ASUS' G35 series motherboards natively support DirectX 10

Integrated graphics sets that handle DirectX 10 like it's their job are a dime a dozen, but ASUS has nevertheless managed to find bragging rights in its G35 series of mobos. Hailed as the "world's first Intel platform" with onboard graphics capable of supporting DirectX 10 natively, the aforesaid motherboards won't require a separate GPU in order to handle the simplest of DX10 demands. Of course, we wouldn't expect the GMA X3500 to run circles around Crysis frame rate tests, but we suppose they'll do for the casual fans in attendance. Per usual, ASUS has left us high and dry in regard to pricing, but the trio of boards should be available as we speak.

[Via I4U News]

[Denver_80203 @ Apr 13th 2008 9:42PM]

Nice if it had DVI rather than VGA while they are at it.

[tom @ Apr 13th 2008 9:51PM]

It has HDMI so it is good, but still Intel's GPU is still weak in comparison to AMD..

That's something AMD can be proud of (for now) ^.^

[STNC @ Apr 13th 2008 10:48PM]

yeah...why is there no dvi?

[Zach @ Apr 13th 2008 10:56PM]

@ STNC

Theres a bundled adapter for you DVI users as well.

[Kamokazi @ Apr 13th 2008 11:38PM]

@ DVI question:

It's a micro-ATX board so space is a premium...VGA is still much more common than DVI (because quite frankly, there is little or no difference in picture quality unless there are interference issues, and few people are needing dual-link love for 2560x1600 res monitors). And like another commenter said, HDMI is availible and an adapter for DVI is included.

And for the person comparing this to AMD GPU's....that's just silly, as Intel's GMA line was never intended to compete with Radeon's and whatnot. (Unless you are talking about their integrated line like the 690g, etc, which may be true but who the hell bothers to benchmark integrated graphics? They're all just different colors of crap, IMHO).

[Kurian @ Apr 14th 2008 12:42AM]

A HDMI signal is fully compatible with DVI-D /w HDCP when simply connected with a physical HDMI->DVI adapter.

[computer.dude.28 @ Apr 14th 2008 8:37AM]

@ Kamokazi

My computer only has a Radion X1550 which has 1 DVI and 1 VGA. I have 2 screens, one hooked up to each. There is definately a difference. The colours on the VGA look a lot worse and I've tried to set it manually but you just can't match the perfection of a DVI (or HDMI) connection.

[Joe DeGooyer @ Apr 13th 2008 9:55PM]

The Asus P5E-VM HDMI has been out since last November so I don't think pricing is that much of a mystery.

[squeezee @ Apr 13th 2008 9:56PM]

I had to check the date, because these boards have been shipping for MONTHS.

The real news is that intel finally has a driver which implements DX10 support in the GMA X3500.

[nyoka @ Apr 13th 2008 11:44PM]

i'm also pretty sure next-gen G45 chipsets are coming soon...this is not too new

[Quadzilla @ Apr 13th 2008 10:05PM]

Yes you to can run crysis now at 1 frame per minute on your new computer.

[Aguiluz @ Apr 13th 2008 11:25PM]

No... It will run at 1FPH.

[Sam Zebian @ Apr 13th 2008 10:09PM]

Cool, but does it run Crysis??

[Zondajag @ Apr 13th 2008 10:13PM]

....the answer to that is no...it wont....

[JAmerican @ Apr 13th 2008 10:32PM]

Will you run and Cry like a Sissy when I hit you?

[crsh @ Apr 13th 2008 10:21PM]

I'm using one right now; it's a fine board, and it handles Windows Aero just fine. You can however forget about running any 3D game on it. Like, even a DX9 game from 2004. Why should it anyway, Intel never claimed it makes gaming-viable video cards.

[ace_spades @ Apr 13th 2008 11:04PM]

ummm... the GMA 950 (i think) in my laptop runs HL2 at a decent speed (gets pretty hot though)

[compuguy1088 @ Apr 14th 2008 12:16AM]

LOL. I've tried to play HL2 on a friends laptop with a x3100. It would barely run at any resolution (at extremely low settings). Intel integrated graphics can never beat discrete.

[Kurian @ Apr 14th 2008 12:51AM]

LOL. People who actually believe themselves saying that most games work fine with acceptable framerates using onboard graphics are pitiful fools.

Then we have people who buy GeForce 7300LEs instead of a 7300GT because the 7300GT is "too expensive". They are the biggest fools. I'm not talking about people who use a PC for basic work, these fools expect to play UT3 and Gears of War.

[David G. @ Apr 14th 2008 1:20AM]

@ Kurian I wholeheartedly agree. I have a 2.4Ghz MacBook (x3100) and when I boot into Windows on it and play Space Cadet Pinball I still get dropped frames every now and then. :( It's depressing considering how long that game's been around and how new my MacBook is.

[Kurian @ Apr 14th 2008 2:15AM]

Its probably full of crapware. I've customized my XP setup disc and removed every trace of unnecessary bullshit, including deleting half the services from Windows itself so they wont even be installed. On a clean install, this Windows will boot before you realize that the brief flash on the screen was the loading screen.

As far as games go, I don't believe in playing games on "medium" or on any other sub-par setting. I only play with everything maxed out, 4x AA, 16x AF, all optimizations turned off. If it doesn't work, I wont play it.

When I had a 6600GT, NFS:MW lagged at max settings, so I didn't even bother to play it at all until 1 year later when I got a 7800GTX 512. For the next 2 years I could play every game maxed out with 4xAA 16xAF on HQ.

I still have a 7800GTX 512 and now new games which use HDR dont allow me to use AA due to hardware limitations, but I max out everything else and games like UT3 work smoothly (50-60fps) maxed out. I played through Crysis at 15fps with everything on Very High, it looked PATHETIC on lowered settings.

I'm going to bother upgrading my PC till there is a card that can run Crysis maxed out with 4xAA and 16xAF.
Because, what the hell is the point in buying something that cant even run CURRENT games maxed out?! It should atleast perform like the 7800GTX 512 which ran everything maxed out for 2 years after its release.

[Kurian @ Apr 14th 2008 2:17AM]

I mean "I'm NOT going to bother upgrading"..

[gt-racer @ Apr 14th 2008 8:23AM]

@Kurian Tri-Sli my friend. 8800gtx or ultra

[Kurian @ Apr 14th 2008 9:48AM]

Tri-Sli will NOT run Crysis at 4x AA. Or any combination of existing hardware for that matter...

[shawnmos @ Apr 13th 2008 11:07PM]

This looks like a good motherboard to use in a HTPC.

[iofthestorm @ Apr 14th 2008 12:51AM]

Personally, I think the AMD 780G chipset or nVidia's equivalent would be the best chipsets for HTPC, their IGPs can actually use that DX10 support to some extent.

[Taomyn @ Apr 14th 2008 4:46AM]

That's exactly what I did when I bought mine last December - no mystery on price, though I can't recall what I paid for it.

It's superb for an HTPC and I watch all kinds of 1080p content on it and it hasn't skipped a beat. I'm even running Vista x64.

I don't dare ruin the experience by trying to run any modern games on it though ;-)

[Andrew @ Apr 13th 2008 11:10PM]

@crsh

but doesn't the article hint that it could run games decently?

'but we suppose they'll do for the casual fans'


maybe i'm misreading something :(

[crsh @ Apr 13th 2008 11:18PM]

I think there's a massive difference between what Asus says and what Intel makes their chipsets for; the X3500 is DX10 *capable*, it has no trouble with low-end stuff like Aero (low-end compared to a game), but it's no video card replacement for gaming.

Having tested mine with a couple of games, Sim2 from 2005 didn't do well at all (min/stock resolution and eye candy), Eve Online (a 2003 game, didn't use their vamped-up graphics from last year) is sluggish at best with most of the stuff turned down, etc. I didn't expect it to do well, in fact it did about what I expected it to do, but Asus' claim is just whacked.

[Ubuntu 7.10 WindowsXP @ Apr 13th 2008 11:20PM]

Congrads Nvidia for being late on Intergrated GPU solutions that have DX10. Why is that the only thing that article brags about. I want to hear some testing numbers and full capabilities.

That article was like that guy that says, "I have a new computer" right after you describe the new components in your rig in detail.

IT TELLS ME NOTHING.

[IsLNdbOi @ Apr 13th 2008 11:43PM]

Why this article now? Asus' G35 boards have been out for months...

[link12245 @ Apr 13th 2008 11:48PM]

Price:
104.99 - NEWEGG.COM

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121336

[Abuzar @ Apr 14th 2008 12:31AM]

Ahh yes that makes sense! The article is about an Asus motherboard and you link us to a Intel motherboard.

[Cide @ Apr 13th 2008 11:59PM]

Has anyone had any success getting drivers working for the X3500 on a hackintosh?

[ethana2 @ Apr 14th 2008 1:04AM]

*sigh*
More trouble than it's worth.
...but way to stick it to the man, I guess.

[Cide @ Apr 15th 2008 8:32AM]

You're right. What was I thinking? I'll just go buy a $2500 for the privilege of running OS X.

[me @ Apr 14th 2008 12:34AM]

all on board graphic chipset r not ment for gaming in any fashion

as some 1 who builds and repairs computer this is a very common myth some 1 by a low end dell

then in almost every case when it won't run there kidds game they bring to me and say the same dame thing but its brand new it should be able to do it then after an hour of telling what system specs mean and that 400 dollar doesn't them spec

i always here the same thing thats bull shit that when they leave call dell come back week latter and ask what they need to do get to do what they want

on board graphic r ment for people who who r not doing any gaming just office work or just a regular computer work surfing the net watching movie

the new dx 10 on boards r just meant for media so u able to watch high def movies on them that about it and for 90% of the people this will do just fine the only people who really need an added graphic card r people who doing r doing graphic type work a k a games maybe editing high def pic if u do graphic design work and maybe editing movies but most people will find that dx 10 enable on broad is just fine

[thethirdmoose @ Apr 14th 2008 1:16AM]

So they let 10-year olds run around with keyboards these days, eh?

[Toink @ Apr 14th 2008 12:46AM]

This one sells for around US$130.00 in my country.

[dBs @ Apr 14th 2008 12:46AM]

"Of course, we wouldn't expect ANY card to run circles around Crysis frame rate tests"

Fixed for free.

[mopo @ Apr 14th 2008 2:18AM]

i lol'd

[strang @ Apr 14th 2008 1:08AM]

Right now AMD is king when it comes to IGP. 780G blows everything else out of the water, especially if you add in the Hybrid CrossfireX support. So even when you add a discrete card, the IGP is not wasted.

[jmd @ Apr 14th 2008 5:11AM]

bad engadget. no biscuit! Putting another stinky intel graphic chip on the front page as if it was something special. I wouldn't run wow with this thing. ^^

[SimonRichards @ Apr 14th 2008 6:24AM]

Engadget, what the heck are you doing?! This board has been available for months, I could buy it RIGHT NOW for around £60 from at least two UK based online retailers. The Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H has AMD's 780G, and outperforms this board. And its about £5 cheaper than this.

[gwynethh @ Apr 14th 2008 8:43AM]

For a bit I thought this was about G45 chipset boards which are due soon and are anticipated except (via Anandtech)

"Our sources have told us that the Intel G45 is suffering growing pains. The current revision is locked at a 667MHz GPU core speed and the VC1/H.264 decoder capabilities are turned off. A new revision will be available in July with the 800MHz GPU core speed and VC1/H.264 decoder capabilities turned on. In essence, the first chipsets (if they are available) will be nothing more than a G35+. We will update this information as we receive additional information."

Oh well.

[Tony @ Apr 14th 2008 11:50AM]

It's a foregone conclusion that onboard graphics don't cut it for gaming, on the other game developers have gone overboard when it comes to the Eye Candy. Even decent Graphics cards(in the Nvidia 7900 range ect) struggled to play Crysis effectively, where will it stop.

[jmd @ Apr 14th 2008 12:00PM]

tony, shame on you, there is never to much eye candy.