No DirectX 11.1 for Windows 7 planned?

When Windows 8 was released two weeks ago, one of the operating system's features was DirectX 11.1, the latest version of Microsoft's 3D graphics API. The company has listed all of DirectX 11.1's new features on its support page, Perhaps the highest profile difference between the new version and the older DirectX 11 is that DirectX 11.1 has native stereoscopic 3D support.

That means any PC games or applications written with DirectX 11.1 will have support for viewing the content via stereoscopic 3D glasses out of the box. Previously, stereoscopic 3D support could only be added to a game or application if you were programming with a particular graphics card in mind, such as NVIDIA's GeForce cards which support its own 3D Vision software, or AMD's Radeon cards with its HD3D technology.

There are still a lot of PC users out there with Windows 7 PCs who likely won't upgrade to Windows 8 but would still like to get DirectX 11.1. Unfortunately, it's looking like Microsoft is going to keep it as an exclusive for Windows 8, along with Windows RT and Windows Server 2012.

In a recent post on the Microsoft Answers forum, Microsoft employee Daniel Moth stated, "DirectX 11.1 is part of Windows 8, just like DirectX 11 was part of Windows 7. DirectX 11 was made available for Vista .... but at this point there is no plan for DirectX 11.1 to be made available on Windows 7."

We contacted Microsoft to get an official response but a spokesperson told us, " ... we have nothing further to share."

Thanks to Winblows8 for the tip!

Source: Microsoft Answers forum | Image via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Apple donates $2.5 million to Sandy victims

Next Story

Man charged with selling lots of counterfeit Microsoft software

79 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I don't see what the big deal is with Windows 8's exclusive DX11.1 support. Once developers start making DX11 games, they'll target as large an audience as possible. This obviously includes any OS that supports DX11 (e.g. Winodws Vista/7). Some developers may add DX11.1 features for Windows 8 users but that won't make their games incompatible with Windows Vista/7. It'll simply be a feature that can't be enabled.

not only is it cheap now but you get media centre FREE if you upgrade and go online for a media centre key before the end of Jan 2013.

(or you can just get the media centre key you only need your e-mail address for this, make a Media Centre ISO with data.dat file that's from an activated install of media centre. This will allow he upgrade key to be used on installing the OS costing you nothing at all for Windows 8 Pro with media centre) I guess that's a tad on the illegal side though.

So, it's gonna be a complete suicide for game developers to code games in dx11.1 exclusive, unless they got a deal they can't refuse from Microsoft. Nah. Let win8 have it. I like win7 and I have yet to see any supreme benefits of them having dx11 support.

The basic reason not to upgrade to win8, is that I don't find it justified to upgrade to it so soon (yes soon!) from win7. And I am not buying another (upgrade) license for this. In a few years from now.... we'll see.

Leonard3E said,
So, it's gonna be a complete suicide for game developers to code games in dx11.1 exclusive, unless they got a deal they can't refuse from Microsoft. Nah. Let win8 have it. I like win7 and I have yet to see any supreme benefits of them having dx11 support.

The basic reason not to upgrade to win8, is that I don't find it justified to upgrade to it so soon (yes soon!) from win7. And I am not buying another (upgrade) license for this. In a few years from now.... we'll see.

It's always suicide to code exclusively in one version of directx, considering how many people are stil on WinXP.

Normally I would agree on the update thing, but Windows 8 is very cheap right now so IMO the upgrade can be justified. It will grand you access to an improved desktop environment as well as early access to the modern UI. Right now that isnt necessary but in a few months there will be plenty of applications worth having in the modern UI.

meh more reason for the windows 8 haters to upgrade. TBF I get the feeling people are just not upgrading due to the bad press windows 8 has got.

Windows 8 if faster, more secure and more SUPPORTED! among other things. If you don't upgrade you are a fool. Times change, software and hardware changes and so will your OS deal with it.

Hopefully Microsoft keeps DirectX 11.1 Windows 8 only and we get a good amount of games that only support DirectX 11.1! It is a great OS and there is no reason what so ever not to upgrade to it.

I have Dx11.1 compliant hardware but considering the extremely slow uptake on Dx10/11 software, I don't feel the rush to upgrade to Win8 on my main machine just to get it. So my main machine will remain on Win7, however, I have updated my older laptop to Win8 and that runs very well

So this is there way to force feed the crap known as Windows 8? Looking more and more like Apple! If only Linux could run the games gamers need. Microsoft would lose so many customers.

JHBrown said,
So this is there way to force feed the crap known as Windows 8? Looking more and more like Apple! If only Linux could run the games gamers need. Microsoft would lose so many customers.

Really? People are panicking over the start menu changing. You're saying theyd be fine with having almost everything else change?

McKay said,

Really? People are panicking over the start menu changing. You're saying theyd be fine with having almost everything else change?


When was the start menu mentioned in his comment?

Just like why DX10 wasn't available on WinXP, it comes down to OS support, specifically the driver model.

DX11.1 depends on the WDM 1.2 WDDM driver technologies. The DX11.1 platform EXPECTS these features to be implemented and running.

A portion is a part of how the DWM works different in both directions. It is full time active, meaning that on pre-DX9 video cards, the GPU Composer is software emulated. On newer GPUs, including DX10.1 and DX11, the DirectX platform is able to move out of the way, giving a faster leaner path to the GPU from games/etc.


With DirectX10, nobody at the time would 'accept' that the Video Driver model was completely new and impossible to 'strap' on to WinXP. The XPDM was not capable of providing the functionality or feature that the DirectX 10 Platform expected and NEEDED to be present, as it was handing over more scheduling and virtualization technology to the NT kernel of the OS.

The WDDM was a massive difference, as anyone that felt the early driver performance issues of Vista. It was a major shift in how Windows and even how OSes in general handed the GPU.


In order for Microsoft to support DirectX 11.1, they would have to back port the WDM 1.2 WDDM driver technology to the Windows 7 kernel. Which when that happens, it is no longer Windows 7 as the cascading dependency of other GPU related features all have to be adjusted until you end up with the Desktop only side of Windows 8. At that point, why not just spend the money for Windows 8 and ignore the freaking Modern UI that seems to driving the nuts crazy.

By moving to Windows 8, users will get the performance bump and other features, even if they don't think they would ever use the new UI. (However, as I have said before, anyone that uses it, ends up liking it and when forced to use Windows 7, find themselves missing Windows 8.)

Sem XL said,
DX10 didn't make me jump to Vista so 11.1 wont make me jump to that turd OS win8

A faster, leaner OS to the one you are running is a turd? Oh, you don't like the new Start Menu/Screen, and are going to let your ignorance keep you on a slower OS with less features. Brilliant logic.

thenetavenger said,

A faster, leaner OS to the one you are running is a turd? Oh, you don't like the new Start Menu/Screen, and are going to let your ignorance keep you on a slower OS with less features. Brilliant logic.


Windows 8 is far from leaner!

JHBrown said,

Windows 8 is far from leaner!

It's not more bloated either, so it must be about on par with Windows 7. The system requirements for both OS's would seem to reflect that.

FrozenEclipse said,

It's not more bloated either, so it must be about on par with Windows 7. The system requirements for both OS's would seem to reflect that.


Yes, because that worked well for Vista didn't it?

Mind you, since Windows 8 has removed features, it should be faster...

Windows 8 is faster and more efficient than 7, I just started encountering issues with my hardware that I had never had on Windows 7 and decided it wasn't worth it.

Though that's not really a reason to stay off it in general since that's a classic "your mileage may vary" situation.

I don't like the new app environment, mainly because it's not polished yet - but mostly because it seems like they are making a power grab with the Windows Store that is far more extreme than Internet Explorer was in the 90s and noone is batting an eyelid. I'd like to see it significantly refined, support for user side-loading of apps and for third parties to offer their own app stores for Metro. I'd go so far as to say the courts should mandate this on their desktop monopoly, maybe Valve or another vendor will complain. The iPad should probably get the same treatment for the same reason in the tablet market.

However the technically speaking rest of the OS is clearly a solid, if more minor upgrade to Windows 7.

Raa said,

Yes, because that worked well for Vista didn't it?

Mind you, since Windows 8 has removed features, it should be faster...

Personally I didn't find Vista much (if any) slower (at least after bootup) than Windows 7 after all updates were applied. 2 service packs, a Platform Update, and a Platform Update supplement later, Vista was a fine OS. Problem was, Windows 7 had already established itself and the negative rep Vista got since launch already caused irreparable damage.

Fragmenting DirectX only hurts MS. Developers won't use the new 11.1 features because they want to target the largest amount of customers. Just like how lots of them are still targeting DirectX 9

Rudy said,
Fragmenting DirectX only hurts MS. Developers won't use the new 11.1 features because they want to target the largest amount of customers. Just like how lots of them are still targeting DirectX 9

Not if you understand DirectX, especially when features are not possible on Windows 7 driver model, and would offer the users nothing. Developers can write DirectX11 and augment with 11.1 features for stereoscopic content and other features for users that can run the 11.1 features.

It is silly to expect Microsoft to back port a complex driver model change back to an older OS. By the time they wasted all the work in doing this, most users will have moved to Windows 8 or bought new PCs with Windows 8, especially if they are gamers and want the extra performance that Windows 8 is squeezing out of many games.

Yeah, and so many games are still stuck using 9.0c because MS didn't release DX10 for XP. I know it's really the game developers' fault, but didn't MS learn anything?

ahhell said,
No. Games are still using DX9 because devs are ****ing lazy and cheap.

And intellectually lazy.

The developers that have spent the time with DX10 and DX11 realize that even just supporting the same level of graphics is faster with DX10 and especially DX11 native platform code.

There are a few titles out there that are DX11, and they are NOT having the performance issues that you find with titles that are DX9 based.

It is this simple... DX10 and DX11 are based off the Xbox 360 technologies. All new GPUs are also based off the Xbox 360 technologies.

When a newer GPU has to handle DX9 code, it is wasting performance by emulation and translation to provide the 'appearance' of the DX9 era VS/PS GPU architecture that simply is not there. If you look at the top DX9 cards from 2006, the difference in DX9 benchmarks to a brand new GPU is not as great as it should be, because the newer GPUs were not designed for DX9 and are having to take time to run DX9 level code.

Everyone is buying a ton of technology in DX10 and DX11 video cards with GPUs and it is being wasted when they are running DX9 code. Simply, users are being cheated out of a lot of features and speed when a game developer is building from a DX9 framework.

People are silly that they don't push developers to provide a true DX10/DX11 based game/engine that was designed around the DX10 framework principles.


This is also why it is silly when you see developers like Valve benchmark a DX9 game engine against a newly optimized OpenGL 4.x game, as the OpenGL game is built for the unified shader and features of the new GPU.

Edited by thenetavenger, Nov 9 2012, 10:46pm :

Laslow said,
Yeah, and so many games are still stuck using 9.0c because MS didn't release DX10 for XP. I know it's really the game developers' fault, but didn't MS learn anything?

No, they're stuck using DX 9 because of XBox 360.

ahhell said,
No. Games are still using DX9 because devs are ****ing lazy and cheap.

ok then..
I'll tell Gabe and all the people who play Counter-Strike lol

I am Not PCyr said,

ok then..
I'll tell Gabe and all the people who play Counter-Strike lol


Valve is ****ing lazy and cheap, I've been saying that since Left 4 Dead 1 came out.

Javik said,
Another attempt to strong arm people into switching. Sigh.

i dunno if it that is there intention. more i think its just there practice.
i kinda see where they are coming from guessing there could be a bunch of reasons why they would choose to do this but I think if they we're smart they would port it down to win 7 also considering how popular and relatively new 7 still is.
shooting themselves in the foot a bit i think..

Javik said,
Another attempt to strong arm people into switching. Sigh.

Actually it is a true technological difference that prevents this from being easily provided. If it was easy, Microsoft would have no problem providing it.

If Microsoft was into strong arming people to ONLY their products, you would NOT see them doing Office for iOS or Android or providing SmartGlass/Companion/Live and other WP exclusive features for other smartphones. The Xbox angle alone would be enough to grab users that would want a WP just to use the extra features, and this is not the case.

thenetavenger said,

Actually it is a true technological difference that prevents this from being easily provided. If it was easy, Microsoft would have no problem providing it.

Oh please, don't be so naive. Javik is entirely correct.

Not only did they have no trouble backporting 11 (a major release and not a point release!) to Vista, but the very existance of OpenGL proves that this is nothing more than an attempt by MSFT to push 8.

One has to ask, if they DID release DX 11.1 for windows 7, they might as well release IE 10 for W7 too... Then you'd that W7 and W8 have pretty much the same things on them so not many people would bother upgrading then they'd sell much less W8 etc.
I don't see why people are surprised? I didn't see DX10 for XP (officially, yes I know you can hack it unofficially so it works)

n_K said,
One has to ask, if they DID release DX 11.1 for windows 7, they might as well release IE 10 for W7 too... Then you'd that W7 and W8 have pretty much the same things on them so not many people would bother upgrading then they'd sell much less W8 etc.
I don't see why people are surprised? I didn't see DX10 for XP (officially, yes I know you can hack it unofficially so it works)

IE10 for windows 7 is expected in a week or so for a beta release and RTM quickly thereafter..

n_K said,
One has to ask, if they DID release DX 11.1 for windows 7, they might as well release IE 10 for W7 too... Then you'd that W7 and W8 have pretty much the same things on them so not many people would bother upgrading then they'd sell much less W8 etc.
I don't see why people are surprised? I didn't see DX10 for XP (officially, yes I know you can hack it unofficially so it works)

You can hack the DX10 frameworks to run on WinXP, but it doesn't run right with DX10 titles, as the driver model is NOT providing the features that the DX10 framework depends on being in the OS and being handled by the OS.

For example the virtualization and scheduling features that the WDDM have that XPDM doesn't is a problem when a game title is letting the OS handle GPU thread scheduling. This is why DX10 on WinXP starts to stutter and gives non-fluid performance, and also other things like being starved for VRAM, as they are loading more into VRAM space that the WDDM is virtualizing with System RAM that is not present in WindowsXP.

The DX 11.1 features don't work on the WDM 1.1/WDDM of Windows 7, the composer works differently, Windows 8 has GPU software emulation as needed that Windows 7 doesn't and on and on.

(There is a lot of difference in how Windows 8 works graphically, even though it is based off the original WDM 1.x WDDM technologies. It has more control over the GPU, can get out of the way of and provide a faster path to the GPU when there isn't load, and can even shove low performance GPU threads through a CPU core if it would be faster than wasting the GPU's time.)

Remember they are trying to become like Apple in every department. So just like how Apple doesn't offer anything downlevel, Microsoft MUST ape them.

Aaron44126 said,
No surprise. Windows XP was the last OS that you could upgrade DirectX on.

another person that doesn't read article that he/she responds too

Aaron44126 said,
No surprise. Windows XP was the last OS that you could upgrade DirectX on.

And it supported only two versions, which it no more than Vista, which also supported DX10 and 10.1.

DirectX has changed from that era as well. It is no longer just an upgrade to a set of framework features adding performance or capabilities based off the SAME hardware and OS level set of technologies. DirectX today is changing based off of GPU advances and OS advances.

thenetavenger said,

And it supported only two versions, which it no more than Vista, which also supported DX10 and 10.1.

DirectX has changed from that era as well. It is no longer just an upgrade to a set of framework features adding performance or capabilities based off the SAME hardware and OS level set of technologies. DirectX today is changing based off of GPU advances and OS advances.

Windows Vista fully supports DirectX 11. MS launched it 5 days after Windows 7 launched with DX11.

RandPC said,

Windows Vista fully supports DirectX 11. MS launched it 5 days after Windows 7 launched with DX11.


That was when Microsoft cared about their consumer base.

b_roca said,
Mmmmm, 3d crap. I think you get that in some really dodgy 3d porn?

Do you play or see 3D movies? C'mon... This is going to extinct in a while.

You would expect MS would have built something truly appealing in DX 11.1 to attract gamers, but probably they had no time or something. Currently Win8 not only does not make gaming any better, but on the contrary, does make it slightly worse.

PC EliTiST said,
Dx 11.1 does not add anything useful to gamers anyway. I've yet to see a guy who plays with 3D crap.

3d movies and 3d games make me sick to my stomach

PC EliTiST said,

Do you play or see 3D movies? C'mon... This is going to extinct in a while.

You would expect MS would have built something truly appealing in DX 11.1 to attract gamers, but probably they had no time or something. Currently Win8 not only does not make gaming any better, but on the contrary, does make it slightly worse.

Like most stuff Microsoft does, they are often ahead of the curve a bit too far. Sure 3D technologies today are rather 'mediocre', but in 5-10 years, do you think there is a possibility that 3D content will look really good and even have new types of displays that create a 3D area instead of a 3D emulated image on a 2D surface?

We will have 3D that is beyond what monitors are capable of today, and this is why the majority of the DX11.1 arguments are silly.

There are a lot of games out there that support 3D glasses technology from ATI and NVidia, which has been around for 10 years, and these developers will like and want to use the DX 11.1 features as they get control over the 3D content and it is not just an approximated image created by the NVidia/ATI drivers.

thenetavenger said,

Like most stuff Microsoft does, they are often ahead of the curve a bit too far. Sure 3D technologies today are rather 'mediocre', but in 5-10 years, do you think there is a possibility that 3D content will look really good and even have new types of displays that create a 3D area instead of a 3D emulated image on a 2D surface?

We will have 3D that is beyond what monitors are capable of today, and this is why the majority of the DX11.1 arguments are silly.

There are a lot of games out there that support 3D glasses technology from ATI and NVidia, which has been around for 10 years, and these developers will like and want to use the DX 11.1 features as they get control over the 3D content and it is not just an approximated image created by the NVidia/ATI drivers.


Even better, MS already has in its research labs multiple approaches in development for 3d display.
Holograms, 3d TV's without glasses, even this 3d touch surface (not surface rt/pro just _a_ surface)

Only top engines have recently fully commited to DX11. The rest are still on DX9. It will take a while for them to adopt DX11.1. Meanwhile, there's going to be Windows 9 and the problem will fix itself. Probably.

Phouchg said,
Only top engines have recently fully commited to DX11. The rest are still on DX9. It will take a while for them to adopt DX11.1. Meanwhile, there's going to be Windows 9 and the problem will fix itself. Probably.

Actually, every major (Western) publisher except Zenimax is releasing DX10/11 only games now. Next year should see far less DX9 only games.

Deranged said,

Actually, every major (Western) publisher except Zenimax is releasing DX10/11 only games now. Next year should see far less DX9 only games.

Some AAA games features dx9 / dx11 render and they recommend (for performance purpose) to use dx9

Brony said,

Some AAA games features dx9 / dx11 render and they recommend (for performance purpose) to use dx9


Yeah, I think one did that. Then they patched it up.

Phouchg said,
Only top engines have recently fully commited to DX11. The rest are still on DX9. It will take a while for them to adopt DX11.1. Meanwhile, there's going to be Windows 9 and the problem will fix itself. Probably.

CS:GO ?

besides who plays most of the crappy games that come out anyway ?
snorfest zzzzzzzz

Brony said,

Some AAA games features dx9 / dx11 render and they recommend (for performance purpose) to use dx9

Um, which one recommends DX9 for performance? Because if they are recommending DX9 for performance, then their DX11 code and engine are built from DX9 with DX11 effects duck taped on top. If the game code is truly using DX10 or DX11 principles, the same quality content will run faster than DX9 on any modern GPU. (New Video cards are designed around the Unified Shader and other DX10/11 technologies.)

If you want evidence that DX10/11 code is inherently faster, look at a native Xbox 360 game title that had its engine designed for the Xbox 360. The Xbox 360 DirectX subset is a variation of DX10 and DX11 technologies, which is why PC Games didn't hit code parity with Xbox until Windows 7 and DX11 was released.

thenetavenger said,
The Xbox 360 DirectX subset is a variation of DX10 and DX11 technologies, which is why PC Games didn't hit code parity with Xbox until Windows 7 and DX11 was released.

It isn't. DX10 came more than a year after Xbox 360 was designed. A couple of DX10 ideas (unified shaders, yes) did make into Xenos, though that doesn't give even a part of the edge. Rather - low rendering resolution, dedicated units for depth buffering and zero-cost AA does that.
Also, the fastest code is one which doesn't run at all. Xbox DX9, having thrown out all hardware compatibility code, isn't close to PC DX9 in other ways than being a generally very similar idea of hardware abstraction.

thenetavenger said,

Um, which one recommends DX9 for performance?


Arkham City did at first iirc. I'm fairly sure they changed that recommendation post patch.

ahhell said,
"DirectX 11.1 has native stereoscopic 3D support"

Big F'ing deal.

Exactly and all these nobs are getting all tied up because Windows 7 won't support it? RELAX guys game developers won't start exclusively publishing titles with no backward compatability most games are on DX 10/11 by now and they're not going to dump their user base. The update will mainly affect WinRT capabilities.

ahhell said,
"DirectX 11.1 has native stereoscopic 3D support"

Big F'ing deal.

yup..

i know when i install nvidia drivers i click custom and look for the useless bloat to uncheck. such as the 3d bs.

Lord Method Man said,
I just wish the market's ancient consoles would stop holding back gaming so that we could actually have some decent games to utilize Dx11+

Solution : Abolish consoles, get back to where gaming belongs - the PC!

Yeah, that's a great way to not **** off your users and developers all at the same time. You're on a roll lately, Microsoft!

Jeez, I was just talking about 11.1 with a friend yesterday, I know it's a powerful update. I honestly could care less about seven (although it was a really, really great OS) now that I've experienced Windows 8. I feel like this version has so much potential.

It's only an opinion all around, but, I feel like they're doing the right thing when it comes to marketing up to something better without actually collapsing the ecosystem of PC users with major updates.

Mr.XXIV said,
Jeez, I was just talking about 11.1 with a friend yesterday, I know it's a powerful update. I honestly could care less about seven (although it was a really, really great OS) now that I've experienced Windows 8. I feel like this version has so much potential.

It's only an opinion all around, but, I feel like they're doing the right thing when it comes to marketing up to something better without actually collapsing the ecosystem of PC users with major updates.

seven is good... but when compared to 8... it is ****. I just love how am visiting metro these days too. windows 8 polish and broaden the experience

Mr.XXIV said,
Jeez, I was just talking about 11.1 with a friend yesterday, I know it's a powerful update. I honestly could care less about seven (although it was a really, really great OS) now that I've experienced Windows 8. I feel like this version has so much potential.

Windows 7 was nice, but now i upgraded to Windows 8 and i never ever would go back! Windows 8 is so fast, responsive and filled with nice Features... simply amazing!

benalvino said,
good...

hows that good?? That's stupid, I don't like Win8 and Win7's UI supports 11.1 so it makes no sense not to push it including other enhancements that come with Win8 such as multimonitor support additions.

sava700 said,
Win7's UI supports 11.1.

wat?

sava700 said,
makes no sense not to push it including other enhancements that come with Win8 such as multimonitor support additions.

Why would they add that? It's a feature of Win 8. Vista got no features of Win 7 (although there was hardly any new stuff on 7 anyway).

NoClipMode said,

Why would they add that? It's a feature of Win 8. Vista got no features of Win 7 (although there was hardly any new stuff on 7 anyway).

did you even read the article? DX11 is in vista and it came from 7

sava700 said,

hows that good?? That's stupid, I don't like Win8 and Win7's UI supports 11.1 so it makes no sense not to push it including other enhancements that come with Win8 such as multimonitor support additions.

MS knows that a lot of people don't want 8, this is just another plan to force them to eventually get 8

nekrosoft13 said,

MS knows that a lot of people don't want 8, this is just another plan to force them to eventually get 8

Oh please, when the majority of PC games are coded with DX11 only and we can finally say goodbye to DX9 we won't be talking about Windows 8 anymore. This is a non-issue at best. Game developers are so slow to move off of DX9 as it is let alone jump on DX11.1.

Well, if this is Microsof't first foray into 3D, its probably good to keep it on Windows 8 where it will be a perfect match for the buggy and unfinished and feature lacking O/S.

Maybe it'll be ready for prime time in its 3rd iteration, along with the return of the start button and desktop as primary interface, when Metro is dumped as a total failure.

GP007 said,

Game developers are so slow to move off of DX9 as it is let alone jump on DX11.1.

No wonder when Microsoft cemented DX9 into the XBox...

nekrosoft13 said,

did you even read the article? DX11 is in vista and it came from 7

Did you even read my reply properly? The new multi monitor features in 8 have NOTHING to do with DirectX.

Derp.

GP007 said,

Oh please, when the majority of PC games are coded with DX11 only and we can finally say goodbye to DX9 we won't be talking about Windows 8 anymore. This is a non-issue at best. Game developers are so slow to move off of DX9 as it is let alone jump on DX11.1.

Completely agree, the majority of games still seem to be DX9. Itll be a long while before 11.1 even matters.