• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

GeForceFX Benchmarks

S

Shagga

Diamond Member
Saw these benchmarks posted over at UK Gamer. Dunno how legit they are but Doom 3 at 1280 x 1024 High Quality at just under 50fps kind of worries me. Not sure if these were based on the Leaked Alpha Demo or what really as I've just looked at the benchmarks.

I hope it gets better, or I might just find that purchasing an NV30 may not be the right idea at this early stage. I think I'm going to wait to see what is available from ATI, nVidia, Matrox (Cough) and Bitboys (Muhahaha!!) nearer the release date.

Think I may just sit the initial release out if these Benchmarks are anything to go by. :frown:

[edit]

Just noticed these were conducted on a P4 3.0GHz, 512MB RAM and WinXP.
 
dude the code for the DOOM III was hardly if at all optimized to run efficiently, LET ALONE run on a f**king NV30 (GFFX)...


by the time we see either an official demo release or the gold version of the game, JC will have done a lil' tweaking here and there, and not only will we see an enormous difference when running an NV30 chip as compared against other cards, but also the framerate may be a little higher.


but expecting a higher framerate with the NV30 probably isnt something we should except. After all, Mr Carmack DOES want to cap the fps around 30 or so. Thats film-speed, thats all you need. To be able to keep 30fps, while havin tons of baddies on the screen, while running at 1280x 1024, while in high quality mode, is some achievement for any card!

but maybe the fps-cap will be a little more lenient on the NV30, just so the card can use its little extra horsepower and flex is muscle, providing us with maybe around 70-80 fps @ release time.



good times. Cant wait for DOOM, cant wait for GEFORCE FX...

its gonna be a crazy gaming revolution!
 
I would think that 50fps is pretty durn playable at THAT resolution. I believe the doom test ran at 640, right? And even at that, it chugged at around 5-30fps. I can't imagine what doom 3 would run at 1024x768 (my usual gaming resolution).
 
Originally posted by: MatthewF01
dude the code for the DOOM III was hardly if at all optimized to run efficiently, LET ALONE run on a f**king NV30 (GFFX)...
Click to expand...

I am aware of that and can only hope its true. I wonder why anyone, including nVidia as I presume these benchmarks were from them would use Doom3 as a benchmark tool! But having said that, it's superficial I suppose. As for the release of Doom3, possibly the next big thing for me, apart from the birth of our first baby next july that is. 🙂



 
Originally posted by: Shagga
Originally posted by: MatthewF01
dude the code for the DOOM III was hardly if at all optimized to run efficiently, LET ALONE run on a f**king NV30 (GFFX)...
Click to expand...

I am aware of that and can only hope its true. I wonder why anyone, including nVidia as I presume these benchmarks were from them would use Doom3 as a benchmark tool! But having said that, it's superficial I suppose. As for the release of Doom3, possibly the next big thing for me, apart from the birth of our first baby next july that is. 🙂
Click to expand...

Doom3 is at LEAST 6 months away, and probably closer to a year. Worry when it comes out not 6 months before it does. Find the best card to play the games you play NOW not that you want to play in the future.
 
yes i find it VERY odd that anyone would use DOOM III as any sort of benchmark of GPU performance.

but if they ran D3 at 1280x1024, think about the sheer power of this card! I cant run it at 800x600 without the pc takin a s**t when more than 2 monsters are on the screen!

think of the resolutions we could run TODAYs software at! (ie SOF II, UT2K3...)

and actually I believe that iD Soft. ran the Doom III presentation at E3 at 800x600, medium quality, on the 9700 and a P4 2.53 or so....


what a load of crap.... intel and ati... heheheh 🙂

<--AMD and Nvidia whore..
 
Originally posted by: Czar
while we are on the subject.. how do I change the resolution in doom3?
Click to expand...

r_mode x

where x is an integer.

5 = 1024x768 resolution
4 = 800x600

you get the idea.
 
You can't change the resolution in the alpha, at least I am not aware that you can. Maybe someone has a fix...
 
errrr.... yes you can.


are you one of those people who dont realize that the menus are non-functional, and you need to perform ALL functions through console?

hell you can even do crazy stuff like turn off dynamic real-time lighting, bump-mapping, adjust gamma and brightness, all that crazy stuff.

and yes, the above is the res change command
 
Originally posted by: MatthewF01



but expecting a higher framerate with the NV30 probably isnt something we should except. After all, Mr Carmack DOES want to cap the fps around 30 or so. Thats film-speed, thats all you need.
Click to expand...

Uh, what the HECK are you talking about?? First off, WHY on earth would he want to cap the FPS at ANY rate? Except possibly to avoid overly exceeding monitors' refresh rates and that's pushing it. Second, 30FPS is NOT all you need (yes, I'm aware that I used to argue that it was, but I've "seen the light" as it were). The difference between 30FPS and 60FPS is HUGE. You really can't compare framerates on TV and movies with framerates on computer monitors. For one thing, the way TV and movies are recorded, there's a slight "blurring" effect on each frame from the camera's "shutter speed". For another, TVs are interlaced, meaning that half the scanlines are refreshed (alternating every othe scan line) then the other half, giving the impression of more frames. On the other hand, video games don't have any "shutter speed" so each frame is nice and crisp, and monitors aren't interlaced.
 
Over 100fps in UT2k3 at 1280x1024 with 4xAA and 8xAniso:Q:Q! That sounds pretty darn good to me!

Kramer
 
Btw, comparing the benchmarks in the above link with the benchmarks from Anandtech's review I've got a quick comparison between the 9700 Pro and the gFFX at UT2003 Asbestos 1280x1024, 4xAA, Aniso was also enabled*:

Radeon 9700 Pro: 71.6
geForce FX: 108

A few notes:

1) These benchmarks are not directly comparable due to the fact that they were run on different systems, likely with different components and CPU.
2) They both include the Ti460
3) Anand used 16xAniso for the Radeon 9700 and only 4x Aniso for the Ti4600. NVIDIA used 8x Aniso for both the Ti4600 and the gFFX.
4) Anand's Ti4600 using 4xAniso got 37.1 FPS, while NVIDIA's got 39FPS despite the higher Aniso filtering.
5) The discrepency between the two Ti4600s indicates that either A) NVIDIA used a MUCH faster CPU than Anand did (Anand used a 2.53GHz P4 indicating NVIDIA may be using an overclocked sytem), B) NVIDIA overclocked the Ti4600, which would be odd since they're trying to highlight the gFFX's speed over the Ti4600, or C) NVIDIA used more highly optimized drivers. My guess would be a combination of A and C.


The raw #s (108FPS vs. 76.1 FPS) would seem to indicate a nearly 50% advantage for the gFFX. However, taking into account the differences in aniso quality and the discrepency between the Ti4600 scores, I'm guessing the real advantage would be closer to 30%. Of course, this is only a very rough comparison. It does show that NVIDIA has made some serious headway in terms of AA and Aniso performance.
 
Excuse me Crazy saint, but I think he was meaning something like minimum framerate, or average framrate. Not max. Cap means limit. And in that statment, I think he meant on the low end of the limit, not the max. As in don't go below X framerate. And that's entirely reasonable to desire 30FPS minimum in a shooter of that type.

But I think that Doom3 will need a 9700 pro to be enjoyable, and a Geforce3 Ti500/Radeon8500 to be playable, with a Geforce3 being the border line. Carmack made statments about Geforce2GTS's getting 15FPS average or something in the final build, if I remember correctly. That's pretty sad. It looks like my tired old Radeon8500 pro (The darn thing cost me 300$, so i'm not about to retire it, yet.) will have to retire from the gaming scene by 2004. So will my Williamette 1.7. As a constantly broke teen, i'm tired of how gaming card's go obselete so fast. I can barley save up enough cash in a year to do a stop-gap PC upgrade and that's what i've been doing for the past 3 or 4 years or so. >.< And now recently I have to start paying taxes and crap.. I hope someone will have a value card around Radeon9700 pro level at the release of DoomIII.
 
thanks FishTankX, i guess i was a bit unclear on that.



crazysaint why dont you look at JC's .plan messages in regards to the technical aspects of DOOM III
 
Originally posted by: MatthewF01
After all, Mr Carmack DOES want to cap the fps around 30 or so. Thats film-speed, thats all you need.
Click to expand...
NITPICK WARNING: Actually, full-motion NTSC video is 30 fps, "film" is 24 fps, animated features are 18 fps (before the days of using computers to help with the animation, that is), and serial/commercial animations are usually 12 fps or lower.

In fact, that's one way they fake a film-like appearance, by recording a video image at the lower frame rate. (TechTV does it in some of their Screen Savers commercials) 😛

Sorry to digress, please continue. 😉
 
i'm tired of how gaming card's go obselete so fast. I can barley save up enough cash in a year to do a stop-gap PC upgrade and that's what i've been doing for the past 3 or 4 years
Click to expand...
Stop your whinning... if they didn't go obsolete then that would mean games were not advancing and we'd be stuck playing crap with Quake2/3 engine for years and years... If that was the case, then you would just complain about that! 😉

I don't mind my $300 video card going obsolete. Yea, I'm still running my $300 GF2GTS card. It still plays games just fine, and I don't have a real need to upgrade, not until D3 comes out.

I'm very excited to see the advance in game technology! And look forward to getting a new vid card to play it (along with new mobo+DDR+XP3000+CPU prolly).

People that bitch and whin about hardware getting outdated need to stop and think... Do you want software to stop advancing? That IS what is outdating your hardware... if you don't want your hardware outdated, don't buy up-to-date software.

nuff said. 😎
 
Whitedog whenever new hardware is released the computer world gets less boring. I am not saying the computer world is boring at all because its not. There is always sometime new to learn and will neve end! Plus just like you are saying if we had no new hardware released then it would be a pretty boring. New stuff being released so fast making it hard to keep up and a lot more fun! This just makes all of us keep wanting more. If we had nothing to upgrade to or want then we would be bored.

 
Guys, please dont stick to closely to my comments on the 30fps being film-rate. i understand that there are different film speeds used for different media applications, and im just giving a rough figure, and im talking about cinematic film anyway (or at least John is 🙂)

but thanks for that info, interesting figures 🙂


and you know, its quite funny. Developers have barely tapped the Geforce 4 Ti's array of functionalities... look at all that crazy stuff 3DMark runs. The nature scene for example. Utter beauty and graphical orgasmic amazement. Where have we seen stuff like this?

I think that Unreal Tournament 2003 is really the first game thats really well-utilizing the technology of the Geforce 4, besides just the higher clock frequencies. Obviously when we compare performance of the NV30 using games like Quake 3, we are just seeing how well that GPU/memory clock can blow by the Q3 childsplay at a very rapid rate...

Im most excited to get Geforce FX really for running Doom III. The alpha is AMAZING, ive been awaiting Carmack's next masterpiece since Quake III (game sucked, technology was alright), and Quake IV on the Doom III engine will be spectacular! If developers are still dinking around twiddling thumbs figuring out the GF4, then anything more amazing that utilizes GFFX tech will be a long ways off..
 
Originally posted by: MatthewF01
thanks FishTankX, i guess i was a bit unclear on that.



crazysaint why dont you look at JC's .plan messages in regards to the technical aspects of DOOM III
Click to expand...

Please, show me a link where JC says he wants to give DOOMII an UPPER LIMIT of 30FPS. If its true, then he has truly lost his mind, or else he has a radical new way of graphics rendering that doesn't need high framerates..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top