Last DirectX for WinXP SP3 x86? 9.0c or 9.0d?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greegor
  • Start date Start date
OK, I'm firmly convinced that for Win XP, DirectX 9.0c is the
latest installable DirectX module.

But I got a casual (easy) game collection CD for the holidays
that is for Windows XP, but requires DIRECTX 9.0
in the video card and didn't like the 9.0c SW module.

I also looked into video cards to possibly upgrade
enough to run W7 or W8 fairly well and noticed
that various video cards have DIRECTX 10 or ? in them.

Apparently this opens the door to having Direct X 10 or 11
on a Windows XP computer.

Why would DIRECTX 9.0 in a vid card work better
than the DirectX 9.0c software module for a game?

Is there a lot of other software that runs on WinXP
but can even use DIRECTX 10 (in video hardware)?

It's not like these are slow computers where
software DirectX runs slow or anything...

Is hardware DIRECTX 10 or 11 fairly common
for on board video in newer mother boards?
 
Greegor said:
OK, I'm firmly convinced that for Win XP, DirectX 9.0c is the
latest installable DirectX module.

But I got a casual (easy) game collection CD for the holidays
that is for Windows XP, but requires DIRECTX 9.0
in the video card and didn't like the 9.0c SW module.

I also looked into video cards to possibly upgrade
enough to run W7 or W8 fairly well and noticed
that various video cards have DIRECTX 10 or ? in them.

Apparently this opens the door to having Direct X 10 or 11
on a Windows XP computer.
Click to expand...

No, it does not.

The door remains firmly shut on WinXP users.

They get DirectX 9.0c, as their named standard.

DirectX 10 and 11 are an architectural change. As to
which element does what when it comes to graphics. The
WinXP OS is not prepared for this (and, it was done
on purpose, just to stick a knife in the ribs of
WinXP users).

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2116/2

"Virtual Memory

Microsoft is taking tighter control of graphics memory
with it's new driver model, and thus is able to provide
virtual memory support for the graphics memory subsystem.
What this means is that games no longer need to worry
about running out of graphics memory.
"

WinXP doesn't know anything about that.
Why would DIRECTX 9.0 in a vid card work better
than the DirectX 9.0c software module for a game?

Is there a lot of other software that runs on WinXP
but can even use DIRECTX 10 (in video hardware)?

It's not like these are slow computers where
software DirectX runs slow or anything...

Is hardware DIRECTX 10 or 11 fairly common
for on board video in newer mother boards?
Click to expand...

Enjoy your WinXP. Enjoy your DirectX 9.0c for as long
as drivers are offered to make it possible with modern
video cards.

Once WinXP is off life support, the video card manufacturers
will not feel inclined to continue DirectX 9.0c support.
It costs them money to continue to regression test that
everything still works in WinXP, so the day after WinXP support
is dropped by Microsoft, ATI and NVidia will be "dancing in
the streets" as they eject WinXP support from their buildings.

If you like your old DirectX 9.0c video games, make sure
you've bought a card (by now) to play them with.

Paul
 
Paul said:
DirectX 10 and 11 are an architectural change. As to
which element does what when it comes to graphics. The
WinXP OS is not prepared for this (and, it was done
on purpose, just to stick a knife in the ribs of
WinXP users).

Enjoy your WinXP. Enjoy your DirectX 9.0c for as long
as drivers are offered to make it possible with modern
video cards.

Once WinXP is off life support, the video card manufacturers
will not feel inclined to continue DirectX 9.0c support.
It costs them money to continue to regression test that
everything still works in WinXP, so the day after WinXP support
is dropped by Microsoft, ATI and NVidia will be "dancing in
the streets" as they eject WinXP support from their buildings.

If you like your old DirectX 9.0c video games, make sure
you've bought a card (by now) to play them with.
Click to expand...

Hopefully, VirtualBox can emulate DX9 functions from a DX10+ card. Or,
can it do it already? I don't have a DX10 card.
 
Paul said:
DirectX 10 and 11 are an architectural change. As to
which element does what when it comes to graphics. The
WinXP OS is not prepared for this (and, it was done
on purpose, just to stick a knife in the ribs of
WinXP users).

Enjoy your WinXP. Enjoy your DirectX 9.0c for as long
as drivers are offered to make it possible with modern
video cards.

Once WinXP is off life support, the video card manufacturers
will not feel inclined to continue DirectX 9.0c support.
It costs them money to continue to regression test that
everything still works in WinXP, so the day after WinXP support
is dropped by Microsoft, ATI and NVidia will be "dancing in
the streets" as they eject WinXP support from their buildings.

If you like your old DirectX 9.0c video games, make sure
you've bought a card (by now) to play them with.
Click to expand...

Hopefully, VirtualBox can emulate DX9 functions from a DX10+ card. Or,
can it do it already? I don't have a DX10 card.
 
http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/NOTEBOOK/GRAPHICS/ATI-MOBILITY-HD-5400/Pages/hd-5450-specs.aspx

This DIRECTX 11 card has DRIVERS for WinXP and W7.

If the DIRECTX 11 hardware and firmware can't
be used in WinXP then what does the driver
do with it?

Would a game application actually prefer
DIRECTX 9 hardware/firmware to the
DirectX 9.0c software module?

I see a card that has shaders and stuff for DIRECTX9.
Would the DirectX 9.0c software module USE that stuff?

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/other/Pages/x1300-specifications.aspx

I found when studying upgrade options that
back when the upper CPU chips were $500
or $600 each, upgrading seemed less worthwhile
but now those same chips are $10 to $30
like the high end ones with hw Virtualization.

When a CPU that used to go for $600 sells
for $30, upgrading isn't so far fetched.
 
Greegor said:
http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/NOTEBOOK/GRAPHICS/ATI-MOBILITY-HD-5400/Pages/hd-5450-specs.aspx

This DIRECTX 11 card has DRIVERS for WinXP and W7.

If the DIRECTX 11 hardware and firmware can't
be used in WinXP then what does the driver
do with it?

Would a game application actually prefer
DIRECTX 9 hardware/firmware to the
DirectX 9.0c software module?

I see a card that has shaders and stuff for DIRECTX9.
Would the DirectX 9.0c software module USE that stuff?

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/other/Pages/x1300-specifications.aspx

I found when studying upgrade options that
back when the upper CPU chips were $500
or $600 each, upgrading seemed less worthwhile
but now those same chips are $10 to $30
like the high end ones with hw Virtualization.

When a CPU that used to go for $600 sells
for $30, upgrading isn't so far fetched.
Click to expand...

"Certified drivers for Windows 7, Windows Vista, and Windows XP"

Presumably, not the same driver. The driver would work with
things usable by the target OS.

If it didn't support DirectX 9, there'd be no point listing
a Windows XP driver.

Using another card as an example...

http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/Pages/amd-press-release-2009sep22.aspx

"superior performance in the latest DirectX 11 games, as well as in
DirectX 9, DirectX 10, DirectX 10.1 and OpenGL titles"

I don't know if I can come up with a search term specific
enough to find a table with that information in it.

WinXP uses an XDDM driver, while the later OSes have some
flavor of WDDM driver.

Notice they do mention backward compatibility so that
WDDM can support older titles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WDDM

"The WDDM specification requires at least Direct3D 9-capable video card
and the display driver must implement the device driver interfaces for
the Direct3D 9Ex runtime in order to run legacy Direct3D applications;
it may optionally implement runtime interfaces for Direct3D 10/10.1
and higher."

But the driver for WinXP would be XDDM. It means it is quite possible
the hardware has to support more than one variation in its interface.
It also means, you could run into a video device, that no longer
has support for XDDM. While WDDM has some backward compatibility
defined for it, there's nothing to say ATI/NVidia have to support
XDDM forever on new designs. They could drop it at any time,
simultaneous with stopping WinXP driver support.

(Ref here)
http://download.microsoft.com/downl...470B-A97E-CE7CE0D98DC2/GraphicsGuideWin7.docx

Paul
 
While WDDM has some backward compatibility
defined for it, there's nothing to say ATI/NVidia have to support
XDDM forever on new designs. They could drop it at any time,
simultaneous with stopping WinXP driver support.
Click to expand...

If they want to abandon the population of XP users, then
used hardware and support archives would take up the slack.

Durable goods like computers should not be obsoleted and
scrapped/landfilled because they're 3 years old, or because
a big OS vendor wants to DRIVE obsolescence of hardware
without regard to speed benchmarks.
 
Back
Top