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

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!