| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | Re: Why Vista`s DRM Is Bad For You |
From: Gary Britt That article doesn't address any of the problems or concerns I raised and to which you responded. Gary Rich Gauszka wrote: > All the articles I've read state that Vista's DirectX 10 (DX10) improves on > gpu performance. Although newer video card gpu s wouldn't hurt which is why > Nvidia and ATI are probably smiling a lot right now > > http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,128275-page,1/article.html > Pipeline Power-Ups > The revamped, more powerful DirectX "allows us to do a lot more processing > on the GPU [graphics processing unit] and speeds everything up immensely," > says Chris Donahue, director of business development for Microsoft Games for > Windows. > > DirectX 9, used widely for today's games, employs different parts of the > video card to determine the visual appearance of pixels and vertices (where > lines meet). A set number of "pipelines" handle only pixel shaders, while > others are just for vertex shaders. If creating a certain 3D scene hits the > pixel shader pipelines hard but uses only a few of the vertex shaders, the > extra vertex pipelines lie dormant. > > DX10's Shader Model 4, however, uses the same hardware resources for pixel, > vertex, and even new geometry shaders. That approach allows GPU vendors to > design chips with pipelines that can run any type of shader, and also makes > it easier for GPUs to handle things like physics effects that currently must > run on the CPU. In general DX10 is more CPU-friendly, with less processing > overhead. > > The end result? A more flexible graphics system, and one that makes better > use of the GPU's processing power. > > "It's a step forward," says Mike Goodman, a senior analyst for research firm > The Yankee Group. "This is another way to take advantage of the processing > power of PCs that Vista will operate on." > > "Gary Britt" wrote in message > news:45d1e4df{at}w3.nls.net... > OK Maybe Vista does use a GPU in some ways, and what I've read previously > wasn't correct. I'm still not convinced however for several reasons. > > 1. The article you cite reads like the under NDA Windows 95 garbage and > deliberate misinformation that MS was shown to have deliberately lied about > with Windows 95 architecture at the time of its release. It reads more like > a reprint of some MS marketing materials for writers and mag editors than a > real investigation of the facts pro and con. > > 2. NT 3.1 had the graphics driver outside ring 0 kernel level. NT 4 moved > it into the ring 0 kernel level to INCREASE performance. Now that mag > article you cite just whips out the statement (without offering any > explanation or investigation or substantiation) that moving the graphics > driver back outside the ring 0 kernel level will somehow magically make the > graphics driver perform better. Have the laws of physics changed since NT > 4?? > > 3. The article gives a very basic broad brush look at how supposedly VISTA > talks to the GPU directly but fails to compare that and explain why its > better or worse than having a ring 0 kernel driver let the GPU do the work > directly with the GPU or why its better than letting applications deal with > the driver and the GPU. It does nothing but repeat the MS marketing > materials about how wonderful the new Vista driver model is without > investigating whether that model is faster or slower than the older model, > and while mentioning the wonderful everything will be DirectX and vector > graphics marketing hype does not consider or address whether this is just > yet another way for Microsoft to try and lock everyone into another > Microsoft proprietary format. > > 4. Finally, there is no consideration paid to how the new Vista graphics > hardware and driver requirements will or could result in cards without the > ability to run Linux or other operating systems full speed (maybe even XP > and Win2K not full speed) and that they might result in new cards without > the ability to have decent XP, Win2K, or Linux drivers. > > I'm afraid the article you cite Richard isn't up to your usual quality > standards for citation, which is usually quite excellent. > > Gary > > > > --- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45) SEEN-BY: 633/267 270 @PATH: 379/45 1 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.