A new DX standard doesn't necessarily mean anything. Look at my FX5900XT. the FX series was the first to really support DX9, but it gets owned by more powerful DX8 cards in alot of games. Just because it suports the new pixel shader options and all that, doesn't mean it has the, for lack of a better term, "balls" to use them. Same with the X1600 from ATI today. Sure, it has SM 3.0, but it doesn't have the "balls" to play games with all the eye candy. So..what is the point of having the capability of eye candy, if a card doesn't have the power to.
Now, this isn't to say the G80 won't have the power. Just looking at the specs so far, they're definately going to rock. But, what about the midrange cards? When they cut the memory bandwidth, or the memory arrangement, or shader clocks to move the G80 into a different segment - how will it perform in DX10 intensive tasks? DX9 tasks? A 7950GT may end up performing better then the 8600GT does in DX9 tasks (It's a chance, we don't know for sure yet), and in DX10 tasks the 8800GT may not have the "balls" to even perform these properly and/or effectively.
To address the question of the move to DX10 in games: It's questionable. A large amounf of people see the movement to DX10 as taking alot of time. DX10 cards are going to be costly, both the cards adn the systems to use them (PSU, CPU, RAM). So, they may alienate a significant number of mainstreamers from playing/buying the game.
What I want to see? Games staying DX9 for the next year and a half, but for them to go back afterwards and offer a DX10 patch for the game to augment the game and let those early adopters really reap the benefits of the G80, or the R600 when it comes out. Or perhaps release an "expansion" which brings the game to DX10. That would be acceptable in my eyes.
