SM 3.0

[Vernor]

So in the end, does the Far Cry patch demonstrate any impressive graphics improvements ?


Haven't seen any screenshot comparisons since the Nvidia launch fiasco.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Vernor
So in the end, does the Far Cry patch demonstrate any impressive graphics improvements ?


Haven't seen any screenshot comparisons since the Nvidia launch fiasco.

none whatsoever

 

[SynthDude2001]

The (now recalled) 1.2 patch was never meant to improve visuals; it was intended to use SM3.0 features to improve speed (among other fixes/changes). The 1.3 patch is supposedly going to be the one to improve the graphics, but unfortunately it's anyone's guess as to when that will be released.

 

[Darthvoy]

Therotically it is supposed to make things fater, but that is yet to be seen. Well see when games using SM 3.0 come out. As for far cry, patch 1.2 implememted it it but not it didn't do it very well (I forgot where I read that), which was one of the reasons it was recalled.

 

[imported_Apophis]

Originally posted by: Darthvoy
Therotically it is supposed to make things faster, but that is yet to be seen.

No it hasn't??? It improved my performance a lot. The benches rollo did didn't lie either.

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Apophis

Originally posted by: Darthvoy
Therotically it is supposed to make things faster, but that is yet to be seen.

No it hasn't??? It improved my performance a lot. The benches rollo did didn't lie either.

I'm not questioning Rollo's benchies but I had ran my benchmarks with 1.1(even though I had some probs with that version) and 1.2
I didn't observe any perf differences
As for the visuals this patch was never meant to improve them

 

[Genx87]

There were reviews that showed the SM 3.0 patch did indeed increase performance.
Ironically the reason for the recall had something to do with ATI cards having a problem running the SM2.0b path they implmented.

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Genx87
There were reviews that showed the SM 3.0 patch did indeed increase performance.
Ironically the reason for the recall had something to do with ATI cards having a problem running the SM2.0b path they implmented.

Yeah I know about what they said. I'm not questioning the reviews I just said that I didn't observe any perf diff with sm3 beta path.

 

[Keysplayr]

The only, and I mean only difference that I have seen is in Toms FarCry 1.2 article. This comparison shows extra objects in the "louvers" of this cabinet using a NV40 SM3.0 (FarCry 1.2 patch). Its the last picture on the bottom right. You can see that there are things rendered there that aren't present in the other shots. Again, this is the only instance I have see with any sort of quality difference. It gives a little more "depth" to the cabinet with lighting and shadow.

 

[JBT]

I noticed performance differences with te 1.2 patch and STILL use it. as for Jim1976 you must actually enable it in Far Cry for it to work using the following in the target section of the launch icon.
-DEVMODE "r_sm30path 1"

Did you do this? if not then your right you shouldn't have noticed anything.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: JBT
I noticed performance differences with te 1.2 patch and STILL use it. as for Jim1976 you must actually enable it in Far Cry for it to work using the following in the target section of the launch icon.
-DEVMODE "r_sm30path 1"

Did you do this? if not then your right you shouldn't have noticed anything.

does that have to be done each time the game is loaded, or is there a way to save the setting in the config file?

edit: oh.. and has anyone tried this path w/ r420 and 4.8? should work.. results would be interesting. i'd run it myself but i loaned out my card to a friend.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: JBT
I noticed performance differences with te 1.2 patch and STILL use it. as for Jim1976 you must actually enable it in Far Cry for it to work using the following in the target section of the launch icon.
-DEVMODE "r_sm30path 1"

Did you do this? if not then your right you shouldn't have noticed anything.

does that have to be done each time the game is loaded, or is there a way to save the setting in the config file?

edit: oh.. and has anyone tried this path w/ r420 and 4.8? should work.. results would be interesting. i'd run it myself but i loaned out my card to a friend.

Good luck getting it back .

 

[Gamingphreek]

Also to really judge shader model 3.0 we need a native SM3.0 game. Also i think both 2.0b and 3.0 are seeing so like improvements is because shader model 2.0b is the same as 3.0 without some of the other features and it just so happened that they enabled all the features in 2.0b that they did in 3.0 so they are basically the same until we get a game that natively supports 3.0 and all its features.

-Kevin

 

[JBT]

It should automaticaly stay in the target field meaning right click on the Far Cry launch icon > properties> then paste that into the target field Mine looks exactly like this

"D:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Crytek\Far Cry\Bin32\FarCry.exe" -DEVMODE "r_sm30path 1"

obviously change the drive letter to whatever drive its on...

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: JBT
It should automaticaly stay in the target field meaning right click on the Far Cry launch icon > properties> then paste that into the target field Mine looks exactly like this

"D:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Crytek\Far Cry\Bin32\FarCry.exe" -DEVMODE "r_sm30path 1"

obviously change the drive letter to whatever drive its on...

ahh.. thanks jb

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: JBT
I noticed performance differences with te 1.2 patch and STILL use it. as for Jim1976 you must actually enable it in Far Cry for it to work using the following in the target section of the launch icon.
-DEVMODE "r_sm30path 1"

Did you do this? if not then your right you shouldn't have noticed anything.

Yeah I did it. Don't you remember me asking a week ago?
Actually you were the one who has given me the answer.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
The only, and I mean only difference that I have seen is in Toms FarCry 1.2 article. This comparison shows extra objects in the "louvers" of this cabinet using a NV40 SM3.0 (FarCry 1.2 patch). Its the last picture on the bottom right. You can see that there are things rendered there that aren't present in the other shots. Again, this is the only instance I have see with any sort of quality difference. It gives a little more "depth" to the cabinet with lighting and shadow.

Any comments on this?

 

[Genx87]

What kind of comments are you looking for?