Sunday, April 22nd 2007

DirectX10 Coming for everyone, with the help of the 'Alky Project'

We all know that DirectX10, for many of us, means an expensive upgrade and the move to a new operating system. We also know that DirectX10 is going to be necessary to play DX10 games such as Crysis and Halo 2 for the PC. What if I told you that a project sought to change that? That you could run DirectX10-exclusive games such as Halo 2 for PC on a DirectX9 platform with Windows 2000? Thanks to the Alky Project, we may not have to spend a penny to enjoy DirectX10 goodness. A quote from their official blog (I know, it's not an official web-page, but they do link to working models) tells us exactly how we can make DirectX10 work without spending at least $270 on a DirectX10 upgrade ($170 NVIDIA GeForce 8600GT, $100 Windows Vista Home Basic).
I'm proud to release a preview of our DirectX 10 compatibility libraries. These libraries allow the use of DirectX 10 games on platforms other than Microsoft Vista, and increase hardware compatibility even on Vista, by compiling Geometry Shaders down to native machine code for execution where hardware isn't capable of running it. No longer will you have to upgrade your OS and video card(s) to play the latest games.
The preview/beta build is here. Make sure to read the README file, as it will tell you exactly how to install the project.Source: Blogspot
Add your own comment

89 Comments on DirectX10 Coming for everyone, with the help of the 'Alky Project'

#1
Mussels
Moderprator
RickyG512 said:
what you talking bout willis
Considering he has a DX9 video card (x850) i'd say he's just full of crap.
Posted on Reply
#2
SpoonMuffin
SkylinGTR26 said:
.... Because the main point of DX10 and the DX10 videocards is that they have unified shaders.

IMO this is really lame, just get a freakin DX10 videocard, or play the game with DX9. Thats the best way to do it.
BTW, i agree, vista is in a very beta state right now. Can't wait for SP1 tho. Oh and BTW 1gb does suck in vista :(. But 2gb has to be the minimum.
ok first, dx10 dosnt requier unified shaders, read the specs yourself, its reccomended but no current card really uses it, the 8800 isnt unified, its a shitload of pipes and shader units, they wont give you the info on real specs but hell, what do you expect.

and dx10 class fetures should be 98% compatable with x1k cards due to how programable they are, older cards.....well no, but the code could be recompiled to run better on x800 range cards with more fetures then normal dx9 mode gives.


by the time vista is mature, the next version of windows will be out and ready for use, i wouldnt pay for vista period, its just not worth it.

dx10 could be made by ms to support 2k and up, it would just be a matter of ms accepting that people dont want vista and want dx10 for xp, hell i know ppl who would PAY for that addon!!!!!

but ms wants to push vista on EVERYBODY, i hear ms is PISSED that dell is offering xp again, cant blame them its "old news" and they got this new thing called vista they want to try and convence everybody is "better in every way on all hardware" when really its just bloated betaware shit, i have installed and tested vista on 6 systems, its NEVER been faster then 2000 or 2003, duno about xp, i gave up on xp long ago, to many problems for me(hotfixes/critical hotfixes/critical security updates that break shit.....piss me off)

i would like to see MS do something smart and put out a new vista like os thats more like 2003 server, vs xp, cut down, clean, fast, stable, none of the problems or bloat that the desktop versions force you to deal with......

and this isnt pure dx10 software emulation, its not using software to emulate missing fetures, its converting the code to run using current videocards.

i hope they can manage this, allow people with high end ati hardware at least play dx10 games on their curent hardware with their current windows :)
Posted on Reply
#3
wazzledoozle
SpoonMuffin said:
ok first, dx10 dosnt requier unified shaders, read the specs yourself, its reccomended but no current card really uses it, the 8800 isnt unified, its a shitload of pipes and shader units, they wont give you the info on real specs but hell, what do you expect.

and dx10 class fetures should be 98% compatable with x1k cards due to how programable they are, older cards.....well no, but the code could be recompiled to run better on x800 range cards with more fetures then normal dx9 mode gives.


by the time vista is mature, the next version of windows will be out and ready for use, i wouldnt pay for vista period, its just not worth it.

dx10 could be made by ms to support 2k and up, it would just be a matter of ms accepting that people dont want vista and want dx10 for xp, hell i know ppl who would PAY for that addon!!!!!

but ms wants to push vista on EVERYBODY, i hear ms is PISSED that dell is offering xp again, cant blame them its "old news" and they got this new thing called vista they want to try and convence everybody is "better in every way on all hardware" when really its just bloated betaware shit, i have installed and tested vista on 6 systems, its NEVER been faster then 2000 or 2003, duno about xp, i gave up on xp long ago, to many problems for me(hotfixes/critical hotfixes/critical security updates that break shit.....piss me off)

i would like to see MS do something smart and put out a new vista like os thats more like 2003 server, vs xp, cut down, clean, fast, stable, none of the problems or bloat that the desktop versions force you to deal with......

and this isnt pure dx10 software emulation, its not using software to emulate missing fetures, its converting the code to run using current videocards.

i hope they can manage this, allow people with high end ati hardware at least play dx10 games on their curent hardware with their current windows :)
Wrong . Stop spreading BS dude-
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2006q4/geforce-8800/index.x?pg=1

The G80 IS a unified shader architecture, just as the R600 will be. (and the R500/Xenos in the 360 is)
Posted on Reply
#4
Mussels
Moderprator
I'm quite surprised what some people will say...

DX10 and D3D10 are still two seperate things. DX10 has no Directdraw, so it definately CANNOT work on a 2D operating system. IF, if, MS decide to port Direct3D10 over to XP, this part is possible - but what of the apps that want to use the other features, like vistas new audio stack, improved networking code and so on? They cant just throw those into XP, it'd break everything that currently works there.

Thats why MS is doing it all-or-nothing, but it IS possible for say, a linux with a 3D GUI to 'emulate' all these things just line WINE can emulate DX9 (however imperfectly)
Posted on Reply
#5
SpoonMuffin
hate to tell u this mussels, but d3d10 can run on a "2d" windows, vista's so called 3d gui is dx9 based, not dx10, and when you dissable areo guess what, the gui is 2d, it has to be to run on many of the intagrated video cards used, intels onboard video is a great example, you CANT run a full 3d gui with onboard video thats 8-16mb and that lacks dx9 fetures(hell they barly support dx8 if they are intel) i have vista on a dell p3 630 here thats got onboard video, and it runs vista, where the gui pure 3d then it wouldnt run because the onboard video is locked at 4-8-16mb max, i set it at 8 because, really 1024x768 dosnt need more then 8mb.

and waz, i cant reammber where but i sware nvidia said or at least implyed that the 8800(g80) wasnt true unified because ITS NOT NEEDED TO SUPPORT DX10.

all you need to get a dx10 sticker is sm4.0 support, nothing more, unified is prefered but not requiered.

again if you dont belive me READ THE SPECS!!!!! they are publicly avalable u know.

one comment on the 8800 design, i alwase find it funny that nvidia went with an external chip for analog/hdtv signals, because really according to vista/hollywood requierments that shouldnt be allowed because somebody could possably hardware hack and get access to a HD signal bypassing HDCP, a big part of why card costs are going back up, all this stupid useless DRM crap that is already made 100% useless by anydvdHD and the like........screw ms and screw hollywood.
Posted on Reply
#6
Mussels
Moderprator
It is in fact rendered in 3D, even if it LOOKS basic. I never said it was DX10, that is ridiculous - it would only work on 8800's. DX9? yes, it does run DX9.0L at a minimum - as for your onboard video claims, it is quite possible to run vista on 16MB of video memory, as long as it supports PS2.0 - any less and the OS wouldnt install, let alone boot.
Any 3D system thats dissasembled will become 2D at its base point, an OS obviously because VDU systems currently used are 2D. We arent using holographic displays, so of course MS would have used a 2D display and worked it into their 3D engine.

Do not invent things i have not said, or make up facts you know nothing about.
DX10 is an SM4.0 sticker? Actually, i think you mean Direct3D10, DX10 is an entire package, and NOT just the video component.
Posted on Reply
#7
SpoonMuffin
oh really mussels, funny, i have vista installed on a system with a gf2gts, didnt know they could run ps2/dx9, wow, anybody want to buy a gf2gts dx9 card?
Windows Vista Starter
Minimum supported requirements

Certain product features are not available with minimum supported requirements

800 megahertz (MHz)

Windows Vista Starter is licensed to run only on PCs with:

Intel Celeron, Celeron D, or Celeron M processors

Intel Pentium 3 processors

Intel Pentium 4 processors not supporting Hyper-Threading technology

Intel Pentium 4 processors model 541, 531, 524, 661, 651, 641, 631, 630, 640, 650, 660, 670

AMD Athlon XP, Duron, Geode or Sempron processors

PCs with similar value processors from other manufacturers

384 megabytes (MB) or higher up to a maximum of 1024 megabytes (MB)

15 gigabytes (GB) free space up to a maximum 120 GB total hard disk space

Super VGA 800x600 resolution video adaptor
Link


vista starter just dosnt have areo, but that dosnt make sence because, well vista is a 3d os according to you.........then again, your effectivly saying my gf2gts is a dx9 card as well.......

guess your right, vista is 100% pure dx9 3d, no 2d at all......
Posted on Reply
#8
GSG-9
DX10 is an SM4.0 sticker? Actually, i think you mean Direct3D10, DX10 is an entire package, and NOT just the video component.

I think what he meant was to have a card DX10 Certified all you need to do is be SM4.0 compliant, Your card does not have to have unified shaders although that is a big push as we all know it will be more efficient. :ohwell:
Posted on Reply
#9
mandelore
wazzledoozle said:
Wrong . Stop spreading BS dude-
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2006q4/geforce-8800/index.x?pg=1

The G80 IS a unified shader architecture, just as the R600 will be. (and the R500/Xenos in the 360 is)
lol, had a read of that article, wow that core is huge, I quote:

"but we can surmise that the G80 has the approximate surface area of Rosie O'Donnell

:roll: :roll:
Posted on Reply
#10
Mussels
Moderprator
Its quite a bitch to get thermal paste on such a large core, too.
Posted on Reply
#12
ktr
wazzledoozle said:
Thats actually not the core, its a heat spreader like you would find on an Athlon 64 or P4/Core 2.

http://sg.vr-zone.com/?i=4352


wow, i wonder if that is covered under warranty ;)
Posted on Reply
#13
SpoonMuffin
like how nobody responded to my proof that vista dosnt need dx9 to run, and isnt 100% 3d gui.....rofl.....figuars, get pwned, ignore the situation.....

and anybody stupid enought to pry the heatspreder off a card they payed that kinda $ for has to much $ for their own good, or shouldnt have a computer to start with, stupid people suck.
Posted on Reply
#14
hotrippr
SpoonMuffin said:

and anybody stupid enought to pry the heatspreder off a card they payed that kinda $ for has to much $ for their own good, or shouldnt have a computer to start with, stupid people suck.
No... IHS suck! The only thing I want between my crystal and block is ceramique.
Posted on Reply
#15
mandelore
hotrippr said:
No... IHS suck! The only thing I want between my crystal and block is ceramique.
haha, especially when you pay so much for the card and then they use crud as the thermal paste under the ihs :rolleyes:

I like my x1900xtx with all that naked silicone :)
Posted on Reply
#16
Mussels
Moderprator
SpoonMuffin said:
like how nobody responded to my proof that vista dosnt need dx9 to run, and isnt 100% 3d gui.....rofl.....figuars, get pwned, ignore the situation.....

and anybody stupid enought to pry the heatspreder off a card they payed that kinda $ for has to much $ for their own good, or shouldnt have a computer to start with, stupid people suck.
you posted no proof - of anything.

Oh and if you really must know, they had a dead review card they pried the IHS off - no wasted money.
Posted on Reply
#17
BXtreme
LOL I really spent the time reading the BS spoon gave :laugh:
Get proper info 1st, then shout all you want :p We're all not stupid you know...
Well your response wasn't that bad spoonmuffin, as ppl are really angry with the NO DX10 on XP thing, it's totally obvious for any1 to get angry and say the 'future' thing is SHIT! cuz ppl have to buy all new gpu's again :p I'm with you on this part.

But...
8800 IS unified shader architecture, so keep quiet about this line ;)
Also, DX10 i.e D3D10 allows the use of more shaders for game makers to use, and to utilise that u need a DX10 compatible gpu, THAT you don't have ATM as I see in your specs...
But not to worry, cuz no dx10 games are near for some time :ohwell:
Uber Dx9 cards WILL run DX10 games but with SM3 it'll look worse than of SM4...

@ the Vista GUI part,
Aero or the GUI of Vista is the complete desktop, i.e anything u see on the desktop is drawn in 3D BUT isn't dx10, lol @ how could any1 think that! :p
It's Dx9, due to the fact that microsoft has said a dx9 card is required atleast as min requirement of Vista.

ALSO, AERO IS 100% 3d GUI. The process called dwm.exe controls/manages the aero.
IF you disable Aero, the dwm.exe pulls out the curtain and reveals a non-3d gui which is sorta like 98. But it's NOT aero and isn't 3d accelerated.

SO, only the AERO (the main gui of vista) is 3d accelerated, BUT NOT the all GUI's of of vista. SO, Vista doesn't need a dx9 card to RUN, but just to show the Aero UI properly

An onboard video card has also been heard to run aero, but with some modification and forced execution.
Posted on Reply
#18
Grings
i wish 8800's werent unified shaders (they are), considering a 7900gtx has 24pixel shaders, the 96 in my 8800 would be ridiculously powerful
Posted on Reply
#19
SpoonMuffin
SpoonMuffin said:
oh really mussels, funny, i have vista installed on a system with a gf2gts, didnt know they could run ps2/dx9, wow, anybody want to buy a gf2gts dx9 card?
Windows Vista Starter
Minimum supported requirements

Certain product features are not available with minimum supported requirements

800 megahertz (MHz)

Windows Vista Starter is licensed to run only on PCs with:

Intel Celeron, Celeron D, or Celeron M processors

Intel Pentium 3 processors

Intel Pentium 4 processors not supporting Hyper-Threading technology

Intel Pentium 4 processors model 541, 531, 524, 661, 651, 641, 631, 630, 640, 650, 660, 670

AMD Athlon XP, Duron, Geode or Sempron processors

PCs with similar value processors from other manufacturers

384 megabytes (MB) or higher up to a maximum of 1024 megabytes (MB)

15 gigabytes (GB) free space up to a maximum 120 GB total hard disk space

Super VGA 800x600 resolution video adaptor
Link


vista starter just dosnt have areo, but that dosnt make sence because, well vista is a 3d os according to you.........then again, your effectivly saying my gf2gts is a dx9 card as well.......

guess your right, vista is 100% pure dx9 3d, no 2d at all......
bullshit if thats not proof that vista dosnt requier dx9 to run.

and as stated by BX, not areo uses 3d fetures of cards, never said it didnt, but with areo dissabled guess what u get WINDOWS EXPLORER!!!!! same old 2d enterface you get with xp, just diffrent themes.

and quote is DIRRECTLY FROM MICROSOFT!!!!!!

the dx9 support is only needed to run areo, not vista itself, but hey if you want to buy a gf2gts that runs dx9 let me know, i have one(if it runs vista then it must be dx9 afterall)

hell my buddys tested vista on 2 server boxes he has when he upgraded the hdd's, they have rage pro class onboard video(8mb) guess what, IT RUNS FINE(opteron systems with tyan boards)
infact its the rage XL
http://www.tyan.com/product_board_detail.aspx?pid=109

the onboard video used
http://ati.amd.com/products/server/ragexl/features.html

this is a VERY basick chip, not even rage128 class, its effectivly a rage2 pro with 8mb vram, but under Mussels version of reality i guess its dx9 to.........


check the link this time Mussels ms specs are quoted above for you, vista starter(vista without areo) runs on ANY videocard capable of 800x600 or better resolutions, you can admit your wrong about vista being 100% 3d any time.

areo=3d over old standby 2d windows gui.
Posted on Reply
#20
BXtreme
SpoonMuffin said:
bullshit if thats not proof that vista dosnt requier dx9 to run.

and as stated by BX, not areo uses 3d fetures of cards, never said it didnt, but with areo dissabled guess what u get WINDOWS EXPLORER!!!!! same old 2d enterface you get with xp, just diffrent themes.

and quote is DIRRECTLY FROM MICROSOFT!!!!!!

the dx9 support is only needed to run areo, not vista itself, but hey if you want to buy a gf2gts that runs dx9 let me know, i have one(if it runs vista then it must be dx9 afterall)

hell my buddys tested vista on 2 server boxes he has when he upgraded the hdd's, they have rage pro class onboard video(8mb) guess what, IT RUNS FINE(opteron systems with tyan boards)
infact its the rage XL
http://www.tyan.com/product_board_detail.aspx?pid=109

the onboard video used
http://ati.amd.com/products/server/ragexl/features.html

this is a VERY basick chip, not even rage128 class, its effectivly a rage2 pro with 8mb vram, but under Mussels version of reality i guess its dx9 to.........


check the link this time Mussels ms specs are quoted above for you, vista starter(vista without areo) runs on ANY videocard capable of 800x600 or better resolutions, you can admit your wrong about vista being 100% 3d any time.

areo=3d over old standby 2d windows gui.
your whole posts are burning, chill out first! :)
OK, 1st of all Vista starter is NOT an OS for even basic use, it's just for testing how will Vista look like :) So, it isn't even Vista's 10% ;)
Posted on Reply
#21
zekrahminator
McLovin
Everyone take a chill pill, and drop the argument, or else you get to lick my long, hard, sweaty banstick.
Posted on Reply
#22
SpoonMuffin
wrong bx, its just vista without areo and with limmited other fetures, the same core, they just removed fetures, ms wouldnt spend all that $ to make a totaly diffrent version of vista just to sell it cheap.

and starter just looks like normal vista in 2d mode insted of areo mode.
Posted on Reply
#24
Ketxxx
Heedless Psychic
lol not only do I find this funny because I said DX10 would come to XP and nobody listened, people also didnt belive software emulation could be efficient enough. Now to top it all off, if this isnt software emulated, this DX10 project has probably been made possible with microsofts very own .NET framework :roll:
Posted on Reply
#25
Ketxxx
Heedless Psychic
Rodster said:
That's the reason why soooooo many are pissed at Vista. In order to get it to run like XP you have to use 4X the memory, buy a new CPU, video card and you might as well throw in a sound card because Creative Labs still has trouble releasing stable Vista drivers.

The day i'm forced to use this bloatware/shit operating system to play games is the day I switch exclusively to consoles. It's almost as if Windows Vista is bad joke by Microsoft. :nutkick:
lol yes many are, Vista has potential to be good, but it eats resources like sweets. On a complete clean install of Vista it ate - wait for it...... 43% of my available memory, and this is coming from someone with 2GB in dual channel. Once I cut a bunch of services off permanently however, it went to a much more managable 23% or so. Even after that Vista still wasnt very good, but at least you can claw your RAM back from it. Many may be interested to learn that a while ago, MS announced that their "next iteration" of Vista could be ready to ship as early as 2008 - in other words most likely a proper working version of Vista will be released then called something else lol.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment