-
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.
PS/VS 3.0: Who Cares?
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
meson2000
Senior member
Yeah, I would also be interested in how you came up with the Doom3 OpenGL being equivalent to DX7...
I remember that Carmack was hyping the Geforce3 line of GPUs because they finally released a video card
that had programable shaders. Carmack was going to use them extensively in Doom3, that is why he recommened
not playing the game on anything less than a Geforce3 because prior to that, graphics cards didn't have programable
shaders. That all came right along with DX8. I would say that Doom3 is more of an equivalent to DX8 rather
than DX7.
I remember that Carmack was hyping the Geforce3 line of GPUs because they finally released a video card
that had programable shaders. Carmack was going to use them extensively in Doom3, that is why he recommened
not playing the game on anything less than a Geforce3 because prior to that, graphics cards didn't have programable
shaders. That all came right along with DX8. I would say that Doom3 is more of an equivalent to DX8 rather
than DX7.
MercenaryForHire
Lifer
Gee this is a surprise. Rumors flying R420 wont support PS 3.0 and VS 3.0 and now nobody cares about having the greatest features?
From what I gather PS 3.0 from a programmers pov is much more elegant than PS 2.0
It would be interesting to see if PS 3.0 actually gets accepted over PS 2.0
From what I gather PS 3.0 from a programmers pov is much more elegant than PS 2.0
It would be interesting to see if PS 3.0 actually gets accepted over PS 2.0
Yeah we wouldn't want the technology to keep getting better, that would really suxorz.
Rollo, that sarcasm is at odds with post above it, which also happens to be yours. You say ATi's extra speed and features are worthless, then complain about companies holding back improved tech. Where was nV's improved AA? Why did they reduce AF quality (from their previous gen)? Considering your total disregard for DX9, what are we left to judge the tech of current cards on--their cooling solutions and clock speeds? 😛
And how exactly are you determining this "OpenGL = DX#"?
M4H, Carmack has said repeatedly that D3 is based on the original GF's feature set, and the original GF is DX7. So he's using OGL to approximate DX7-level tech, although he obviously uses newer tech with newer cards (NV2x, R200, NV3x, ARB2 paths).
While D3 is GF-tech, the GF3 is probably the slowest card you'll want to use to actually *play* the game.
Gee this is a surprise. Rumors flying R420 wont support PS 3.0 and VS 3.0 and now nobody cares about having the greatest features?
Should we care if the NV40 supports PS/VS3.0 as "well" as the NV30 supported PS/VS2.0+?
I'd be more than impressed if nV came out with a PS/VS3.0 part that was about as fast as ATi's purported PS2.0+/VS3.0 part. Given Dany LePage's enthusiasm for 3.0 shaders, it'd be hard to believe ATi could maintain both market and mind share with an equally-fast but technologically inferior part. (Dany worked on Splinter Cell.)
Rollo, that sarcasm is at odds with post above it, which also happens to be yours. You say ATi's extra speed and features are worthless, then complain about companies holding back improved tech. Where was nV's improved AA? Why did they reduce AF quality (from their previous gen)? Considering your total disregard for DX9, what are we left to judge the tech of current cards on--their cooling solutions and clock speeds? 😛
And how exactly are you determining this "OpenGL = DX#"?
M4H, Carmack has said repeatedly that D3 is based on the original GF's feature set, and the original GF is DX7. So he's using OGL to approximate DX7-level tech, although he obviously uses newer tech with newer cards (NV2x, R200, NV3x, ARB2 paths).
While D3 is GF-tech, the GF3 is probably the slowest card you'll want to use to actually *play* the game.
Gee this is a surprise. Rumors flying R420 wont support PS 3.0 and VS 3.0 and now nobody cares about having the greatest features?
Should we care if the NV40 supports PS/VS3.0 as "well" as the NV30 supported PS/VS2.0+?
I'd be more than impressed if nV came out with a PS/VS3.0 part that was about as fast as ATi's purported PS2.0+/VS3.0 part. Given Dany LePage's enthusiasm for 3.0 shaders, it'd be hard to believe ATi could maintain both market and mind share with an equally-fast but technologically inferior part. (Dany worked on Splinter Cell.)
I have this wild hypothesis Pete- what if we actually judged the card on their framerates in games currently available at the store and the detail settings they can run them at? At settings where the fps never drop below 30? (you know, playable?)
Oh, I know this is radical departure from the current standard of gaming review- the all important HL2 or Far Cry benchmark - but just maybe people will find benchmarks of the games they can actually buy useful too.
Imagine the chaos- everyone knows a 9600 Pro is better than a 5900 Ultra at HL2 PS2. What if they saw benchmarking like I'm suggesting and saw a 9600 Pro is 30-40% slower, and a 9800 Pro isn't really any faster? We'd have ATers running gibbering madly through the streets, it would be the end of life as they know it.
Let's hope it never comes to pass, because I come here to see "nVidia suxorz ballsorz, ATI PS2 ownz joo".
MercenaryForHire
Lifer
Now that I look at it, you could probably swing pretty much everything in the promo videos with just the original gF256's OGL 1.2 featureset. True that you'd need a lot more card to run it at acceptable speed though - and I'm also optimistic that he's not going to shun the newer extensions. 🙂
- M4H
How do games available at launch allow us to judge new (and thus, usually forward-looking) tech? Then all we have to go on is the company's word, and as many people are fond of reminding us, these publicly-traded companies have no one to answer to but their shareholder--meaning their customers may get left holding the bag of silicon and transistors. Current game benchmarks and IQ analysis may help with comparing features like texture and polygon filtering, but they do nothing for features not in use.
Bah, let's not go through those old arguments again. We've got to conserve our strength and vitriol for the next gen. 😉
Bah, let's not go through those old arguments again. We've got to conserve our strength and vitriol for the next gen. 😉
DeeSlanger
Member
lol.
:disgust:
Flyermax2k3
Diamond Member
Rollo, you assume that I make my arguments because ATI might not include PS/VS 3.0 support in R420 but that is not the case. I've been saying this about video cards since the original Geforce days when Hardware T&L was all the rage. All I'm saying is that there are more important things to PC gaming than PS/VS 3.0. I'll be happy with both next-gen parts regardless of PS/VS 3.0 support as long as they live up to their performance claims.
Darn it. You too Acanthus? Repeat after me, 500 times:
"Losing 60-80% of your framerate for shinier water is well worth it. The game won't be worth playing without shinier water. The smart gamer loses 60% of his performance, rather than 70%, and this is why we worship ATI, forsaking all others".
Make sense now?
So would I Flyermax, so would I. You see, I'm smart enough to know that by the time new features are usable and make a difference, it won't be on old cards.
I knew I wouldn't be playing PS2 games on my 9700P, I knew I wouldn't be on my 9800P. So I didn't spend my time trying smack down 5900 owners, because I knew they were playing the available games just as well as me.
I'll buy a nV40 or R420, maybe both, but I won't be playing any PS3 games on them, and I for sure won't be telling people one is better than the other for it's unneeded PS3 support. But hey, that's just me. I think when two first gen cards do something badly, it doesn't really matter if one does it a little less badly.
this thread is hilarious.
Rollo, man, you are incredible. 😀
PS2.0 pretty much sums up the arguments that ATi is better than nvidia.
wait, doom3 runs much better on nvidia cards than on ATi cards (and for OpenGL in general), and doom3 will revolutionize the 3d engine, and define the 3d engine for many future games (as it did with doom and quake (and especially quake 3)), but who cares? PS2.0 performance on ATi is better!
thanks for the synopsys. 🙂
Rollo, man, you are incredible. 😀
PS2.0 pretty much sums up the arguments that ATi is better than nvidia.
wait, doom3 runs much better on nvidia cards than on ATi cards (and for OpenGL in general), and doom3 will revolutionize the 3d engine, and define the 3d engine for many future games (as it did with doom and quake (and especially quake 3)), but who cares? PS2.0 performance on ATi is better!
thanks for the synopsys. 🙂
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
