SM3.0 finally having a nice performance gain over older tech?

[fierydemise]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Benchmarking a unoptimized beta game that you cannot buy is dumb. Reviewers need to use their heads, stick to finished retail products.

Agreed, wait till the game is released, it could get far more optimized before release, it could change signifigantly, since it isn't released don't use it.

EDIT: Give Rollo a break, he hasn't even responded yet an your already bashing him? That in itself is trolling you hypocrites

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: zendari
Not sure if this has to do with SM3. Doom 3 was faster on a 6800 GT than a x850xtpe. Conversely, the x800 XL is often comparable to the 6800 U in HL2 and Farcry.

Plus FEAR is still in beta, with this level of performance its nowhere near relase.

Word.
Why is this SM3 related? Sure, it's *something* related, but that doesn't mean SM3 necessarily. It could be something inherent to the nVidia architecture (such as SM3, or in the case of Doom 3 the shadow thing, IIRC), or it could be something different in architecture not related to shader models, or it could be something different again (drivers etc).

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Im not. Dont get mad for me stating facts.

A thread with Fear being faster on NV cards, has been posted before. By rollo, which turned into a 7 page crap thread.

How about you get this silly thread locked, because its old news, and the game is several months off. And we all know the game runs very poorly on any card.

Vote for BAN!

 

[fierydemise]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Im not. Dont get mad for me stating facts.

A thread with Fear being faster on NV cards, has been posted before. By rollo, which turned into a 7 page crap thread.

How about you get this silly thread locked, because its old news, and the game is several months off. And we all know the game runs very poorly on any card.

Vote for BAN!

Are you going to start another petition?

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Im not. Dont get mad for me stating facts.

A thread with Fear being faster on NV cards, has been posted before. By rollo, which turned into a 7 page crap thread.

How about you get this silly thread locked, because its old news, and the game is several months off. And we all know the game runs very poorly on any card.

Vote for BAN!

Good job quoting me, and keeping it going, after I dropped it. You're helping, really.

Again, what I said was true. This has been covered, and the topic poster said this post was an accident, he ment to hit reply. So why not lock it? Its not doing well.

 

[Rock Hydra]

Since when is it feasable to beta a demo version and draw conclusions from an unfinished product?
I'm not taking sides here, I want that to be clear before I get flamed for some reason.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: fierydemise

Originally posted by: Todd33
Benchmarking a unoptimized beta game that you cannot buy is dumb. Reviewers need to use their heads, stick to finished retail products.

Agreed, wait till the game is released, it could get far more optimized before release, it could change signifigantly, since it isn't released don't use it.

EDIT: Give Rollo a break, he hasn't even responded yet an your already bashing him? That in itself is trolling you hypocrites

Well, Farcry demo was released in Jan. 04, when the best card out for it by far was the 9800 Pro/XT. But Rollo claimed SM2 was useless because "the 9800 pro runs Farcry like a voodoo 2".

Wonder what he'll say here.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Im not. Dont get mad for me stating facts.

A thread with Fear being faster on NV cards, has been posted before. By rollo, which turned into a 7 page crap thread.

How about you get this silly thread locked, because its old news, and the game is several months off. And we all know the game runs very poorly on any card.

Vote for BAN!

Good job quoting me, and keeping it going, after I dropped it. You're helping, really.

Again, what I said was true. This has been covered, and the topic poster said this post was an accident, he ment to hit reply. So why not lock it? Its not doing well.

If you were actually telling the truth when you said you dropped it, you would have never entered the thread to see my post in the first place. You should apologize to McArra for the inital thread crap.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: fierydemise

Originally posted by: Todd33
Benchmarking a unoptimized beta game that you cannot buy is dumb. Reviewers need to use their heads, stick to finished retail products.

Agreed, wait till the game is released, it could get far more optimized before release, it could change signifigantly, since it isn't released don't use it.

EDIT: Give Rollo a break, he hasn't even responded yet an your already bashing him? That in itself is trolling you hypocrites

Well, Farcry demo was released in Jan. 04, when the best card out for it by far was the 9800 Pro/XT. But Rollo claimed SM2 was useless because "the 9800 pro runs Farcry like a voodoo 2".


Wonder what he'll say here.

I'll say what I said then, although it's fairly pointless as we're two generations down the road:
The level of DX9 performance offered by the 9800Pro was fairly irrelevant for almost a year after it's release due to lack of DX9 games. When DX9 games did start to show up (e.g. Far Cry 4/04) 9800Pro DX9 performance would be rendered largely pointless by far superior DX9 performance of 6800NUs and X800Pros. (not to mention higher level cards)

Pretty radical stuff.

I'd also say it's pretty sad to see your little club flaming me in threads I haven't even posted in. You can bet I don't think as much about you guys as you apparently think about me.

 

[zendari]

So you agree that the prescence of SM3 is irrelevant because the 6800s run FEAR like a voodoo 2?

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Rollo
I'd also say it's pretty sad to see your little club flaming me in threads I haven't even posted in. You can bet I don't think as much about you guys as you apparently think about me.

Don't flatter yourself Rollo, Ackmed just mentioned you in passing as you already created a thread on this topic and that would likely have been all the attention you got here if it wasn't for your fellow fanboys atempting to defend you.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: Rollo
I'd also say it's pretty sad to see your little club flaming me in threads I haven't even posted in. You can bet I don't think as much about you guys as you apparently think about me.

Don't flatter yourself Rollo, Ackmed just mentioned you in passing as you already created a thread on this topic and that would likely have been all the attention you got here if it wasn't for your fellow fanboys atempting to defend you.

Actually Snowman, Ackmed more or less called him a troll. He referred to Rollo's thread as a "trolling thread". See above.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: Rollo
I'd also say it's pretty sad to see your little club flaming me in threads I haven't even posted in. You can bet I don't think as much about you guys as you apparently think about me.

Don't flatter yourself Rollo, Ackmed just mentioned you in passing as you already created a thread on this topic and that would likely have been all the attention you got here if it wasn't for your fellow fanboys atempting to defend you.

We'll see how you feel about it if people ever start calling you a troll in posts you're not even a part of Snowman. It's childish behavior, as many have noted.

 

[xtknight]

Jesus Christ...always the same people crapping on the thread, I swear.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: munky
The funny thing is that even a 10x7 w/o AA or AF none of the cards even break 50fps, and the minimum fps is in the single digits. Also notice that the Ati cards have slightly higher min fps. This tells me not only that the Ati cards have more brute force when the scene gets really complex with a lot of geometry and effects, but also that all those who bragged about future profing themselves with sm3 will be not be running the game with all the sm3 eye candy at decent fps.

I know this game is only in a beta stage, and probably hasnt been optimized yet, but if this is any indication of future games, it only confirms my theory that by the time many games start utilizing sm3 eye candy, the gf6 series will be too slow to run them with the eye candy enabled.

This is standard for first generation hardware. Try running a 9800 Pro or NV3.x in these games.

It is interesting to see SM3 does give a higher frame rate which is good for future development.

The 9800p is a 3 year old card, but there were plenty of dx9 games a few years back that ran well on it. HL 2 runs well, FarCry runs well too, and even before there were dx9 games like Max Payne 2 that the card just brezed through no problem. The Nv30, even though it looked better on paper, with features like dx9+, longer-than-required shader length ability and 32-bit presicion, still sucked at dx9 games, but that's a whole other topic.

What is standard however is when Ati or Nvidia try to pimp features that the card will not run at acceptable fps. Ati, for example, had the trueform feature, and I only know a handful of games that use it, but when you enable it in HL2, the performance gets a lot worse. The same thing goes for Nvidia with the HDR and soft shaows and all that crap, the performance takes a huge hit when the features are enabled, and sometimes other features like AA are disables in addition to that.

I know there was a bunch of people in this forum who earlier this year toted sm3 as the the deciding factor of Nv superiority with their gf6 cards, and what happened now? With this game, you now actually have to turn off features like AA and AF, with or without sm3, just to have playable frame rates on a single gf6 card, and thats at 10x7 resolution. So much for future-proofing...

But how intensive are these games? HL2, Far Cry ect arent what I would consider highly intensive DX9 games. Sure they may have DX9 shaders but they are short and simple.

The games coming out now are what the developers started working on when they got their hands on DX9 hardware.

Unsurprising when it comes time to play games built from the ground up they crumble.

My point is the first generation hardware of anything is going to suck donkey ballz when it comes time to render its intended target.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Genx87
My point is the first generation hardware of anything is going to suck donkey ballz when it comes time to render its intended target.

The same principle now applies to sm3 shaders on the 6 series cards. Sm3 alone does offer speed enhancements, but now when we are starting to see games built ground-up with sm3 shaders, the gf6 cards cant run em at acceptible frame rates.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: Genx87

But how intensive are these games? HL2, Far Cry ect arent what I would consider highly intensive DX9 games. Sure they may have DX9 shaders but they are short and simple.

The games coming out now are what the developers started working on when they got their hands on DX9 hardware.

Unsurprising when it comes time to play games built from the ground up they crumble.

My point is the first generation hardware of anything is going to suck donkey ballz when it comes time to render its intended target.

Agreed. So why the endless "you MUST have SM3!!!" pimping from the Nvidia crowd over the past year?

The 6800 series has come and gone and SM3 has proved to be of limited use at best.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: Rollo
I'd also say it's pretty sad to see your little club flaming me in threads I haven't even posted in. You can bet I don't think as much about you guys as you apparently think about me.

Don't flatter yourself Rollo, Ackmed just mentioned you in passing as you already created a thread on this topic and that would likely have been all the attention you got here if it wasn't for your fellow fanboys atempting to defend you.

Actually Snowman, Ackmed more or less called him a troll. He referred to Rollo's thread as a "trolling thread". See above.

His thread WAS a trolling thread. If you actually read the old topic, and his first post, before he edited it, you would see that. I do commend him on editing the title, and his first post. If it was that way to start with, it wouldnt have been trolling. I mentioned his old thread, because it was on the same exact topic.

Again, way to keep it going. Super job! You say you dont like these sort of posts, yet you encourage more of them. So how about we drop it? As I did long ago till you brought it back up.

 

[hans030390]

I'd like to see benchies without them running it at sm2.0....then you could compare a 6800ultra with an x850, and i'm assuming the 6800u would lose...not sure by how much, but Sm3 offers a decent performance boost without hurting graphics.

munky: last time i checked, there are no games that were built from the ground with SM3.

Besides, this game is beta right now. that should say one thing. also, some games are just coded poorly, and as good as this game looks, it might be one.

in short, yes SM3 will have a nice performance gain over "older" tech. Not saying that it will be playable, but it will be better than 2.0 cards...but i'm wondering, i'm sure that UE3 uses sm3, so...would a sm2.0 card have to run it at less graphics quality, or would they try to get the sm3 effect and hurt performance.

As of right now, this really isn't saying anything, but imo i think the 6 series will be much better choices for next gen games if you are considering an x800/6800 card.

still, this is a pointless thread...i heart donuts.

 

[McArra]

Ackmed, the thread wasn't a mistake, don't put words in my mouth. I was asking, wanted to know about the technical facts that make this Nvidia cards perform so good compared to X8xx. Also I think the thread would be great without the people taking it as ATi vs Nvidia, something you contributed to with your actitude.

CAN'T WE TALK ABOUT TECH WITHOUT STUPID FANBOY CRAP FOR ONCE??? PEOPLE THIS IS TECH, IS NOT LIKE WE ARE WORKING FOR THE COMPANIES.

Hope the next posts are more constructive, there are some in this thread but some people like to throw crap and make them less visible. So please, stick to the thread, it's the only thing I'm asking, let's talk about tech!

 

[Ackmed]

I see you cant drop it, and just move on. Way to be a hypocrite. Always have to has the last word, dont you? How sad.

Go ahead and post something else, this topic is useless, and has been discussed at length before. The numbers are also old news. This thread has run its course for me, have fun.

 

[fstime]

Originally posted by: McArra
I guess those low fps are due to not having enough RAM memory, as it happens in Battlefield 2.

Yes, because it seems both games are poorly coded.

 

[McArra]

Then go away Ackmed, you have been the most useless part in the topic, nobody is going to miss you.

Edited: Thanks BouZouki for sticking to the topic.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: Ackmed
It looks to me as the game run poor on any setup, and they need to optimize the heck out of it. Its not what I would consider playable with any of those cards.

Its pretty well known Fear runs like crap. Even before rollo posted his trolling thread.

Rollo isn't a troll!

:laugh: I love this subtle irony, these forums are the best for humour! Back to the op, is this game going to be any good, I need something new to play. :beer:

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: munky
The funny thing is that even a 10x7 w/o AA or AF none of the cards even break 50fps, and the minimum fps is in the single digits. Also notice that the Ati cards have slightly higher min fps. This tells me not only that the Ati cards have more brute force when the scene gets really complex with a lot of geometry and effects, but also that all those who bragged about future profing themselves with sm3 will be not be running the game with all the sm3 eye candy at decent fps.

I know this game is only in a beta stage, and probably hasnt been optimized yet, but if this is any indication of future games, it only confirms my theory that by the time many games start utilizing sm3 eye candy, the gf6 series will be too slow to run them with the eye candy enabled.

It is interesting to see SM3 does give a higher frame rate which is good for future development.

The 9800p is a 3 year old card, but there were plenty of dx9 games a few years back that ran well on it. HL 2 runs well, FarCry runs well too, and even before there were dx9 games like Max Payne 2 that the card just brezed through no problem. The Nv30, even though it looked better on paper, with features like dx9+, longer-than-required shader length ability and 32-bit presicion, still sucked at dx9 games, but that's a whole other topic.

What is standard however is when Ati or Nvidia try to pimp features that the card will not run at acceptable fps. Ati, for example, had the trueform feature, and I only know a handful of games that use it, but when you enable it in HL2, the performance gets a lot worse. The same thing goes for Nvidia with the HDR and soft shaows and all that crap, the performance takes a huge hit when the features are enabled, and sometimes other features like AA are disables in addition to that.

I know there was a bunch of people in this forum who earlier this year toted sm3 as the the deciding factor of Nv superiority with their gf6 cards, and what happened now? With this game, you now actually have to turn off features like AA and AF, with or without sm3, just to have playable frame rates on a single gf6 card, and thats at 10x7 resolution. So much for future-proofing...

But how intensive are these games? HL2, Far Cry ect arent what I would consider highly intensive DX9 games. Sure they may have DX9 shaders but they are short and simple.

The games coming out now are what the developers started working on when they got their hands on DX9 hardware.

Unsurprising when it comes time to play games built from the ground up they crumble.

My point is the first generation hardware of anything is going to suck donkey ballz when it comes time to render its intended target.

I'll have to agree with Genx87 (for once ). New features in video cards alwys take time to pick up. I don't think I own one game that supports SM3, nor do I care at this point. By early next year there will be some, but all mid-high cards will support it, so who cares?

BTW Rollo isn't a troll, just a fanboy