G80 not SM4 Compliant?

[hardwareking]

i'm pretty sure nvidia knows what it's doing.
And i hope they put in some features that are missing from the current line-up like HDR+AA and HQ AF(or somethin of the sort).
ATI's HQ AF is what decimates nvidia in imgae quality.AA wise the quality is similar but nvidias takes a bigger hit.
And just to confirm.
As of now G80 will be dx10 compatable,even without the unified shaders and stuff.
And it's meant to topple the x1900 xt/xtx.After that r580+,rv570 and rv50 come out as an answer from ati.After that maybe price wars.
the future of the consumers(u and me) is gonna be awesome.

 

[Sonikku]

Originally posted by: guoziming

Originally posted by: Sonikku

Originally posted by: obeseotron
SM4 will probably be a moot point for a while, but it doesn't mean it will be irrelevant for the entire life of the card. When I bought this 6800GT SM3 was a joke, but now two years later every new game seems to have SM3 only features. If you keep the card for two years, I'm sure there will be stuff to take advantage of SM4 in 2008.

Just how many people on the video board, reading these topics, are going to keep a video card for 2 years? Sheesh, the performance of the amazing 7800GTX 9 months ago has lost over half it's original $600 value compared to what you can now get in the form of a $230 X1800XT. And even if they did, just how well is a two year old card going to perform with Shader 4 activated? This is a big fat marketing joke. A 6600GT had Shader 3. It doesn't mean it's going to be seeing much use with Shader 3 use, less you want a nice shader intensive clip show.

I had a $60 budget card (MX420) for two and a half years.

And are you satisfied with the Shader 3 performance in modern games?

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Sonikku

Originally posted by: obeseotron
SM4 will probably be a moot point for a while, but it doesn't mean it will be irrelevant for the entire life of the card. When I bought this 6800GT SM3 was a joke, but now two years later every new game seems to have SM3 only features. If you keep the card for two years, I'm sure there will be stuff to take advantage of SM4 in 2008.

Just how many people on the video board, reading these topics, are going to keep a video card for 2 years? Sheesh, the performance of the amazing 7800GTX 9 months ago has lost over half it's original $600 value compared to what you can now get in the form of a $230 X1800XT. And even if they did, just how well is a two year old card going to perform with Shader 4 activated? This is a big fat marketing joke. A 6600GT had Shader 3. It doesn't mean it's going to be seeing much use with Shader 3 use, less you want a nice shader intensive clip show.

That pretty much sums up what I thought about SM3 2 years ago, and I doubt this time it will turn out any different for first gen SM-anything HW.

 

[Dribble]

/me looks at his 1 2/3 year old 6800GT and tells himself off severely for daring to use it's SM3 and HDR in games.

 

[magomago]

I used to think SM3 would be something worth talking about, because it was allegedly easy to integrate into games and we would see it come fast....well that didn't happen so I don't tsee why SM4 would be any different.
Then again I "upgraded" to a ti4200 about 9 months ago

 

[imported_Crusader]

Originally posted by: akugami
Even if true, what does it matter? I mean, even if Vista gets widespread support and sells zillions of copies, it will still take time before developers really dig into and fully utilize the new features properly. It'll be years before SM4 matters. Most current games will be developed for DX9 and use SM3.

Best post ^
Who cares about DX10. Vista is delayed more and more. DX10 games will be even farther behind Vista.
Great DX10 engines (id, Valve, Epic) will be even further back than the techdemo DX10 games that are released first after Vistas release.

Looking at ~2009 till DX10 is what DX9 is today.
This is ASSUMING Vista sells a zillion copies like akugami said.

DX9 is where its at and will be for a long time to come, even longer than usual due to Vista delays.
We dont even have UnrealEngine 3.0 yet.

DX10 is, and will be in the category of technologies for forum-goers to spank off to constantly talking about. But in the reality of the gaming world is a long ways off.

 

[russki]

the article says it wont have unified shaders... not that it wont be sm4.0... read closer!

 

[Bull Dog]

That linked article has been edited from its original form.

 

[5150Joker]

Has anyone here used Vista yet? I tried beta 2 and it's a piece of crap. Major resource hog and the UI is cluttered, no thanks! Vista needs at least 1.5 year before it can be anywhere near where XP is today. I wish MS would just release DX10 for XP.

 

[v8envy]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Has anyone here used Vista yet? I tried beta 2 and it's a piece of crap. Major resource hog and the UI is cluttered, no thanks! Vista needs at least 1.5 year before it can be anywhere near where XP is today. I wish MS would just release DX10 for XP.

Um. That's the whole point. If you want the whizbang new eye candy made possible by DX10, you'll put up with the mountain of crap that is Vista. This is not a technology driven product, it's a marketing driven product.

6 years in development, and the feature set is not significantly larger than the win2k/xp feature set. So what if borgites re-wrote most of userland in .net? I don't give a rat's ass if it's written in Perl. I care about features, stability, and speed.

Borg is leaking talented developers left and right. They're being sucked up by google and startups. All they got left is marketing & sales. Expect more of the same in the near future -- bundling and annoying 'you can only X if you Y' for the sake of squeezing revenue out of the customer.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: obeseotron
I understood that they were maintaining seperate shaders at the hardware level while still being able to process DX10's unified software shaders, but wouldn't not being SM4 compliant mean that it couldn't do all DX10 effects, regardless of how they choose to implement the hardware?

Driver can probably take care of most of this. Being Unified doesnt mean you cant be DX10 compatible.

That is a hardware decision outside the scope of the API.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: v8envy

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Has anyone here used Vista yet? I tried beta 2 and it's a piece of crap. Major resource hog and the UI is cluttered, no thanks! Vista needs at least 1.5 year before it can be anywhere near where XP is today. I wish MS would just release DX10 for XP.

Um. That's the whole point. If you want the whizbang new eye candy made possible by DX10, you'll put up with the mountain of crap that is Vista. This is not a technology driven product, it's a marketing driven product.

6 years in development, and the feature set is not significantly larger than the win2k/xp feature set. So what if borgites re-wrote most of userland in .net? I don't give a rat's ass if it's written in Perl. I care about features, stability, and speed.

Borg is leaking talented developers left and right. They're being sucked up by google and startups. All they got left is marketing & sales. Expect more of the same in the near future -- bundling and annoying 'you can only X if you Y' for the sake of squeezing revenue out of the customer.

Not sure I agree with this... Borg, I am sure, pays its top programmers huge ammounts of money. I could be wrong, but I am certain that MS probably still has some of the best programmers. You can trash XP, Vista etc... But who else can make an OS that feature rich while supporting a ridiculous ammount diverse hardware? I mean, no the OS isn't perfect. But maybe if they only had to program for a certain hardware set, it would be. But the fact remains is that Linux/Mac has a teeny userbase. Linux has poor driver support, steep learing curve. Mac OS only, until recently, supported it's small hardware lineup... Blah blah blah... Yes, Vista is not ready, but that does not mean that Vista is terrible product. It means that anything that complex and on a scale that large takes time to complete and work the bugs out.

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: v8envy

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Has anyone here used Vista yet? I tried beta 2 and it's a piece of crap. Major resource hog and the UI is cluttered, no thanks! Vista needs at least 1.5 year before it can be anywhere near where XP is today. I wish MS would just release DX10 for XP.

Um. That's the whole point. If you want the whizbang new eye candy made possible by DX10, you'll put up with the mountain of crap that is Vista. This is not a technology driven product, it's a marketing driven product.

6 years in development, and the feature set is not significantly larger than the win2k/xp feature set. So what if borgites re-wrote most of userland in .net? I don't give a rat's ass if it's written in Perl. I care about features, stability, and speed.

Borg is leaking talented developers left and right. They're being sucked up by google and startups. All they got left is marketing & sales. Expect more of the same in the near future -- bundling and annoying 'you can only X if you Y' for the sake of squeezing revenue out of the customer.

Not sure I agree with this... Borg, I am sure, pays its top programmers huge ammounts of money. I could be wrong, but I am certain that MS probably still has some of the best programmers. You can trash XP, Vista etc... But who else can make an OS that feature rich while supporting a ridiculous ammount diverse hardware? I mean, no the OS isn't perfect. But maybe if they only had to program for a certain hardware set, it would be. But the fact remains is that Linux/Mac has a teeny userbase. Linux has poor driver support, steep learing curve. Mac OS only, until recently, supported it's small hardware lineup... Blah blah blah... Yes, Vista is not ready, but that does not mean that Vista is terrible product. It means that anything that complex and on a scale that large takes time to complete and work the bugs out.

Funny really, gamers complaining about microsoft.

I mean they could always go and game on linux boxes or Macs.

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Has anyone here used Vista yet? I tried beta 2 and it's a piece of crap. Major resource hog and the UI is cluttered, no thanks! Vista needs at least 1.5 year before it can be anywhere near where XP is today. I wish MS would just release DX10 for XP.

You do know you can turn almost all the eye candy off in vista dont you?

And MS will not be releasing DX10 for XP.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

OH NOHZZZZZZ Who has an X800, X800XL, X850, etc? Are you crying yet about SM2.0?

No.

God. Watch the ATI fans now jump out and slice NV fanboys about not having SM4. This will be crazy. If SM2/SM3 wasn't taht big of a deal, nor will this.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: DLeRium
OH NOHZZZZZZ Who has an X800, X800XL, X850, etc? Are you crying yet about SM2.0?

No.

God. Watch the ATI fans now jump out and slice NV fanboys about not having SM4. This will be crazy. If SM2/SM3 wasn't taht big of a deal, nor will this.

Well, I still think people who argue about single features suffer from not understanding the bigger picture.

If image quality and speed are there, I could care less what means a GPU does to get its work done. I am not sure why people are married to products, features and companies. I suppose people need something to put their self esteem in, I just wish people would wake up and find their self worth in themselves, not in what feature to pimp out in a video card. I think many people are co-dependent on this forum board, co-dependent on their hardware... Sad, but true.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Has anyone here used Vista yet? I tried beta 2 and it's a piece of crap. Major resource hog and the UI is cluttered, no thanks! Vista needs at least 1.5 year before it can be anywhere near where XP is today. I wish MS would just release DX10 for XP.

When you're trying to install Beta 2, and it asks for a cd key which one do you put in?? I downloaded the 32-bit ISO off the Microsoft Vista website so I don't have a cd key.

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Has anyone here used Vista yet? I tried beta 2 and it's a piece of crap. Major resource hog and the UI is cluttered, no thanks! Vista needs at least 1.5 year before it can be anywhere near where XP is today. I wish MS would just release DX10 for XP.

When you're trying to install Beta 2, and it asks for a cd key which one do you put in?? I downloaded the 32-bit ISO off the Microsoft Vista website so I don't have a cd key.

Why did you download the 32-bit? I thought Vista's 64-bit wasn't going to have all of the compatiblitiy issues that XP 64 bit had, and your processor would benefit from it.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Has anyone here used Vista yet? I tried beta 2 and it's a piece of crap. Major resource hog and the UI is cluttered, no thanks! Vista needs at least 1.5 year before it can be anywhere near where XP is today. I wish MS would just release DX10 for XP.

When you're trying to install Beta 2, and it asks for a cd key which one do you put in?? I downloaded the 32-bit ISO off the Microsoft Vista website so I don't have a cd key.

Why did you download the 32-bit? I thought Vista's 64-bit wasn't going to have all of the compatiblitiy issues that XP 64 bit had, and your processor would benefit from it.

Well, I'm not running it on this comp...I don't wanna screw my XP install up.

But you have any idea about the cd-key??

 

[obeseotron]

Originally posted by: Sonikku

Originally posted by: guoziming

Originally posted by: Sonikku

Originally posted by: obeseotron
SM4 will probably be a moot point for a while, but it doesn't mean it will be irrelevant for the entire life of the card. When I bought this 6800GT SM3 was a joke, but now two years later every new game seems to have SM3 only features. If you keep the card for two years, I'm sure there will be stuff to take advantage of SM4 in 2008.

Just how many people on the video board, reading these topics, are going to keep a video card for 2 years? Sheesh, the performance of the amazing 7800GTX 9 months ago has lost over half it's original $600 value compared to what you can now get in the form of a $230 X1800XT. And even if they did, just how well is a two year old card going to perform with Shader 4 activated? This is a big fat marketing joke. A 6600GT had Shader 3. It doesn't mean it's going to be seeing much use with Shader 3 use, less you want a nice shader intensive clip show.

I had a $60 budget card (MX420) for two and a half years.

And are you satisfied with the Shader 3 performance in modern games?

First off, not everyone on the forum upgrades every 9 months, $400 for a new video card isn't always in the cards for a college student with new york city rent such as myself.

As for SM3 on the 6800, has it been a huge deal? No, not really. Have I been pleased to be able to turn on extra features in splinter cell, aoe3, oblivion and a few others? Yes, I have. A 6800GT (overclocked to above ultra speeds, for what it's worth) is obviously outdated and not fast enough to crank up everything in these new SM3 games. But it is fast enough to enjoy them with at least some of those features enabled.