Posted on September 28, 2007,

Is DirectX 10 Worth It?


FiringSquad has a great story up regarding DirectX 10, how it stacks up against DirectX 9 currently, and if it’s worth it. There’s quite a few benchmarks and comparative screenshots throughout, so whether or not you’re a tech-head, you’ll be able to get something out of the story. If you’re thinking about upgrading your PC or buying a new one anytime soon, give the story a read and find out what’s really worth your money. (Above you can see a side-by-side image I put together – hence the reason it doesn’t have a pretty border – using two of the screenshots FS provided. DX9 on the left and DX10 on the right, in case you couldn’t tell.)

Unlike previous DirectX launches where new games using the technology often trailed the introduction of the new API by a year or more, the transition from DirectX 9 to DirectX 10 has been a swift one so far: already a trio of DirectX 10 games have been released (Lost Planet, World in Conflict, and BioShock), while a pair of games have been patched to take advantage of DX10 – Company of Heroes DX10 patch came in May, while Call of Juarez was patched and released for the US market with DX10 support in June. Other games we can look forward to later this year include Age of Conan, Crysis, EVE: Online, Flight Simulator X (Patch), Gears of War PC, Hellgate: London, and Unreal Tournament 3.

Read the full story here.

Join the Conversation   

* required field

By submitting a comment here you grant GameFront a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate or irrelevant comments will be removed at an admin's discretion.

20 Comments on Is DirectX 10 Worth It?

Da Soc

On September 28, 2007 at 12:47 pm

I don’t think it’s really that important, or now, at least.

The only game that’s really fully utilized it so far is Crysis.

It’s still not worth having to deal with the crap that is vista.


On September 28, 2007 at 12:47 pm

I Actualy like the one on the left more ^_^


On September 28, 2007 at 2:03 pm

“It’s still not worth having to deal with the crap that is vista.”

I bit the bullit and upgraded to Vista last month and I’ve had no problems whatsoever. Describing it as ‘crap’ is a bit retarded to say the least.

Da Soc

On September 28, 2007 at 2:48 pm

From what I’ve heard from all the people I know, it can be a total pain, and not to mention it takes more disk storage space and uses up more memory.

I might install it on my secondary hard drive just for games like crysis, but that’s it really.

Maybe after they work out all the bugs.


On September 28, 2007 at 2:50 pm

i agree with norbit. i got 2 8800′s in sli with vista ultimate x64 and i also havnt had any problems, all the games i play on xp work on vista and i get the added bonus of dx10 features which i must admit are awesome in world in conflict


On September 28, 2007 at 2:54 pm

I agree with Rollet, except I thought the one on the left, due to it being ‘better’, was D10. Hmmm.


On September 28, 2007 at 3:55 pm

Vista is crap. it is being hailed as a discrase to microsoft and being called to Windows ME 2. I am a fan of windows XP and even more OS-X. Vista stole and copied so many feature thats in OS-X. i love my Mac and Os-x is better.


On September 28, 2007 at 10:43 pm

DX10 was designed to be more a refinement than an evolution. So yeah, it’s not suprising when the differences are subtle at best.


On September 29, 2007 at 12:04 pm

The only difference I noticed is that the one on the right looks like she just had some Botox and changed out her Fox Fur collar for rabbit instead. :lol:


On September 29, 2007 at 12:37 pm

Not worth it especially since it requires that awful Vista. Ugh no thanks.


On September 29, 2007 at 7:36 pm


That may be true–though, many people who haven’t even touched Vista just bash it to ‘fit in’. Just like the Xbox 360 Vs. PS3 war. Most people who bash the PS3 haven’t even touched it, and vice versa by way of 360.

As a personal and business user of Vista, XP and OSX, I’d have to say that Vista has its ups and downs. Its ups is that it is rather easy to use for first-time users–much unlike XP (which was quite a bit more complicated despite the help and support center). OSX was really only good for working (BBEdit, Transfer, etc etc).

Given, that, XP is the platform for which most games used to be made, the fact that many games now have specific benefits that can only be utilized by Vista (in addition to the fact that vista DOES look rather smexy), it’s good.

Plus, Xboxlenny, don’t bash Vista because you’re mad that the 360 won’t get any hot crysis smex.

Mike Tsafaroff

On October 9, 2007 at 10:09 pm

I am having a hell of a time trying to figure out what to do. I put together a super computer ($4000.00) in March 07, and stuck with XP as it was serving me well and there was no reason to change. I’m now thinking of upgrading to SLI (8800 GTX OC}, and don’t know if its time for vista or not, especially if the difference is minor, I also do not want to compromise performance for subtle DX 10 features. Please let me know what you think THANX

gpu-8800 GTX OC
mboard-BFG tech 680i SLI


On October 22, 2007 at 8:24 am

ive used vista since January and once you have got use to it and now every works (ie drivers released) its much better than XP. I’m not going to list everything but the fact it loads progs twice as quick, looks 100 x nicer and has direct x10 support should be enough. Vista uses only a small amount of extra mhz, my core 2 duo 6600 rests at an average of 3% and ram is so cheap now anyway, buy some more cheapskates, 4 gig will run Vista for you and play any game without bottlenecking.. so what difference does it make? At the moment, due to the fact the games are both direct x9 and 10 means they dont take the full advantage, direct x10 will look better in game though, like turning the graphical setting up a notch more than a OMG look at that reaction.


On October 25, 2007 at 5:50 pm

Look. All i had to do was get a souncard driver (which the vista compatibility scan sent me to) & one for my wireless connector (which was found on Belkin website). Runs sweet as, no messin, no horror stories. The subtle graphical changes on Company of Heroes is sweet, an its just a matter of time until the “subtle” changes become “big” changes. Crysis will be the first to fully use DX10 an that looks a significant diff to DX9 if ya askin me. So wait till ya see the future…………And i own a PS3, PSP, Nintendo Wii an a mofo of a PC so i know what im chattin when it comes to games. NB: VISTA IS NOT THE F UP PEOPLE MAKE IT OUT TO BE.


On January 10, 2008 at 12:23 am

I find it funny that everyone mentions Vista has Dx10 but they forget to metion you have to buy a $500 card to even be able to use


On January 14, 2008 at 4:39 pm

Vista was bad when it was first released after updates very few hardware issues (beside buy new hardware – obvious – upgrade OS then upgrade hardware)


Vista is so much better now. prob is people havent TRIED it again since it was released and as for OSX mac stole the concepts from M$ when vista was in developemnt (7 years in dev)

As for DX10 the platform allows develps to utilise so much the plines and tex mapping is amazing


On February 7, 2008 at 8:19 pm

Vsync no longer work on DX10, both ATI and NVIDIA.
Glad I bought Vista Ultimate for 2$.
Should have bought Chinese take out instead.


On April 26, 2008 at 7:35 am

It’s not a good thing that you should need to upgrade to some crappy, laggy old OS that apparently needs 512-1GB of RAM just to use to play the latest games. Microsoft can go kiss my ass.


On October 6, 2008 at 12:43 pm

Just hack crysis on Dx9 its nearly the same as DX10 (the water, sunburst, etc..)
As for the rest .. Im no fan boy, but I dont like vista just because you gotta have about 2 gig min. or 4gig for vista ultimate


On December 16, 2010 at 7:23 pm

There are two problems in existence right now with directx:

1. Dumb consumers
2. Dumb devlopers

Neither of whom has the proper understanding of utilizing hardware and memory.