DirectX 11.1 won’t come to Windows 7

When Microsoft released DirectX 11 as part of Windows 7, it back-ported the API to the previous version of the OS. That may not happen with DirectX 11.1, though. Windows 8 and Windows RT both ship with the latest iteration of the API, but according to Microsoft developer Daniel Moth, “at this point there is no plan for DirectX 11.1 to be made available on Windows 7.” Neowin prodded Microsoft for comment, and the firm had “nothing further to share,” which at least confirms Moth’s assertion.

The list of Direct3D 11.1 features available on Microsoft’s site doesn’t include anything that really catches our eye as a must-have feature for gamers. We’ve been told that DirectX 11.1 will have native support for stereoscopic 3D implementations, which should make life easier for developers who would otherwise have to write separate code for Nvidia’s 3D Vision and AMD’s HD3D schemes. However, stereo 3D doesn’t appear to be catching on with gamers despite being supported by numerous DirectX 11 titles.

DirectX 11.1 does have a few interesting tricks up its sleeve, of course. It boasts better support for graphics virtualization and has the ability to apply shader-based filters to video streams. There are provisions to conserve power, too, but nothing looks compelling enough to drive Windows 7 users into the arms of the Modern UI.

Of course, if DirectX 11.1 isn’t coming to Windows 7, future revisions of the API probably won’t support the OS, either. We haven’t heard a peep about DirectX 12, though. It could be a while before the next major release.

Comments closed
    • jonjonjon
    • 7 years ago

    so lame. ms must know that no one wants to use that disaster of an os. so now they are going to try to figure out ways of forcing people to upgrade. to bad most games dont even fully implement dx11 never mind 11.1. and a lot of games are just dx9 console ports with a couple dx11 features.

    • deb0
    • 7 years ago

    Now that Win8 is out, Microsoft is dead set on pulling the rug out from all Win7 users. Nice move Microsoft.

    • sweatshopking
    • 7 years ago

    UPDATE: YES IT WILL
    [url<]http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-gives-in-adds-some-directx-111-features-to-windows-7[/url<]

    • chrissodey
    • 7 years ago

    I wish the developement community will start to focus on creating good efficient engines for OpenGL. I know OpenGL has shot itself in the foot many times throughout the years, but now is the time to cut the string with Microsoft. I’m not really worried about DX11.1 since a lot of good games are still shipping initially coded in DX9. It is the mentaility that I don’t care much for.

    • Arclight
    • 7 years ago

    I’m pretty sure that DX 11.1 won’t be that significant seeing how developers suck up to consoles these days. Rather than a few fancy new eye candy how about some fun games for once with complete PC options?

    • marvelous
    • 7 years ago

    This sucks

    • Krogoth
    • 7 years ago

    I call BS on this one.

    Windows 8 is based the same codebase as 7/Vista. Window 8 device drivers already work perfectly under 7/Vista. There’s no technical reason that prevents DX 11.1 from working. In the worse case, it will child’s play to get it working with 7/Vista. Microsoft will not be liable for any software issues or support DX 11.1 under 7/Vista. It will be at user’s own risk.

    Again, Windows 8’s primary target has never been the tradition desktop market. They are after the current mainstream market who could care less about “PC gaming”. Microsoft wants this group to go towards their gaming consoles. Microsoft’s lackluster approach with its crappy XBL-clone, “Games for Windows” makes it painful obvious.

    Microsoft 8’s primary goal? Micro-transactions via the app store.

    • Bensam123
    • 7 years ago

    Darn no 11.1 for W7, whatever will I do. MS is really shooting themselves in the foot by not offering the latest version of DX on all OS’s too, not to mention hurting the gaming market by creating artificial segmentation. This in itself is a reason for developers to embrace OGL, although hasn’t been a highlight since MS doesn’t release a new OS all that often… That may change though based on MS’s new strategy, we may see more and more DX segmentation. Traditionally it was a entirely DX revision between OS’s… now just .1?

    3D for gamers is retarded. 3D in general is retarded. I wont buy into it till I can get images directly beamed into my brain through a neuro link. It just doesn’t work out. The negatives of the experience far outweigh the cheesy benefits of having images ‘pop’ at you.

    Surround gaming on the other hand I could see a LOT of potential in. If AMD can work things out with developers so you don’t run into those few quirk issues like perspective stretching on each side monitor it would be great. All of the issues could simply be worked out if they communicated. Like there are no real big hurdles for it.

    Of course LCDs made without bezzles around the edges wouldn’t hurt too. I wonder why they don’t make those. Simply cover the edges with a rubber coating or something to make it seem smooth, continuous, and sturdy so it takes a few bangs. Bezzles are entirely pointless and are more of a fashion statement then anything. I’d personally rather have a free floating screen then having it outlined by a frame.

    • ludi
    • 7 years ago

    Lessee now: I bought the $40 Pro Upgrade for my HTPC, which was built from the bones of my old desktop and was running Win7. After observing how well the GUI simplification in Win8 handles older and slower hardware, I’m about to upgrade my laptop as well.

    Meanwhile, I play all my games on my desktop, and that’s staying with Win 7 from now until, as a rough estimate, the heat death of the universe.

    Hence, irony.

      • Meadows
      • 7 years ago

      Your rough estimate is conspicuous.

    • Cyco-Dude
    • 7 years ago

    yay for microsoft trying to artificially kill windows 7 in favor of their newer “products”. they sure aren’t doing themselves any favors…first no service packs, now no updated directx. oh well, maybe windows 9 will actually be worth getting (not holding breath).

    • Welch
    • 7 years ago

    Count me in as being apart of the Linux crowd by the time Windows 7 has outlived its use. Assuming of course that Linux manages to hold itself together and is viable at that time.

      • oldog
      • 7 years ago

      I too have been apart of the Linux crowd.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 7 years ago

      So you’ll be using OS X (or whatever OS Apple has at the time)?

      • designerfx
      • 7 years ago

      I’m really hoping steam will help overcome this in a significant fashion. Gaming is the only thing holding me back from being in a 100% linux environment for literally thousands of people that I know/game with who have said the same.

      • danny e.
      • 7 years ago

      there is a difference between “a part” and “apart” and it’s an important difference.

    • Anarchist
    • 7 years ago

    hopefully the game makers will get the message and start to port their stuff to linux, apple, android, etc.

    • cynan
    • 7 years ago

    If there was a legitimate reason why newer DirectX APIs couldn’t be easily ported to Windows 7, that’s one thing. But as far as I know, there is no such discrepancy between Windows 7 and Windows 8.

    You may not be able to polish a turd, but I suppose you can try to strong-arm loyal customers into buying one by threatening to cripple their future computing experience if they don’t pony up.

      • LostCat
      • 7 years ago

      Maybe WDDM 1.2 and DXGI 1.2 have something to do with it.

      And while we’re at it, the fact that the DWM can’t be turned off in 8 also probably has something to do with it.

    • jokinin
    • 7 years ago

    Windows NT 4.0 : 6 SP
    Windows 2000 : 4 SP
    Windows XP : 3 SP
    Windows Vista : 2 SP
    Windows 7 : 1 SP

    So I think i can see a trend here!

      • Meadows
      • 7 years ago

      Interesting.

      • gmskking
      • 7 years ago

      I see a trend of failure…

      • Welch
      • 7 years ago

      In that list you should also show how many versions of DirectX updates each OS got… coincidences with the SP pretty closely I bet 😉

        • jokinin
        • 7 years ago

        Good point. After doing some research (correct me if i’m wrong) :

        Windows 98 : Shipped with DirectX 5.2, can install DX 8.1
        Windows 2000 : DX 7.0 -> DX 9.0c
        Windows XP : DX 8.1 -> 9.0c
        Windows Vista : DX 10.0 -> DX 11
        Windows 7 : DX 11
        Windows 8 : DX 11.1

          • ludi
          • 7 years ago

          I think I see an S-curve.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          Did DX11 get backported to Vista?

            • Ryu Connor
            • 7 years ago

            Yes.

            [url<]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista_Platform_Update#Platform_Update[/url<]

          • l33t-g4m3r
          • 7 years ago

          Not quite. 98 and ME [i<]can[/i<] install dx9. Don't know if the installer is still available, but I have a copy.

            • Ryu Connor
            • 7 years ago

            Microsoft continues to provide the old editions of the DirectX installer. Including those that would add DirectX to Windows 9x.

      • Geistbar
      • 7 years ago

      Now compare the MS-code induced security, reliability, and feature-completeness of each OS at release. Each successive OS was more stable and prepared for the world in which it was deployed than the one before it; the need for each of the successive OS’ to have service packs has gone down. All this trend tells you is that Windows 7 is more secure and prepared for the real world than Vista is.

        • no51
        • 7 years ago

        You have to forgive these guys, they think “Service Pack” means “Feature Pack”.

      • Krogoth
      • 7 years ago

      Microsoft wants to copy Apple’s OS selling model. The days of “free” service packs are over. They just reduce the MSRP of their OS licenses and sell each “service pack” as a new OS.

      Windows 8 is the beginning of this.

      Expect Windows 8 SP1 be labeled as “Windows 9” for the same $40/$90 per seat and have some excuse on why the new features will not work with Windows 8.

      Steven Sinofsky, President of Windows division is trying to be second coming of Steve Jobs. I’m not kidding either.

        • designerfx
        • 7 years ago

        he just quit/forced to resign/etc, so umm…no?

          • lilbuddhaman
          • 7 years ago

          to later come back and save the company !

        • l33t-g4m3r
        • 7 years ago

        You know how a lot of guys wait for the first SP before purchasing? LOL, BAD Win8 sales.

    • bjm
    • 7 years ago

    This would only matter if there was a demand for DirectX 11.1. There isn’t, so it doesn’t matter.

    • Kaleid
    • 7 years ago

    That’s OK, I won’t go to windows 8 either.

    • albundy
    • 7 years ago

    hahahahah, i knew it! it’s the only way MS can peddle winblows! without DX, you might as well install OSX!

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 7 years ago

      Unfortunately true.

      • willyolio
      • 7 years ago

      …you know that directX [b<]11.1[/b<] means it's the first revision of the eleventh DirectX, right? the previous versions don't stop existing.

        • albundy
        • 7 years ago

        it has nothing to do with that. it has everything to do with getting everyone off the win7 bandwagon. i am sure many non gamers and businesses still use win xp!

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 7 years ago

    All this does is limit the prevalence of game developers using DX 11.1 to minimal as most developers would prefer to target the far more pervasive Windows 7 market that includes most of what Windows 8’s DX 11.1 has.

      • LostCat
      • 7 years ago

      You can target D3D10, 10.1, 11, and 11.1 with the same engine ya know?

      Tons of devs are doing that now with at least 10 and 11.

    • MadManOriginal
    • 7 years ago

    Microsoft does something, nerd rage ensues. More at 11!

      • Celess
      • 7 years ago

      Doesnt deserve the downvotes. Its like watching the retarded kids at the park break into a fight over a banana.

        • cynan
        • 7 years ago

        Perhaps you should be on the lookout for a (new) hobby? Watching kids at the park, regardless of their mental or developmental (dis)abilities never seems to go over all that well in most communities for some reason…

          • Sam125
          • 7 years ago

          Hey, maybe he thinks making fun of “nerds” who’re more than likely better educated, wealthier and happier than him is still “cool”. =P

          Some people.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            Or maybe I have a sense of humor about life. You should try it.

            • Sam125
            • 7 years ago

            Are you a hipster? Because you’re certainly being ironic. 😉

            • cynan
            • 7 years ago

            In case any of that was directed at me, for the record, I have no problem with anyone poking fun at nerds. Your comment was entertaining.

            Needlessly roping in developmentally disabled children to make fun of nerds on a public forum such as this is another matter… (at least in my opinion).

            And now back to our regularly scheduled programming…

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            It was not directed at you at all. I read TR too and would include myself in the ‘nerd’ category, I just don’t care in this particular case because DX 11.1 versus DX 11 means very little, if anything at all. The post was purely a joke when everyone else was being so serious.

        • ludi
        • 7 years ago

        But it was MY banana.

      • moshpit
      • 7 years ago

      ROFLMAO!

    • Chrispy_
    • 7 years ago

    Thanks to current generation consoles the vast bulk of titles are still DX9.

    Why would developers restrict themselves to DX11.1 when even DX11 isn’t really a very large market segment?

      • LostCat
      • 7 years ago

      There are five DX10/11 only major releases between October 23 and November 23 covering most major publishers.

    • Ryhadar
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]DirectX 11.1 won't come to Windows 7[/quote<] Ryhadar won't come to Windows 8

      • Meadows
      • 7 years ago

      Don’t say radar when trying to sneeze.

    • TurtlePerson2
    • 7 years ago

    This may be a sign that Windows 8 isn’t getting the sort of adoption that Microsoft had hoped for. I can get it legally for free (engineering student) and I see no reason to pick it up.

    Microsoft tried something similar with Vista and DX10, but I don’t think that really worked too well. Game developers adopted DX10 features slowly. There are still games today that don’t use DX10. Since DX11.1 doesn’t really have any interesting features like DX10 did, I don’t expect that anyone will use it unless they’re being paid by Microsoft to do so.

      • Meadows
      • 7 years ago

      First two sentences are exactly my thoughts.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      Really worked too well?!?! How many vista and 7 licenses have they sold?

        • Meadows
        • 7 years ago

        Ask them and 8 out of 10 people will say DirectX had nothing to do with their decision.

          • TurtlePerson2
          • 7 years ago

          I don’t think 2/10 people even know what DirectX is, but I think your point is correct. DirectX 11.1 support is a feature that only a very select group of people will know about.

      • Geistbar
      • 7 years ago

      I don’t think the slow adoption of DX10/11 really indicates much of anything for this.

      DX10 was adopted slowly because all of the big budget games are made for consoles first, PC second. The feature set of console hardware is (more or less) DX9. Everyone who did implement DX10 essentially did so as a gimmick instead of as a fundamental part of the technology for the engine.

      • bcronce
      • 7 years ago

      “This may be a sign that Windows 8 isn’t getting the sort of adoption that Microsoft had hoped for.”

      4mil copies in 3 days during opening. Best selling OS in MS history so far… hmmmm…

        • Squeazle
        • 7 years ago

        Meaningless. As long as more and more people have computers, the size will continue to increase.

        Same thing with biggest financial bailout ever. As long as there continue to be more money pumped into the system, of course it’s going to be bigger.

        Unless there is a big change to either (removing stability from microsoft or adding it to the economy) we will continue to see these numbers and gawp ad infinitum.

      • Malphas
      • 7 years ago

      “This may be a sign that Windows 8 isn’t getting the sort of adoption that Microsoft had hoped for.”

      Aha, way way way too early for that kind of analysis. Come back in eighteen months. Odds are that Windows 8 adoption rates will be the same as every previous version of Windows; the vast majority of Windows licenses are sold with new PC’s, and most people generally don’t know or care what version it comes with.

      Everyone praying that Windows 8 is a disaster and Microsoft changes their ways should read this for a wake up call. [url<]http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-is-the-new-xp-7000006095/[/url<]

        • Welch
        • 7 years ago

        I didn’t read the article you posted (putting that out there). But the title alone is premature just as you said Turtles analysis is way to early. Windows 8 is the new XP…… Come the hell on, that’s all sorts of jumping the gun.

        Yea, the fact is Microsoft and the OEMs who make systems with the OS suddenly cut overnight the ability to buy a new system with Windows 7 on it and instead force you into purchasing Windows 8. My beef with it is that Windows 7 isn’t an old OS, nor is it anywhere near its end of life. To me and the rest of the normal world, an OS should make it as long as the hardware you purchased it on. Which means 5-6 years. That is acceptable. A lot of people unfortunately think that Windows 7 should last as long as XP did. I’ve got no grand illusions that any OS is going to live that long, it was a freak of nature. But to cut the cord on Windows 7 shortly after 3 years of its release….. Sure the official “Support” for it is still active until January 2015… but if they are already opting out of software updates, that’s the same thing as partially ending support.

        I hope some large corporations that banked on Windows 7 as being the horse they bet on sue the all living shit out of M$ for bait and switch. More software updates exclusive to Win 8 that could be in Win 7 to come, just watch.

      • MFergus
      • 7 years ago

      It’s not like Microsoft just decided this now. As with directx10 on vista, I dont think they ever once said it was coming to the previous OS and changed their mind so I don’t see how you can say that how well W8 is selling is the main reason for not bringing it to W7.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]I can get it legally for free (engineering student) [/quote<] Which school?

    • Dposcorp
    • 7 years ago

    Now how will BerserkBen enjoy all his DosBox games they way they are meant to be played?

    • Sam125
    • 7 years ago

    Isn’t this a tactic MS has been using for the past few generations of OS’? No DX 11 and IE 9 for Windows XP and now no IE 10. Considering that people and corporations are [i<]still[/i<] happily using XP without official MS support I think I'll be fine with just security updates on Windows 7 for quite a while sans DX 11.1.

      • Ryhadar
      • 7 years ago

      I thought IE 10 [i<]was[/i<] coming to Windows 7. Maybe I missed something?

        • sweatshopking
        • 7 years ago

        It is. You can grab the preview tomorrow
        [url<]http://www.neowin.net/news/ie10-for-windows-7-arriving-tomorrow[/url<]

        • Sam125
        • 7 years ago

        It is, but not to XP and apparently Vista.

        Again, withholding software updates is just a tactic to “encourage” users to upgrade.

          • Ryhadar
          • 7 years ago

          Oh sorry, I think I misread your comment. My fault.

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          download one of the great many alternatives? maybe the reason MS doesn’t back port the code is that it’s more work than it’s worth? how many vista users are likely to download ie10? i don’t imagine that many

            • Sam125
            • 7 years ago

            I don’t use IE.

            Consider what you’ve written and what I’ve written. Laziness plus a desire to have users upgrade would mean no updates to older OS’. It’s not like an internet browser or directX is so specialized an application that it requires a new OS. Not providing upgrades to older OS’ is more than likely a business decision and nothing more.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            If you have it working on Win7, how much work could it really take to make it work on Vista?

            I’m guessing like 1 hour, 2 max from one guy.

      • My Johnson
      • 7 years ago

      I thought DX10 was dependent on the OS’ driver model and that’s why it could not be installed on earlier OS’.

        • Sam125
        • 7 years ago

        Wasn’t directX 10 the jump from XP to Vista? Consider what you’re saying though. Do you think Microsoft’s engineers [i<]couldn't[/i<] offer it to XP or that they didn't want to to "encourage" users to upgrade? Which is a more plausible reason? Anyway, I really don't want to debate this so I'm done here. lol

          • Geistbar
          • 7 years ago

          Nothing is ported for free. If MS didn’t see cost as a limitation, they could probably port DX11 to DOS. DX10 was written around a significantly altered technological stack for graphics — a stack which was not present in XP. They could have ported it, but it would have taken a significant amount of work to make it stable; it very likely would have ended up with MS having two code bases for DX10. The complications, time, and organizational complexity it would require weren’t worth it, especially since XP was about as old then as Vista is now.

            • Sam125
            • 7 years ago

            Does directX 11 and 11.1 use a different graphical stack? I know you’re intelligent enough to know this but there are a lot of users lurking TR now who just try to stir up trouble. 😉

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            You were talking about DX10 and XP, not DX11 vs 11.1 and Win7.

            Maybe you’re the one trying to stir up trouble by shifting the topic, eh?

            • Sam125
            • 7 years ago

            No, some random TR user was. Not me. 😉

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            So when you said:
            [quote<]Wasn't directX 10 the jump from XP to Vista?[/quote<] You weren't talking about DX10 or XP? I'm rather skeptical of your claim.

    • tanker27
    • 7 years ago

    Whats? is this Vista and Halo2 port all over again? WTF!

      • TurtlePerson2
      • 7 years ago

      I played Halo 2 in 2010 using a 4830 GPU and a 9550 quad-core processor and it still chugged in some sections. I would like to nominate Halo 2 for the worst console port of all time. A game that ran fine on 2001 XBox hardware couldn’t run well on 2010 PC hardware.

        • Chrispy_
        • 7 years ago

        Totally this.

        I waited for a PC port of Halo2 and it was so badly done and late that I’ve since dumped, ignored and never bothered playing another Halo game. This is probably a shame (but I wouldn’t know).

        • travbrad
        • 7 years ago

        That’s pretty pathetic considering even emulators for Xbox/PS2 run pretty smooth on modern PCs.

        When your console port runs worse than an emulator created by some random hackers in their spare time, something is very wrong.

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 7 years ago

      lol. Halo2 was hacked to work on XP. Microsoft lied about the requirements, which were completely artificial.

    • Omniman
    • 7 years ago

    It’s very sad how Microsoft will dump Windows 7 so easily…no more Service Packs and no overhauls to direct x 🙁

      • UberGerbil
      • 7 years ago

      Service packs are just roll-ups of patches; losing them may be inconvenient for folks installing from scratch (more downloads vs fewer) but it’s really not a meaningful loss in the sense of making the product less-supported than it was. The days of service packs delivering features (like XP SP2) have been long gone for some time.

        • no51
        • 7 years ago

        Vanilla XP was a piece of crap.

          • MadManOriginal
          • 7 years ago

          Yeah, using it could be quite the rocky road.

          • Kaleid
          • 7 years ago

          Nope. Easily better than anything before it.

          • rrr
          • 7 years ago

          Yeah, chocolate XP was better. Strawberry one too.

    • wingless
    • 7 years ago

    Oh darn…

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This