NV40 = 12,535 3DMark03 ?

[rgreen83]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15169

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: rgreen83
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15169

At what resolution, 640x480!

 

[rgreen83]

I was just thinking that their driver downloads are going to get a lot bigger if they have to include all of 3dmark in their code

 

[rgreen83]

"Perhaps we should all now be expecting briefings by Nvidia's competitors that 3DMark03 isn't now a valid indicator of 3D graphics performance?"

That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard, show me a hardware site that even uses 3DMark03 or, without a disclaimer to it invalidness, in its reviews.

We all know people dont play 3dmark, we just paid for it so we can watch and have it pull random numbers out of its arse, and hell it isnt even good at that.

 

[ronnn]

I am expecting 14,000 minimum after all the hype about more than twice as fast as current cards. Besides that it would take numbers at least that high to have me considering spending the type of money they will be asking. Besides were there any artefacts as suggested by the last inquirer story? The inquirer seems to have covered their bases, so no matter what happens they will be right or wrong depending on which story you quote.

 

[rgreen83]

Originally posted by: ronnn
The inquirer seems to have covered their bases, so no matter what happens they will be right or wrong depending on which story you quote.

This seems to be their common practice.

 

[Corporate Thug]

"In back rooms at the CeBIT Messe, we heard talk of 3DMark03 scores of "over 10,000 3DMarks" for both ATI's R420 and Nvidia's NV40 but, for various reasons, we weren't particularly confident in our source. However, in light of today's news, we'll mention that that same source said that the ATI R420 was somewhat slower, though "not by much".

 

[BenSkywalker]

I would expect both nV and ATi to be in the 11-13K region with their upcoming parts, not that it's worth anything though. Show me FarCry maxed out 1600x1200 @100FPS and we're talking

 

[BugsBunny1078]

hehe my monitor doesnt even go that high. 1024x768 is the standard for gaming nowadays. Thats all that matter to me as any smaller makes objects to small to shoot. Which by the way my montior only gets 85 fps at 1024x768 so if the card will do 85 fps steady with AA on and eax 3 on and I never lose a frame I am happy.

 

[Todd33]

"hats all that matter to me as any smaller makes objects to small to shoot."

That's not how resolutions work

 

[BugsBunny1078]

have you ever tried upping your resolution.it makes all objects ont he screen smaller. Including writing and player models. that is how it works in 3d games.

 

[jasonja]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
have you ever tried upping your resolution.it makes all objects ont he screen smaller. Including writing and player models. that is how it works in 3d games.

Um..no it doesn't. The 3D objects are the same size, they are just represented by more pixels making them look clearer and more detailed. Think of it like a printer, if you have a low budget 300dpi laser it still prints out a page of text the same size as a 1200dpi printer.. but the print on the 1200dpi printer looks much better since more dots are used to make the text. The only thing that may get smaller at higher resolutions is the text in menus or 2D sprites in the HUD

 

[Todd33]

No. Text may be a fixed size, but 3D objects do not get smaller. Are you saying that a person playing at 1600x1200 has a smaller target in an online shooter than a person playing at 640x480? That's crazy, everyone would play in low res then. You need to do a bit more homework in 3D rendering.

 

[BugsBunny1078]

Yes youre right I hadnt tried it in awhile. It used to be that the objects just got smaller and more was displayed on screen. I always viewed this as a problem. WIth the newer cards or drivers it doesnt seem to be the case now,. nice!
I dont have to do a bit more homework iive been gaming for over 20 years! Maybe I dont keep up with all the changes but what I stated was a fact 3 years ago!

 

[Keysplayr]

I love this line:

"Perhaps we should all now be expecting briefings by Nvidia's competitors
that 3DMark03 isn't now a valid indicator of 3D graphics performance?"

Oh I full well expect this.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: rgreen83
"Perhaps we should all now be expecting briefings by Nvidia's competitors that 3DMark03 isn't now a valid indicator of 3D graphics performance?"

That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard, show me a hardware site that even uses 3DMark03 or, without a disclaimer to it invalidness, in its reviews.

We all know people dont play 3dmark, we just paid for it so we can watch and have it pull random numbers out of its arse, and hell it isnt even good at that.

Looks like he was right RGREEN. You are the first one I've seen so far to attempt to discredit 3dmark after this announcement. Even thought the announcement itself may well be BS.

 

[jasonja]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
Yes youre right I hadnt tried it in awhile. It used to be that the objects just got smaller and more was displayed on screen. I always viewed this as a problem. WIth the newer cards or drivers it doesnt seem to be the case now,. nice!
I dont have to do a bit more homework iive been gaming for over 20 years! Maybe I dont keep up with all the changes but what I stated was a fact 3 years ago!

This was only EVER the case in 2D games... perhaps you only played 2D games 3 years ago, but 3 years ago, 3D games still rendered objects the same size in any resolution.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: jasonja

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
have you ever tried upping your resolution.it makes all objects ont he screen smaller. Including writing and player models. that is how it works in 3d games.

Um..no it doesn't. The 3D objects are the same size, they are just represented by more pixels making them look clearer and more detailed. Think of it like a printer, if you have a low budget 300dpi laser it still prints out a page of text the same size as a 1200dpi printer.. but the print on the 1200dpi printer looks much better since more dots are used to make the text. The only thing that may get smaller at higher resolutions is the text in menus or 2D sprites in the HUD

So, your telling us that a 3D game model (for example) rendered at 640x480 wont look enourmous compared to the same model rendered at 1024x768?
Image quality aside, In order for the model to "look" the same size, you would need a huge monitor to make the model appear the same size at 1024x768 or higher resolutions. Its the same amount of pixels being rendered, just in a smaller area, hence the heightened detail. This is why things get smaller as resolutions get higher. Unless you change your monitor every time you change resolutions.

 

[BugsBunny1078]

Well you see the confusion here is that there are some older games that do make everything seem smaller as the resolution gets higher and some newer games that seem to offset this.
Try it in tfc go from 640x480 to 1280x1028 and you will see a big difference. Objects get smaller and fit more of them on the screen as res goes up. Now try it in COD and everything stays the same size no matter how high the res.
I didn't realize that COD behaved like this and I mostly played TFC 3 years ago.
It is still exactly the same todaya nd you can easily go verify it for yourself. Lower res = bigger items.
I know planetside is a year old and it behaves this way also. The higher the res the more stuff you can see on your screen and the smaller each item is.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
Well you see the confusion here is that there are some older games that do make everything seem smaller as the resolution gets higher and some newer games that seem to offset this.
Try it in tfc go from 640x480 to 1280x1028 and you will see a big difference. Objects get smaller and fit more of them on the screen as res goes up. Now try it in COD and everything stays the same size no matter how high the res.
I didn't realize that COD behaved like this and I mostly played TFC 3 years ago.
It is still exactly the same todaya nd you can easily go verify it for yourself. Lower res = bigger items.

Ahhh, ok. I never tried this with COD. Will try it tonight. That is a great game btw.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Fvck 3DMock, as stated above show me how it holds up in FarCry then we'll oooooo ahhhhhh ohhhhhh BTW, anyone else noticed that in the last week or 2 as the rumors on nv40 performance have continued to be touted as the real deal that suddenly there are more anti-ATi posts popping up here? Amazing how the same goobers who have lambasted nV for the last 18 months suddenly flip flop when it looks like nV may regain the title

Fickle fanbois suck

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
Well you see the confusion here is that there are some older games that do make everything seem smaller as the resolution gets higher and some newer games that seem to offset this.
Try it in tfc go from 640x480 to 1280x1028 and you will see a big difference. Objects get smaller and fit more of them on the screen as res goes up. Now try it in COD and everything stays the same size no matter how high the res.
I didn't realize that COD behaved like this and I mostly played TFC 3 years ago.
It is still exactly the same todaya nd you can easily go verify it for yourself. Lower res = bigger items.
I know planetside is a year old and it behaves this way also. The higher the res the more stuff you can see on your screen and the smaller each item is.

I'll give this a shot later with TFC for HL (been a *WHILE* since I played that one), but I just don't believe you. I'll even take some screenshots; I've been trying for a while to figure out how to get my Comcast web space working, and this seems like a good excuse.

The only things that ever have gotten bigger or smaller at different resolutions are 2D sprites with fixed sizes (like some HUD menus, and some things things like weapon models, although those are usually provided in multiple sizes so that you don't have this problem). Certain elements of the game may change sizes, but the architecture and player models do not.

 

[BugsBunny1078]

Well I cant duplicate it on my own pc anymore just by looking at the world.THere is a slight difference in that any resolution above 640 is having about 5% more viewable space but thats all.. I am looking looking but it just doesnt do it. I know thats how it was though!
Newer drivers or whatever =) Or I was wrong . Its never happened before though. I thought I was wrong once but I was wrong!

 

[Genx87]

One game where this happened was the Original Tribes.

When i slapped it upto 1600X1200 it was hard to see the guys because they were so small so I kept it at 640X480 so I could pwn people.

 

[BugsBunny1078]

yeh I believe you! I just think maybe the drivers have corrected this issue for my now state of the art video card or the games have updated.Right now I cant tell the difference between resolutions. Except I can put it at 800x600 to get it so my monitor will do 100 hz and then turn on anti aliasing to make it look good and it looks the same as 1024x768 except it runs faster, edit ah screw that I tried 1024 with 2x aa and it looks so awesome I cant go back!