX10.
Did I honestly have to explain that? You should already know how A-Net makes the game to be able to run on lower-spec systems, (Hence why GW1 still supports DX8).
GW2 will support DX10, but it will also be able to support DX9 for trouble shooting purposes and people with older computers.. I think somewhere Gaile even said herself it will support DX10.
Did I honestly have to explain that? You should already know how A-Net makes the game to be able to run on lower-spec systems, (Hence why GW1 still supports DX8).
Ephraim Floreaux
Thanks for all the help.
Thank the Good Lord's little mercies I won't have to put up with Vista.
Thank the Good Lord's little mercies I won't have to put up with Vista.
Rainbow Ftw
Vista is fine if you have machine that can handle it.
Cyb3r
vista is fine if you don't got the stuff that isn't decently supported period
Edge Martinez
Vists pwns in my opinion, and I was very reluctant to get it.
Brianna
I enjoy it on 64 bit as well, but to each their own.
Lord Sojar
64bit vista with SP1 is fine. Don't be afraid of it.
isamu kurosawa
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brianna
It's obvious.
GW2 will support DX10, but it will also be able to support DX9 for trouble shooting purposes and people with older computers.. I think somewhere Gaile even said herself it will support DX10. Did I honestly have to explain that? You should already know how A-Net makes the game to be able to run on lower-spec systems, (Hence why GW1 still supports DX8). |
Did I honestly have to explain that?
zamial
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ctX_10_support
Not to mention the countless Dev comments about this. I am to lazy to dig through the thousands of Gaile's posts to show you.
GW2 IS DX10 with backwards compatibility to DX9.
Also there are those of us here that really do like vista, vista is a superior OS. The only thing it does not let you do is pirate. Not to mention Windows7 Is due to launch next year.
I of the Main advantages Of the 64bit version of vista, is not so much JUST vista but when used in conjunction with Server 2008. Server 2008 addresses an issue that dates aaaaalllllll the way back to windows for work groups 3.31(the 1st server OS). With server 2003 R?-workgroups 3.31 the file transfer packet size HAS ALWAYS BEEN 10mb. Server 2008 addresses this by Increasing the packet size to 1Gb. Unfortunately all you vista haters will not be able to utilize this functionality as you will need vista 64 or a newer 64 OS in order to use this and a 1Gb Nic card.
Not to mention the countless Dev comments about this. I am to lazy to dig through the thousands of Gaile's posts to show you.
GW2 IS DX10 with backwards compatibility to DX9.
Also there are those of us here that really do like vista, vista is a superior OS. The only thing it does not let you do is pirate. Not to mention Windows7 Is due to launch next year.
I of the Main advantages Of the 64bit version of vista, is not so much JUST vista but when used in conjunction with Server 2008. Server 2008 addresses an issue that dates aaaaalllllll the way back to windows for work groups 3.31(the 1st server OS). With server 2003 R?-workgroups 3.31 the file transfer packet size HAS ALWAYS BEEN 10mb. Server 2008 addresses this by Increasing the packet size to 1Gb. Unfortunately all you vista haters will not be able to utilize this functionality as you will need vista 64 or a newer 64 OS in order to use this and a 1Gb Nic card.
cebalrai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ephraim Floreaux
Hello everyone, quick question.
I'm getting a laptop soon but I don't want the awful piece of crap that is Vista and instead want XP, which is fine but... Since GW2 doesn't require DX10, does that mean I can go with my shiny beloved XP instead of the crap that is Vista? |
Quaker
As a Vista user, I'd say that some people can have problems with Vista. Most of these problems have to do with compatibility problems with older apps and devices. While I can see why people would want to stick with XP, this does not make Vista "a piece of crap" and there is really no need to justify wanting to keep Windows XP.
It's likely that any switch would be readily accessible under the Graphics settings, instead of a command line switch. Probably a check box that defaults to dx9.
One thing to keep aware of if you want to put XP on a laptop that comes with Vista - make sure you can get all the required drivers for XP. I recently tried to install XP on a Sony laptop (for a friend), but had to give up (ran out of time) because I couldn't find any sound drivers for it that weren't supplied by Sony and would only install under Vista (although, from the description, they may have worked in XP)
Quote:
| A majority of players will not have dx10 so there is no way the method of running the game on a pre vista machine will be to manually use a -dx switch. most people have trouble udnerstanding how to use -image or even -dx8. Making a switch an official method of running the game on an xp machine would be foolish. |
One thing to keep aware of if you want to put XP on a laptop that comes with Vista - make sure you can get all the required drivers for XP. I recently tried to install XP on a Sony laptop (for a friend), but had to give up (ran out of time) because I couldn't find any sound drivers for it that weren't supplied by Sony and would only install under Vista (although, from the description, they may have worked in XP)
Kattar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cebalrai
What's ur beef with Vista?
|
Brianna
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by isamu kurosawa
A majority of players will not have dx10 so there is no way the method of running the game on a pre vista machine will be to manually use a -dx switch. most people have trouble udnerstanding how to use -image or even -dx8. Making a switch an official method of running the game on an xp machine would be foolish.
Did I honestly have to explain that? |
And, assuming A-Net knows what they are doing, the community will not have to piss around with switches, and such. Definitely speculation on how that will work, but like I said I'm sure they know what they are doing.
zamial
To the nay sayers of Vista,
Vista has a large footprint, why do you expect that you can load it and run it on a xp machine? If ya want a Porsche buy a Porsche, do not expect a old '85 gremlin with a Porsche engine to run right, It is an unreal expectation.
Vista, more specifically Server 2008 in conjunction with the 64bit version of Vista, addresses an issue that most people have no clue about. Since Windows for Workgroups 3.31 up to Server 2003 R3, the packet transfer size has been 10Mb. With Server 2008 and Vista64 the transfer packet size is increased to 1Gb. Not to worry those of you that will never upgrade, Server 2008 also can detect if you are on a non-64bit Vista version or newer and will send you 10 Mb packets.
M$ has also made a company policy that they will only support the latest OS and the previous version. Historically they have granted a 6 month extension of this policy, so that corporations have the opportunity to "upgrade". After that point if you require any M$ support you will have to pay for each instance.
Next year Windows7 is scheduled to launch.
I suspect that Those of us that did upgrade to Vista will have an easier time adjusting to Windows7.
Vista also has way better security than Xp. To date the only people that have a legitimate gripe against Vista are the software, music and video pirates. Root kit stops piracy. Since you are a thief your gripe is null.
While I am not a fan of this it still aids in keeping people honest. I personally will never get rid of my XP machine but it has been stripped down and is no longer online.
I am moving into the future, if you put down the rocks and sticks to come along is truly irrelevant to me.
Good Luck.
Disclaimer:
This is not meant as a sales pitch or as I am a "fan boy" of M$. I actually have no respect or love for the Gate's empire. This is only here as information. Feel free to Quote this on other forum posts that are typically anti-Vista. BTW I am a network admin at a fortune 500 company.
Vista has a large footprint, why do you expect that you can load it and run it on a xp machine? If ya want a Porsche buy a Porsche, do not expect a old '85 gremlin with a Porsche engine to run right, It is an unreal expectation.
Vista, more specifically Server 2008 in conjunction with the 64bit version of Vista, addresses an issue that most people have no clue about. Since Windows for Workgroups 3.31 up to Server 2003 R3, the packet transfer size has been 10Mb. With Server 2008 and Vista64 the transfer packet size is increased to 1Gb. Not to worry those of you that will never upgrade, Server 2008 also can detect if you are on a non-64bit Vista version or newer and will send you 10 Mb packets.
M$ has also made a company policy that they will only support the latest OS and the previous version. Historically they have granted a 6 month extension of this policy, so that corporations have the opportunity to "upgrade". After that point if you require any M$ support you will have to pay for each instance.
Next year Windows7 is scheduled to launch.
I suspect that Those of us that did upgrade to Vista will have an easier time adjusting to Windows7.
Vista also has way better security than Xp. To date the only people that have a legitimate gripe against Vista are the software, music and video pirates. Root kit stops piracy. Since you are a thief your gripe is null.
While I am not a fan of this it still aids in keeping people honest. I personally will never get rid of my XP machine but it has been stripped down and is no longer online.
I am moving into the future, if you put down the rocks and sticks to come along is truly irrelevant to me.
Good Luck.
Disclaimer:
This is not meant as a sales pitch or as I am a "fan boy" of M$. I actually have no respect or love for the Gate's empire. This is only here as information. Feel free to Quote this on other forum posts that are typically anti-Vista. BTW I am a network admin at a fortune 500 company.
Brianna
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zamial
To the nay sayers of Vista,
Vista has a large footprint, why do you expect that you can load it and run it on a xp machine? If ya want a Porsche buy a Porsche, do not expect a old '85 gremlin with a Porsche engine to run right, It is an unreal expectation. Vista, more specifically Server 2008 in conjunction with the 64bit version of Vista, addresses an issue that most people have no clue about. Since Windows for Workgroups 3.31 up to Server 2003 R3, the packet transfer size has been 10Mb. With Server 2008 and Vista64 the transfer packet size is increased to 1Gb. Not to worry those of you that will never upgrade, Server 2008 also can detect if you are on a non-64bit Vista version or newer and will send you 10 Mb packets. M$ has also made a company policy that they will only support the latest OS and the previous version. Historically they have granted a 6 month extension of this policy, so that corporations have the opportunity to "upgrade". After that point if you require any M$ support you will have to pay for each instance. Next year Windows7 is scheduled to launch. I suspect that Those of us that did upgrade to Vista will have an easier time adjusting to Windows7. Vista also has way better security than Xp. To date the only people that have a legitimate gripe against Vista are the software, music and video pirates. Root kit stops piracy. Since you are a thief your gripe is null. While I am not a fan of this it still aids in keeping people honest. I personally will never get rid of my XP machine but it has been stripped down and is no longer online. I am moving into the future, if you put down the rocks and sticks to come along is truly irrelevant to me. Good Luck. Disclaimer: This is not meant as a sales pitch or as I am a "fan boy" of M$. I actually have no respect or love for the Gate's empire. This is only here as information. Feel free to Quote this on other forum posts that are typically anti-Vista. BTW I am a network admin at a fortune 500 company. |
bhavv
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cebalrai
What's ur beef with Vista?
|
Abedeus
Vista:
- Slow
- High requirements, offers nothing worth it
- The main advantage, Aero interface, was already in use on other PCs and can be used in XP
- Doesn't work with older machines, too old procs' and graphics
- A lot of existing ones don't work, cause there are no good drivers
- DOS things and epic games work worse than on XP
- The longer it works, the slower it gets
- Some xp games dont work too...
- Good programs don't have licenses under vista.
And that's it. Oh and that Vista's support ends in 2012, XP's in 2014. And Windows 7 comes out not-so-long-from-here. Vista is like a beta version of W7...
Everything and more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Windows_Vista
- Slow
- High requirements, offers nothing worth it
- The main advantage, Aero interface, was already in use on other PCs and can be used in XP
- Doesn't work with older machines, too old procs' and graphics
- A lot of existing ones don't work, cause there are no good drivers
- DOS things and epic games work worse than on XP
- The longer it works, the slower it gets
- Some xp games dont work too...
- Good programs don't have licenses under vista.
And that's it. Oh and that Vista's support ends in 2012, XP's in 2014. And Windows 7 comes out not-so-long-from-here. Vista is like a beta version of W7...
Everything and more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Windows_Vista
Snograt
Abadeus, the vast majority of the downsides you posted are due to equipment/software companies not making drivers available - it's not Vista's fault (the companies had PLENTY of time to come up with the goods).
I'm happily running GW at 150fps - so what if XP can run it at 200; I'm not going to see a difference.
I'm happily running GW at 150fps - so what if XP can run it at 200; I'm not going to see a difference.
zamial
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Abedeus
Oh and that Vista's support ends in 2012, XP's in 2014. And Windows 7 comes out not-so-long-from-here. Vista is like a beta version of W7...
Everything and more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Windows_Vista |
This is ALMOST true Vista service pack 0 ends in 2012, we are currently on Vista sp1, and xp will go end life at the release of Windwos7.
your link = fail
That article is based on info from 2006. news flash thats 2 years old.....
Vista is the 1st stage of the windows longhorn project and windows 7 is the completed longhorn project.
KTHXBYE
isamu kurosawa
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brianna
Err, suppose it detects what version of DirectX so you don't have to do that? Who knows, but it's already been proven now (Thanks zamial) that GW2 will have DX10, so I don't see what the problem is.
And, assuming A-Net knows what they are doing, the community will not have to piss around with switches, and such. Definitely speculation on how that will work, but like I said I'm sure they know what they are doing. |
cebalrai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Abedeus
Vista:
- Slow - High requirements, offers nothing worth it - The main advantage, Aero interface, was already in use on other PCs and can be used in XP - Doesn't work with older machines, too old procs' and graphics - A lot of existing ones don't work, cause there are no good drivers - DOS things and epic games work worse than on XP - The longer it works, the slower it gets - Some xp games dont work too... - Good programs don't have licenses under vista. And that's it. Oh and that Vista's support ends in 2012, XP's in 2014. And Windows 7 comes out not-so-long-from-here. Vista is like a beta version of W7... Everything and more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Windows_Vista |
Most notably, it doesn't consider Vista SP1.
Just look at the awful references in that article that try to cite that Vista is slower than XP. They're flawed in ways like 1) possibly pre-SP1, and 2) they compare using systems with 1 GB of RAM.
Windows XP had major issues at release and everyone was asking why they should switch to it from Win 2000. Then XP matured, just as Vista is already doing.
And if one more person says "OMG you can't find Vista drivers for things so it suxx", I'm going to laugh... Really, who is using old fossilized hardware from last millenia? And what hardware is it?
Buy a decently modern computer IMO. Or put Linux on your old machine and freeze time!
zamial
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cebalrai
That's a horrible Wiki page. It's out of date (badly), therefore it's useless since we're talking about Vista in today's incarnation.
Most notably, it doesn't consider Vista SP1. Just look at the awful references in that article that try to cite that Vista is slower than XP. They're flawed in ways like 1) possibly pre-SP1, and 2) they compare using systems with 1 GB of RAM. Windows XP had major issues at release and everyone was asking why they should switch to it from Win 2000. Then XP matured, just as Vista is already doing. And if one more person says "OMG you can't find Vista drivers for things so it suxx", I'm going to laugh... Really, who is using old fossilized hardware from last millenia? And what hardware is it? Buy a decently modern computer IMO. Or put Linux on your old machine and freeze time! |
I actually read that article and even for being dated it went on to say how almost all of the"problems" were fixed or false.
KZaske
Not really wanting to bash Vista all I can say is DRM as built into that OS sucks. You can not even time shift some TV shows, unless the broadcast company chooses to let you time shift that show.
As for the real topic: DX10 support in GW2. I got the idea from reading Gaile's posts that it was an option. If you are using Vista, you will have the option of using DX10 if you are using Win XP you will be running DX9 or not playing. I do not remember Gaile ever specifing what version of DX9, but the most common video cards at the time she made the comment were DX9c. Given developments since Gaile made her comments and the improvements offered by DX10.1 I would guess that the game would scale up to that level. Most likely an auto switch detecting the highest level your video sub-system can use and load that feature set.
Just my guess.
As for the real topic: DX10 support in GW2. I got the idea from reading Gaile's posts that it was an option. If you are using Vista, you will have the option of using DX10 if you are using Win XP you will be running DX9 or not playing. I do not remember Gaile ever specifing what version of DX9, but the most common video cards at the time she made the comment were DX9c. Given developments since Gaile made her comments and the improvements offered by DX10.1 I would guess that the game would scale up to that level. Most likely an auto switch detecting the highest level your video sub-system can use and load that feature set.
Just my guess.
isamu kurosawa
I have to say i found vista quite decent myself. The only issues i had where:
It tried to install drivers for various pieces of hardware twice. Not a big problem but annoying.
Most importantly though there was a serious problem caused by a variety of things that made some people loose the ability to use usb storage devices. I got hit by that and went through 3 solutions found by other people before dropping back down to XP.
I run a variety of usb storage devices so my system was crippled without them.
Try searching around the web and you will find a variety of issues in vista that can cause this to happen. May have been fixed in sp1 but i'll just stick with XP till i do another large upgrade.
I suggest people who buy a machine with vista pre-installed give it a go though, or at the very least dual boot xp.
It tried to install drivers for various pieces of hardware twice. Not a big problem but annoying.
Most importantly though there was a serious problem caused by a variety of things that made some people loose the ability to use usb storage devices. I got hit by that and went through 3 solutions found by other people before dropping back down to XP.
I run a variety of usb storage devices so my system was crippled without them.
Try searching around the web and you will find a variety of issues in vista that can cause this to happen. May have been fixed in sp1 but i'll just stick with XP till i do another large upgrade.
I suggest people who buy a machine with vista pre-installed give it a go though, or at the very least dual boot xp.
Rip_Snag
Will GW run on a 64bit vista setup??
ty in advance
ty in advance
Snograt
Ooh, I just replied to a thread asking the very same question...
YES IT DOES!
Very happily, in fact
YES IT DOES!
Very happily, in fact
Rip_Snag
ty ty appreciate the help..............and cant wait for that speed lol
Lord Sojar
Vista SP1 is fine and dandy. It is only slow if your PC is slow. Vista may be a bit bloated, but M$FT is improving the bloat, SP1 did a lot for that issue.
I am going to be upgrading this PC I am on right now to Vista after June 20th. Ooops, I said June 20th. *cough*
Just kidding guys! But here is a little known fact...
We (nVidia) will be releasing our newest graphics solution. I present to you... the Geforce GTX 280 and Geforce GTX 260.
These new cards will feature the PhysX stream processor directly built in to the PCB. In addition, they Geforce GTX 280 will feature 240 unified stream processors while its younger brother the Geforce GTX 260 will feature 192 unified stream processors.
Finally, the Geforce GTX 280 will feature a 512bit memory interface with 1GB GDDR3 onboard, and the Geforce GTX 260 will feature a 448bit memory interface with 896MB of GDDR3 memory onboard.
Excited? You should be! I was on the team that developed the fabs for the 280, so I am pretty proud of my new baby. Get ready for some amazing power regulation and heat reduction kids!
I am going to be upgrading this PC I am on right now to Vista after June 20th. Ooops, I said June 20th. *cough*
Just kidding guys! But here is a little known fact...
We (nVidia) will be releasing our newest graphics solution. I present to you... the Geforce GTX 280 and Geforce GTX 260.
These new cards will feature the PhysX stream processor directly built in to the PCB. In addition, they Geforce GTX 280 will feature 240 unified stream processors while its younger brother the Geforce GTX 260 will feature 192 unified stream processors.
Finally, the Geforce GTX 280 will feature a 512bit memory interface with 1GB GDDR3 onboard, and the Geforce GTX 260 will feature a 448bit memory interface with 896MB of GDDR3 memory onboard.
Excited? You should be! I was on the team that developed the fabs for the 280, so I am pretty proud of my new baby. Get ready for some amazing power regulation and heat reduction kids!
Snograt
Sell me PhysX...
If you can without breaking that NDA thang
I read nVidia were going to be incorporating it, but with the almost-zero take up of the PhysX boards, I wonder why.
If you can without breaking that NDA thang
I read nVidia were going to be incorporating it, but with the almost-zero take up of the PhysX boards, I wonder why.
Lord Sojar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Snograt
Sell me PhysX...
If you can without breaking that NDA thang I read nVidia were going to be incorporating it, but with the almost-zero take up of the PhysX boards, I wonder why. |
But, the CUDA enabled GPUs we make can use the PhysX code perfectly, because GPUs excel at mass number calculation. CUDA enables us to essentially use the leftover processing power (the parts of the GPU not being used for rendering) to perform very fast, accurate math, thus creating 3D physics for PhysX enabled games.
CUDA in and of itself is a self contained C programming environment, used primarily for massive number crunching. GPUs excel (just like the Cell processor in the PS3) at number crunching, and they run at very high speeds, with 100s of stream processors. CUDA programming allows us to use a GPU more like a CPU without effecting CPU or GPU overall performance. PhysX calculations would take a massive chunk of the CPUs time to do, but because the Geforce cards actually are never fully utilized, we can tap the extra "wiggle room" and force it to calculate physics code rather then just sitting there doing nothing.
If you are savvy about technology, I would advise you to read up on CUDA a bit more.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_home.html
The website explains a lot, and you can see what we and our partners use CUDA for. It is fairly interesting. Remember, my focus is the fab production methods (hardware), not software design. So, I know how to use some basic CUDA functions and can write code with it, but I am nowhere near as skilled as our software engineers are (those guys are geniuses)
Brianna
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief
Sales and marketing isn't my thing, lol.
But, the CUDA enabled GPUs we make can use the PhysX code perfectly, because GPUs excel at mass number calculation. CUDA enables us to essentially use the leftover processing power (the parts of the GPU not being used for rendering) to perform very fast, accurate math, thus creating 3D physics for PhysX enabled games. CUDA in and of itself is a self contained C programming environment, used primarily for massive number crunching. GPUs excel (just like the Cell processor in the PS3) at number crunching, and they run at very high speeds, with 100s of stream processors. CUDA programming allows us to use a GPU more like a CPU without effecting CPU or GPU overall performance. PhysX calculations would take a massive chunk of the CPUs time to do, but because the Geforce cards actually are never fully utilized, we can tap the extra "wiggle room" and force it to calculate physics code rather then just sitting there doing nothing. If you are savvy about technology, I would advise you to read up on CUDA a bit more. http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_home.html The website explains a lot, and you can see what we and our partners use CUDA for. It is fairly interesting. Remember, my focus is the fab production methods (hardware), not software design. So, I know how to use some basic CUDA functions and can write code with it, but I am nowhere near as skilled as our software engineers are (those guys are geniuses) |
Lord Sojar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brianna
Looks like I'm building a new computer soon then..
|
zamial
AMD, did I hear AMD? Ill bring the steaks and mallows if we are going to use those chips! At least those will cook 'em.
Serafita Kayin
Yeah, AMD has a 280-killer in the works. That GDDR5 is something to consider.
If you work there, can ya get a bro some sponsorship for his project? I swear it's worth your time...
If you work there, can ya get a bro some sponsorship for his project? I swear it's worth your time...
demonblade
for those who runs on budget computers - they are not meant for graphic intense gaming
for those who runs on high-end computers - try vista 64bit instead
for those who runs on high-end computers - try vista 64bit instead
Cyb3r
Say hello to vista 64bit
i happily run 3 os'es on this Pc, Winxp for games like freelancer and one other oldy quake 3 both of those don't work flawlesly in MP in Vista sadly and one coding tool that refuses to boot up atm in vista (work on the vista version is works in progress ^^) and for 2 music apps which don't work at all in vista, there is a newer version out however i don't have the money to buy the upgrades atm and tried the demo versions and don't like the new versions either => another reason i keep xp
Second OS : Ubuntu 64 bit say hello to the pinguin All the coding except 1 compiling is done under here (both my coding for Project Crosus (huge modmanager/mod downloader tool) and Sirius Reborn (mod for freelancer))
Third Os: Vista 64bit newer games and other stuff ^^
and while there are things i don't like in all the 3 os'es i use one atleast makes up for the other so i'm happy
Oh and rahja when is nvidia releasing better drivers for linux?
and can't wait to see those new cards either
i happily run 3 os'es on this Pc, Winxp for games like freelancer and one other oldy quake 3 both of those don't work flawlesly in MP in Vista sadly and one coding tool that refuses to boot up atm in vista (work on the vista version is works in progress ^^) and for 2 music apps which don't work at all in vista, there is a newer version out however i don't have the money to buy the upgrades atm and tried the demo versions and don't like the new versions either => another reason i keep xp
Second OS : Ubuntu 64 bit say hello to the pinguin
All the coding except 1 compiling is done under here (both my coding for Project Crosus (huge modmanager/mod downloader tool) and Sirius Reborn (mod for freelancer))Third Os: Vista 64bit newer games and other stuff ^^
and while there are things i don't like in all the 3 os'es i use one atleast makes up for the other so i'm happy
Oh and rahja when is nvidia releasing better drivers for linux?
and can't wait to see those new cards either
Evil Genius
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief
I am going to be upgrading this PC I am on right now to Vista after June 20th. Ooops, I said June 20th. *cough*
Just kidding guys! But here is a little known fact... We (nVidia) will be releasing our newest graphics solution. I present to you... the Geforce GTX 280 and Geforce GTX 260. These new cards will feature the PhysX stream processor directly built in to the PCB. In addition, they Geforce GTX 280 will feature 240 unified stream processors while its younger brother the Geforce GTX 260 will feature 192 unified stream processors. Finally, the Geforce GTX 280 will feature a 512bit memory interface with 1GB GDDR3 onboard, and the Geforce GTX 260 will feature a 448bit memory interface with 896MB of GDDR3 memory onboard. Excited? You should be! I was on the team that developed the fabs for the 280, so I am pretty proud of my new baby. Get ready for some amazing power regulation and heat reduction kids! |
Unfortunately those leaked pictures of the card don't say much about its performance, so can you leak any 3DMark 06 scores/Crysis benchmarks please?
(http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...73&Ite mid=34)
O and btw its not quite a "little known fact": tech sites have been going on for months about it, especially in recent weeks.