Recommended Posts

Adding to the already impressive pile of Vista-deflating features we're expecting to see in Windows 7 is WARP, a tech which will allow your PC's CPU to act as a graphics accelerator, possibly doing away with the need for integrated graphics hardware to render user interfaces and low-end games. Not-so-seductively described as a ?fully conformant software rasterizer?, WARP requires nothing more than an 800MHz processor for complete?if comically slow?DX10 compliance.

At this stage WARP won't be intended as a gameworthy replacement for dedicated graphics cards, but it could help avoid another "Vista Capable" type debacle by standardizing essential graphics capabilities across virtually all hardware. That said, it's not that slow: Microsoft reports that when paired with the rather awesome i7, it runs Crysis faster than Intel's integrated DX10 solutions. Like, 42% faster. Granted, that's still only 7.36FPS on the game's lowest settings, but don't miss the point here: Windows 7 will run Crysis?or any other game?without a video card.

Source

As we already know that Windows 7 will feature 'WARP' which allows the CPU processor to render GPU functions/features. But, while this may be great for people who run old hardware like a Radeon 8500 (for example), allowing them to use Aero features like transparency and so on. I doubt it'll be so great on the processor. If anything, people would be worse off since the CPU would have to do it's primary job as well as Graphical effects. Does anyone else agree this is a false positive?

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea, it just doesn't seem logical. If you haven't got a computer that doesn't render Aero, then you are seriously behind in the technology world. What does everybody else think of this?

Source

As we already know that Windows 7 will feature 'WARP' which allows the CPU processor to render GPU functions/features. But, while this may be great for people who run old hardware like a Radeon 8500 (for example), allowing them to use Aero features like transparency and so on. I doubt it'll be so great on the processor. If anything, people would be worse off since the CPU would have to do it's primary job as well as Graphical effects. Does anyone else agree this is a false positive?

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea, it just doesn't seem logical. If you haven't got a computer that doesn't render Aero, then you are seriously behind in the technology world. What does everybody else think of this?

I work on a lot of computers that run perfectly fine with vista... but have crummy video cards. I dobut these computers would be taxed by the extra processing power needed. Not to mention by the time 7 comes around... more people will have modern hardware/upgraded/purchased a new pc.

I work on a lot of computers that run perfectly fine with vista... but have crummy video cards. I dobut these computers would be taxed by the extra processing power needed. Not to mention by the time 7 comes around... more people will have modern hardware/upgraded/purchased a new pc.

Yeah, but really, is there any point of using 'WARP'? It's like. Yay! I can run Crysis, but at 7fps (On a i7 based processor). Hardly playable.

Yeah, but really, is there any point of using 'WARP'? It's like. Yay! I can run Crysis, but at 7fps (On a i7 based processor). Hardly playable.

Running crysis vs having glass are completely different things.

I fixed an old P4 1.4GHz 512MB of ram computer running vista ultimate. I got a 1.1 on the index iirc.

We upgraded the graphics card and it ran glass just fine... so I doubt any other computer is going to have an issue. And if you're running Windows 7 on a P4 1.4GHz... thats their problem.

Microsoft got it all wrong again which is natural for them. If they wanted to make Aero in Windows 7 to work on machines with no video card to support it for God sake they don't need Pixel Shader 2.0 to run aero, infact Pixel Shader 1.1 is enough which is supported by old Geforce 3, Radeon 8500 cards.

Why is everyone talking about WARP as it's meant to just run aero? You say MS got it wrong? Maybe you're missing the bigger picture? WARP is meant to take advantage of x86 CPUs better, sure the GPU should be running your games, and that's what it'll do, the fact WARP can even run Crysis at 7FPS just shows how good MSs code is, it's an example, not what it's meant for.

Setting a performance base for future versions is one thing, and this does that in one respect, but the main part is to better support future x86 CPUs. When Intel has it's larrabe chips out, which are nothing but lots of mini-x86s made to take just this sorta code and work with it, then WARP comes into play even more.

Why is everyone talking about WARP as it's meant to just run aero? You say MS got it wrong? Maybe you're missing the bigger picture? WARP is meant to take advantage of x86 CPUs better, sure the GPU should be running your games, and that's what it'll do, the fact WARP can even run Crysis at 7FPS just shows how good MSs code is, it's an example, not what it's meant for.

+1

What's all this about running Crysis at 7fps on an i7? :blink:

Well, not exactly 7fps, but why does it work badly on an i7?

Back on topic, is it really necessary to put the CPU or even GPU to heavy use when it comes to Aero? I mean, you get the Aero theme when installing Vista during setup regardless of whether your PC can handle Aero or not.

What's all this about running Crysis at 7fps on an i7? :blink:

Well, not exactly 7fps, but why does it work badly on an i7?

Back on topic, is it really necessary to put the CPU or even GPU to heavy use when it comes to Aero? I mean, you get the Aero theme when installing Vista during setup regardless of whether your PC can handle Aero or not.

Actually, you don't. That's just a still image. You can't move it or anything.

Why is everyone talking about WARP as it's meant to just run aero? You say MS got it wrong? Maybe you're missing the bigger picture? WARP is meant to take advantage of x86 CPUs better, sure the GPU should be running your games, and that's what it'll do, the fact WARP can even run Crysis at 7FPS just shows how good MSs code is, it's an example, not what it's meant for.

Setting a performance base for future versions is one thing, and this does that in one respect, but the main part is to better support future x86 CPUs. When Intel has it's larrabe chips out, which are nothing but lots of mini-x86s made to take just this sorta code and work with it, then WARP comes into play even more.

+1....Some people hate MS without any particular reason saying that vista is crap and that Win7 will be worst...MS is a giant software/hardware company that tries to facilitate our lives...can't they face it?

CPU's are usually running at 1% capacity most of the time, this is a great way to put them to use, just like how superfetch makes use of memory when it's otherwise not being used. This will be great for improving aero performance on netbooks, and nettop PC's.

Why is everyone talking about WARP as it's meant to just run aero? You say MS got it wrong? Maybe you're missing the bigger picture? WARP is meant to take advantage of x86 CPUs better, sure the GPU should be running your games, and that's what it'll do, the fact WARP can even run Crysis at 7FPS just shows how good MSs code is, it's an example, not what it's meant for.

Setting a performance base for future versions is one thing, and this does that in one respect, but the main part is to better support future x86 CPUs. When Intel has it's larrabe chips out, which are nothing but lots of mini-x86s made to take just this sorta code and work with it, then WARP comes into play even more.

Taking advantage of x86 CPU that way, are you freaking kidding me? Intel's Larrabe is going to suck big time.

CPU's are usually running at 1% capacity most of the time, this is a great way to put them to use, just like how superfetch makes use of memory when it's otherwise not being used. This will be great for improving aero performance on netbooks, and nettop PC's.

Well, my laptop does not need this cause it has ATI X3000 video chip unlike others with crappy Intel Integrated Video Chip. Either way Aero can run using Video Cards such as Geforce 3, Radeon 8500, and even Integrated Intel Video Chip capable of running 1.1 Shader Model which is enough. As I said Microsoft does everything wrong. Maybe the best way Steve Jobs summarized it saying that what is actually 'sad' is that Microsoft writes 3rd grade Software and Operating System.

Why is everyone talking about WARP as it's meant to just run aero? You say MS got it wrong? Maybe you're missing the bigger picture? WARP is meant to take advantage of x86 CPUs better, sure the GPU should be running your games, and that's what it'll do, the fact WARP can even run Crysis at 7FPS just shows how good MSs code is, it's an example, not what it's meant for.

Setting a performance base for future versions is one thing, and this does that in one respect, but the main part is to better support future x86 CPUs. When Intel has it's larrabe chips out, which are nothing but lots of mini-x86s made to take just this sorta code and work with it, then WARP comes into play even more.

+1

Since 7 is an upgraded vista this is important. IF your notebook cant run Aero then the os will not let you run movie maker and other programs.

This sounds like microsoft being lazy and instead of fixing their programs they came up with a bandaid solution.

I thought WARP was intended to be used for Aero like the thread title says. Just because it will run a game doesn't mean that's what they intended it for. ;) And the Intel GPUs are fine as long as you don't want to play an intensive game. The 945s and 950s seem to run Aero just fine.

What's all this about running Crysis at 7fps on an i7? :blink:

Well, not exactly 7fps, but why does it work badly on an i7?

Back on topic, is it really necessary to put the CPU or even GPU to heavy use when it comes to Aero? I mean, you get the Aero theme when installing Vista during setup regardless of whether your PC can handle Aero or not.

That is just a tech demo. Either way, it's a relatively impressive feat, to use the CPU to give such a boost to graphics performance.

Everyone in this thread has got this wrong (unless I skipped over someone who explained it correctly already, in which case I appologise).

WARP's primary purpose is to allow application developers to build applications (not games) that run on DirectX 10, and only on DirectX 10, whether most people have capable hardware or not. Writing a DirectX application to target two platforms (Dx9, Dx10) is time consuming. By writing to one platform that can target everybody, a developer can save time and money. It is not designed to allow demanding 3D games to run without a dedicated 3D graphics processor, nor is it designed to allow Aero to be run on any system (although this may be a possible by-product of this tech). It is simply another tool that allows developers to target DirectX 10, even if hardware support is not available.

Everyone in this thread has got this wrong (unless I skipped over someone who explained it correctly already, in which case I appologise).

WARP's primary purpose is to allow application developers to build applications (not games) that run on DirectX 10, and only on DirectX 10, whether most people have capable hardware or not. Writing a DirectX application to target two platforms (Dx9, Dx10) is time consuming. By writing to one platform that can target everybody, a developer can save time and money. It is not designed to allow demanding 3D games to run without a dedicated 3D graphics processor, nor is it designed to allow Aero to be run on any system (although this may be a possible by-product of this tech). It is simply another tool that allows developers to target DirectX 10, even if hardware support is not available.

most logical thing i've read all thread

Everyone in this thread has got this wrong (unless I skipped over someone who explained it correctly already, in which case I appologise).

WARP's primary purpose is to allow application developers to build applications (not games) that run on DirectX 10, and only on DirectX 10, whether most people have capable hardware or not. Writing a DirectX application to target two platforms (Dx9, Dx10) is time consuming. By writing to one platform that can target everybody, a developer can save time and money. It is not designed to allow demanding 3D games to run without a dedicated 3D graphics processor, nor is it designed to allow Aero to be run on any system (although this may be a possible by-product of this tech). It is simply another tool that allows developers to target DirectX 10, even if hardware support is not available.

this is in direct responce to the vista debacle with the 915 chipset. I have an old 915 notebook that was vista capable. they didnt tell you that aero wouldnt run and half of the included apps would not work because aero wasnt caspable of running.

This makes windows 7 fully run on any pc . which goes back to my complaint. instead of fixing their apps to not require a gpu they built a sub system to fool the apps to run. Example on my acer which has an 915 chipset which movie maker works perfectly well on xp in vista on the same pc movie maker refuses top run because i cant run aero.

I feel this is microsoft just being lazy and trying to get out of legal trouble. that is all .

Everyone in this thread has got this wrong (unless I skipped over someone who explained it correctly already, in which case I appologise).

WARP's primary purpose is to allow application developers to build applications (not games) that run on DirectX 10, and only on DirectX 10, whether most people have capable hardware or not. Writing a DirectX application to target two platforms (Dx9, Dx10) is time consuming. By writing to one platform that can target everybody, a developer can save time and money. It is not designed to allow demanding 3D games to run without a dedicated 3D graphics processor, nor is it designed to allow Aero to be run on any system (although this may be a possible by-product of this tech). It is simply another tool that allows developers to target DirectX 10, even if hardware support is not available.

This was what I was trying to get at with my post, why I said it's a base for developers to target etc. But you pointed it out even better.

Cool technology and the potential applications and implications of it are going to be quite big I think. But, I do imagine there will be cries of complaint of people running Windows 7 on vastly underpowered computers with Aero turned on, complaining that the CPU usage is too high...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This sounds like underneath the nice marketing spin, either someone at Adobe got tired of their lazy devs and asked Microsoft to help them sort at least some of Adobe's ancestral spaghetti code to make it go faster, or Microsoft wanted Adobe's crap to run better on Windows to make it look better when compared to Apple, so they offered to intervene. Either way, GOOD.
    • My favorite file manager for Windows 11 finally gets a long-requested feature by Taras Buria Files is among the best File Explorer alternatives for Windows 10 and 11. This free app is packed with all sorts of features and conveniences, but there is one crucial feature that is still missing—Tree View. Fortunately, the latest update in the Preview channel finally delivers it. With version 4.1.4, which is now available for download in the Preview channel, developers implemented Tree View, a new mode that displays folders in an expandable hierarchy. Windows 11's stock File Explorer always had this feature, but it was nowhere to be found in Files until now. Starting with the latest preview update, you can expand each drive and its nested folders without leaving the current location and then open the folder you need in the main view. To try Tree View in Files, update the app to the latest preview version, then click the small arrow next to a drive to expand its content. The developers say they are rolling out Tree View in Preview first to gather feedback from users and improve the feature before bringing it to all in the stable channel. In addition to Tree View, Files 4.1.14 improves the Windows Fonts folder. You can now preview each font directly in Files with no need to open the built-in font viewer. For now, these two features are only available in the Preview channel. For those using the stable release, developers recently released version 4.1.3, with improvements for the built-in tag system, on-demand folder size calculation, and plenty of various fixes. You can check out the full release notes here. You can download Files from the Microsoft Store (paid version) or its official website (free).
    • Who is paying for this 30x scale-up? Its sounds expensive.
    • Millions of users to benefit from Windows 11's new performance boost on Adobe Photoshop by Sayan Sen Despite the advent of AI-generated imagery, Adobe's Photoshop remains one of the most popular tools on this planet. Adobe does not have a publicly reported total user count but it's probably not wrong to assume there are millions. As of 2025, Adobe Creative Cloud has had approximately 41 million paid subscribers, many of whom likely use Photoshop. In addition, more than 166,000 companies worldwide are apparently also using the app. These figures are according to a very recent report by SQ Magazine. Out of them, it is fair to assume that many are probably running Windows. As such, there is good news for these users as Microsoft has announced Photoshop is getting a big 20% performance boost on x86-64 (AMD64) systems and a 13% bump-up on Arm devices. This is definitely great news for them as many have complained about the slow performance and general sluggishness of Photoshop on Windows 11 ever since the advent of the latter back in 2021. If you are wondering how Microsoft managed to do this, the answer lies in a combination of compiler-level optimizations and a technology called Sample Profile Guided Optimization (SPGO). According to Microsoft, Adobe worked closely with the company’s Visual C++ team and adopted the latest MSVC toolchain enhancements together with SPGO to squeeze more performance out of Photoshop’s CPU-bound workloads. Unlike traditional Profile Guided Optimization (PGO), which requires developers to create special instrumented builds and run lengthy training workloads, SPGO gathers performance data directly from optimized release binaries. This means Adobe could collect real-world usage information which gives a major advantage to this technique, as companies could leverage data collected from actual customer workloads rather than only relying on synthetic benchmark runs. In theory, this should allow optimizations to better reflect how users interact with software in the real world. Thanks to this, there are improvements to code layout, function inlining, hot-and-cold code separation, and other low-level tweaks that help processors execute instructions more efficiently. Essentially the compiler is better able to identify “hot” code paths, those which are most frequently executed, and optimize them accordingly.
    • "The 2TB Samsung 990 PRO NVMe SSD hits lowest price in over three months¨ I'd prefer to see the lowest price in over a year
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      Jocimo earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      suprememobiles48 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Prasann earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Prasann earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      521
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      174
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      90
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      81
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!