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

    • The reviews you refer to mean nothing. Where there is no journalism there is no reason to call the gaming media's opinion pieces "reviews". For GP games there is indeed a metric for success - increasing subscriptions. Which turns in revenue. The only circumstance in which subs do not rise when great is being released is a Game Pass system where the company is close to fully saturated with customers in a subscription. However, in that case as the theory goes you spend aplenty in all kind of games - from shady live service cash cows and customer offending agitprop crap in purple colours to robust and entertaining single player games. And keep a solid level of profitability. Ignoring the simply innocuous but mid games MGS has released primarily of the second kind.
    • Report: Microsoft to use AWS to help GitHub deal with a major surge in demand by Pradeep Viswanathan Thanks to the surge of coding AI agents, GitHub's usage has skyrocketed over the past 12 months. To meet this demand, GitHub started with a plan in October 2025 to increase capacity by 10x. However, by early this year, the company realized that it needed 30x scale. This rapid growth has caused severe strain on the platform's reliability, resulting in several small outages over the past few months. In April, GitHub published a long blog post explaining the steps it is taking to resolve these reliability issues. In the post, the company also confirmed that it is working toward a multi-cloud architecture for better resilience. Today, Business Insider reported that GitHub is turning to Amazon Web Services to help deal with a major surge in AI-driven coding activity. It is important to note that GitHub is still in the process of moving completely to the Azure cloud. The current plan is to move the platform fully to Azure by 2027 so that it can scale better as per developer demand. Therefore, the current decision to utilize AWS might be part of a short-term plan to meet immediate demand. A Microsoft spokesperson confirmed that GitHub is using multiple cloud providers with the following statement: For Microsoft, the decision highlights the operational pressure behind the AI boom. GitHub has to stay reliable for developers at a time when rivals such as Codex, Cursor, Claude Code, and other AI coding tools are gaining attention. And the decision to use AWS for computing capacity seems practical given the circumstances.
    • It's growing on me, however, your right, it make better usability sense if the tabs were bellow the address bar.
    • Qwen 3.6 is better value per dollar, and you can run it locally for free.
    • I don't believe them that anyone using threads, at least meaningfully. It's the same thing for Facebook, people just don't engage with Meta platforms like they are thinking. This isn't 2006.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      Dys Topia earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Conversation Starter
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      Console General earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Twozo Technologies earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Twozo Technologies earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      517
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      106
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      88
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!