Can I run Far Cry in Shader Model 2.0b mode on my R9700PRO?

[SickBeast]

I just read the Xbit Labs article yesterday and I'm noticing pretty much an 18% gain across the board w/ SM2.0b for ATi hardware. Since the X800 cards are based on the R9700/9800 architecture, shouldn't it be possible to run these optimizations on a 9700PRO? They didn't benchmark the 9700 w/ SM2.0b enabled. I'm wondering if there is a way for me to try it seeing as DX9.0C is out now. I want to be able to somehow magically run at 1280x1024 on my LCD w/o losing out on the DX9 features.

 

[Falloutboy]

in theory you should because all the x800 is is a R300 based core with double the pipelines. the question is will it be enabled in the drivers

 

[GeneralGrievous]

I don't think SM2.0b is supported by R3xx hardware.

http://tech-report.com/etc/2004q2/nalasco/index.x?pg=3

 

[SickBeast]

Well, I'm not sure if this worked, but check this out:

TEXT

Look for "Fxc.exe"; it's about 15% of the way down the page.

Well with the release of the 222Mb SDK I was able to download it and get the file everyone has been looking for. Below is the fxc.exe file that people wanted for FarCry to enable SM3.0. make a backup of the fxc.exe file in your /Bin32 directory of your FarCry and replace it with this one.
fxc.exe - 956Kb - Application

I downloaded the file, installed the 1.1 patch, installed the fxc.exe file, and everything seems to run just fine. I'm running at 1280x1024 w/ 2XAA (4XTAA when I hit 60fps which is rare) and 8XAF (performance mode). My FPS has yet to drop below 30FPS, which is much better than my previous experiences with the game. I'm not sure if I'm running with SM2.0b, but the game does indeed seem faster than it was when I first played it which was a few months ago. I suppose it could be drivers.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
I don't think SM2.0b is supported by R3xx hardware.

http://tech-report.com/etc/2004q2/nalasco/index.x?pg=3

Based on your own link, the 9800 should support SM2.0b.

The main improvements in 2.b versus 2.0 are increased instruction counts. As I said, we increased it from 160 instructions in the 9800 which supports 2.0 to 1,536 instructions in 2.b.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

I looked at the first sentence which says that 2.b was created for the x800 cards, which leads me to believe its not a 9xxx spec. I'm not exactly sure what he means by his setence. Perhaps you can test it out and tell us.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
Perhaps you can test it out and tell us.

How do I benchmark the game? I don't mind doing it; I have both of the files I need (the new and the old "fxc.exe") so it's just a matter of running a benchmark script.

I wouldn't mind using whatever benchmarks Rollo used, just in case there's the chance my card slaps around his 6800NU (j/k).

A comparison with what Rollo did would probably be useful though.

 

[bpt8056]

AFAIK, the R3XX chips only supports 2.0. It is evidenced by the inability to run the X800 demos which requires 2.b. To run the X800 demos, you'll need a wrapper.

If the R3XX does support 2.b, then that would certainly be a neat surprise.

 

[SickBeast]

It's disappointing, I thought you guys would be all over this stuff.

Check this out

you will at least be able to use some, but not all of the features of SM 2.0b with the next Cat. driver release

I somehow get the impression that SM2.0b will work on all R300 and greater ATi cards.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Try this out. Though if the difference is that big you probably could just run around with fraps on and repeat.

It's disappointing, I thought you guys would be all over this stuff.

We all ditched out R3xx cards.

 

[SickBeast]

Actually it turns out SM2.0b will NOT work on anything but the R420 cards.

There will be a new feature called "Geometry Instancing" that will be enabled on the 9700/9800 in Catalyst 4.8 though. It's apparently part of the SM3.0 spec, ATi just decided to implement it early.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
We all ditched out R3xx cards.

Yeah I know, you guys seem to have more money than you know what to do with.

I'll get one of the next-gen cards once they hit close to the magic $200 level, even used, I don't care.

I refuse to invest that kind of money just to run a small handful of games. Besides, I have a feeling HL2 will run just fine for me on the 9700PRO.

 

[Megatomic]

I didn't ditch mine, as a matter of fact I waited for the R420/NV40 to hit the stores to buy my 9800 Pro. I got it for $165 and added an $12 VGA Silencer. Not a bad deal, eh?

I can't wait for the Geometry Instancing, from what I've seen it can add lots of real performance.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Megatomic
I can't wait for the Geometry Instancing, from what I've seen it can add lots of real performance.

Yeah it's just a shame that SM2.0b won't run on the R300 cards. Does anyone know the actual instruction limit for shaders on R300? I'm pretty sure it's higher than 96, the number specified in the DX9 spec. I have a feeling the R300 still has considerable power that they're not tapping into. Someone mentionned that R300 has an instruction limit of 512; is that true?

 

[flywhiteguy]

The R300's support SM 2.0.

Also, certain R300's support geometry instancing. However, I am not sure which ones support it. I imagine it would be the entire R300 line, but I am not sure.

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/radeon/r420.html

Pixel Shader 2.0

Nesting of texture selection, up to 4

Texture value selections, up to 32

Shader code length 32+64

Executed shader instructions 32+64

Interpolators 2+8

Temporary registers 12

Constant registers 32

 

[Marsumane]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Actually it turns out SM2.0b will NOT work on anything but the R420 cards.

There will be a new feature called "Geometry Instancing" that will be enabled on the 9700/9800 in Catalyst 4.8 though. It's apparently part of the SM3.0 spec, ATi just decided to implement it early.

Geometry instancing i thought was done on NV40 through loops (calculates it once, and then just places it as many times as needed in a loop) which the ATI cards cannot do. Maybe the ATI cards run it in a different manner? Anyone know anything more on this?

 

[rbV5]

We all ditched out R3xx cards.

Not me