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

    • Seems to be working fine for me.
    • Latest Rufus update improves new Windows 11 install method by Taras Buria Pete Batard, the maker of Rufus, a very popular app for creating bootable Windows (and other OS) media, has released a new beta version of its app. Rufus 4.15 beta is now out, and while it offers no new features, there are all sorts of improvements and fixes, including for the new Windows 11 installation method that was introduced in version 4.14 in early May. The "Silent Windows 11 installation" is a new feature whose goal is to automate operating system installation. All you have to do is boot from the drive, and then Rufus takes over, doing all things for you, such as setting up a new account, skipping ads and prompts, and more. It is a very handy tool, but initially, it had some bugs and issues that required addressing. With version 4.15 beta, Rufus is fixing that, particularly a bug with installation failing at 75%, crashes on Snapdragon X-based PCs, and more. Here is the changelog: Rufus 4.15 beta is now available for download from its GitHub repository. If you have never used Rufus before, you can check out our guide here. It is a very useful utility to have, as it allows you to deal with plenty of Windows 11's annoyances, which are still there, despite Microsoft's ongoing efforts to fix them.
    • Microsoft fixes one of Excel Copilot's most frustrating limitations by Usama Jawad Microsoft began integrating Copilot into Excel a couple of years ago and has been upgrading it with new functionalities since then. While some changes have been controversial, Microsoft is hoping to win over users by allowing them to be more productive via Copilot. To that end, it has now announced a Copilot improvement that may actually be appreciated by people who use it regularly. Excel customers often use the Copilot prompt box to issue instructions to format and customize their data, but it can become quite tiring to keep repeating the same instructions again and again. Microsoft now allows you to define Copilot personalization rules for formatting, naming conventions, formulas, and report styles. These can be accessed via Settings > Personalization, where you can explain your rules in natural language like "Always format currency in USD with no decimals", and just let Copilot take care of the rest. Microsoft is going a step further in this direction by allowing you to set workbook rules too. These rules are stored as a .Rules sheet, and are preserved while the workbook is shared. This fosters collaboration while making sure that standard rules govern the Copilot editing experience across the organization. Other advantages of this capability include pointing it to specific examples, defining dynamic formulas, and referencing an entire sheet and asking Copilot to infer rules based on that. You can leverage this feature by opening Copilot in Excel, clicking on "+", and selecting Create workbook rules. If you have an existing .Rules sheet, you can simply start listing the rules in column A as well. Personalization features are available to all Copilot in Excel users across the web, Mac, and Windows. Meanwhile, workbook rules are currently being previewed for Windows and Mac customers on the Insiders channel. General availability is scheduled after a few weeks, but a concrete date is currently unknown. Overall, the Excel capability is quite similar to ChatGPT's memory features, which allow you to permanently store items in the AI model's context window.
    • Imagine you still haven't discovered Total Commander that is doing all those things for three decades already...
    • 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.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Vincian earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • 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
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      509
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      172
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      90
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      77
    5. 5
      neufuse
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!