Text 16048, 108 rader
Skriven 2007-02-13 19:40:06 av Richard Gauszka (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Why Vista's DRM Is Bad For You
==========================================
From: Richard Gauszka <gauszka@nospam-hotmail.com>

actually my first response to you was that Vista does use the gpu as you stated
it doesn't.

  I'm more concerned now with getting the vmware fusion beta running
well on my new macbook - it's a bit slow due to the beta debugging code but it
looks like my vm applications will be able to be copied from my Windows
computer


Gary Britt wrote:
> 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<g>
>>
>> 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" <GaryNOSPAMBritt@generalcogster.com> wrote in message
>> news:45d1e4df@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)