Unreal creator believes G70 beats R520

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: archcommus
And isn't this a 2006 game? Who cares, things like this change every day.

the first Unreal3 game ships THIS year.
['05]

Which one is that again?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: SynthDude2001

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: archcommus
And isn't this a 2006 game? Who cares, things like this change every day.

the first Unreal3 game ships THIS year.
['05]

Which one is that again?

Again?

Game based on Unreal 3 engine to arrive this year - With 1000 Shader instruction

This engine has great potential as we learned that the longest Shader used in this game will end up with up to 1000 instruction. Just for the record longest Shader program in Far Cry is the one doing incredible good looking water is made with 80 instructions only.

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: SynthDude2001

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: archcommus
And isn't this a 2006 game? Who cares, things like this change every day.

the first Unreal3 game ships THIS year.
['05]

Which one is that again?

Again?

Game based on Unreal 3 engine to arrive this year - With 1000 Shader instruction

This engine has great potential as we learned that the longest Shader used in this game will end up with up to 1000 instruction. Just for the record longest Shader program in Far Cry is the one doing incredible good looking water is made with 80 instructions only.

"Again" because I knew I'd read it before, I just didn't remember if they'd mentioned a specific title

Sounds good though, I can't wait.

(Especially since I should have a G70 or R520 by that time. )

 

[CaiNaM]

umm.. yea.. Duke Nukem Forever :roll:

i would really be surprised if this speculation turned out to be true.. seems rather peculiar that a game within 6 mo. of completion has not been shown off to some degree, especially at e3. the alternative would be to believe the gaming inudstry is finally turning away from "hype".. and how easy is THAT to believe?

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: ddogg

Originally posted by: deadseasquirrel

Originally posted by: KruptosAngelos
ATI ships 50% more units :roll:

I'm gonna call bull$hit unless you can produce a link. In which case, I will gladly retract my bull$hit declaration and make a formal, public apology. But, until then, bull$hit.

guys...from previous threads that KruptosAngelos has posted it clearly shows that he is an ATIFanboy so disregard any crap he posts.....

ddogg, you are an idiot, plain and simple. I am not a fanboy, I even suggest nvidia to friends depending on their situation. Nvidia has better budget cards, while ATI has better high-end cards, that's plain fact and any site or magazine will tell you that.

The fact that ATI sells more has already been produced earlier in this thread, but anyone who is following this should already know that. ATI is the more popular brand, hence my previous statement. My 50% comes from a previous thread where someone posted either 2005 Q1 sales or 2004 Q4 sales, can't remember which. According to those numbers, ATI shipped 50% more units than nvidia.

You don't want to believe the facts? I don't really care. Don't call me a fanboy, I only say it like it is.

 

[imported_DaveA]

Originally posted by: KruptosAngelos

Originally posted by: ddogg

Originally posted by: deadseasquirrel

Originally posted by: KruptosAngelos
ATI ships 50% more units :roll:

I'm gonna call bull$hit unless you can produce a link. In which case, I will gladly retract my bull$hit declaration and make a formal, public apology. But, until then, bull$hit.

guys...from previous threads that KruptosAngelos has posted it clearly shows that he is an ATIFanboy so disregard any crap he posts.....

ddogg, you are an idiot, plain and simple. I am not a fanboy, I even suggest nvidia to friends depending on their situation. Nvidia has better budget cards, while ATI has better high-end cards, that's plain fact and any site or magazine will tell you that.

The fact that ATI sells more has already been produced earlier in this thread, but anyone who is following this should already know that. ATI is the more popular brand, hence my previous statement. My 50% comes from a previous thread where someone posted either 2005 Q1 sales or 2004 Q4 sales, can't remember which. According to those numbers, ATI shipped 50% more units than nvidia.

You don't want to believe the facts? I don't really care. Don't call me a fanboy, I only say it like it is.

50 percent more units? lol let me guess, x300 or x600 and to Dell.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: DaveA

50 percent more units? lol let me guess, x300 or x600 and to Dell.

Dell is where all the real money is.

 

[Regs]

The facts, in this case the statistics, are always skewd. Just like those stock market numbers on both ATi and Nvidia that I never follow.

 

[ddogg]

Originally posted by: KruptosAngelos

Originally posted by: ddogg

Originally posted by: deadseasquirrel

Originally posted by: KruptosAngelos
ATI ships 50% more units :roll:

I'm gonna call bull$hit unless you can produce a link. In which case, I will gladly retract my bull$hit declaration and make a formal, public apology. But, until then, bull$hit.

guys...from previous threads that KruptosAngelos has posted it clearly shows that he is an ATIFanboy so disregard any crap he posts.....

ddogg, you are an idiot, plain and simple. I am not a fanboy, I even suggest nvidia to friends depending on their situation. Nvidia has better budget cards, while ATI has better high-end cards, that's plain fact and any site or magazine will tell you that.

The fact that ATI sells more has already been produced earlier in this thread, but anyone who is following this should already know that. ATI is the more popular brand, hence my previous statement. My 50% comes from a previous thread where someone posted either 2005 Q1 sales or 2004 Q4 sales, can't remember which. According to those numbers, ATI shipped 50% more units than nvidia.

You don't want to believe the facts? I don't really care. Don't call me a fanboy, I only say it like it is.

well show me one damm link that proves that statement u made...i dont care whether u suggest nvidia to friends or crap like that....fact is u make stupid comments here showing ur absolute ignorance....not one person in this thread so far has agreed with ur statement, so next time u make statements like that have links to back it up...just goes to show what an ignorant fvcuk u are!! plain and simple

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: BouZouki
I think he is full of shit.

Seeing his game is optimized for Nvidia and all.

Frankly, I think the fact that both Carmack and Sweeney recommend Nvidia chips for their engines says something.

I don't think I really need to specify what - you can probably figure that out for yourselves. But it definitely says something, and it definitely has implications.

 

[Ackmed]

Who cares what he recommends? ATi cards play UT games just fine, even faster than NV's a lot of the times.

If Unreal 3 sucks as bad as Unreal 2 did, its wont matter one way or the other. Nobody will be playing it.

(quick someone make another carbon copy of this "news" so we can have yet another thread on the same exact thing)

 

[CaiNaM]

the game doesn't matter. unreal 3 may suck, but you can damn sure bet there will be some quality games using the engine.. and unreal2 wasn't bad.. wasn't great either, both worth playing through once for most ppl.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
the game doesn't matter. unreal 3 may suck, but you can damn sure bet there will be some quality games using the engine.. and unreal2 wasn't bad.. wasn't great either, both worth playing through once for most ppl.

Guarenteed there will be quality games using both the Unreal3 and Doom3 engines . . . the first Unreal3 game is due THIS year ['05].

Unreal2 was OK . . . just not up to the orignal's lofty standards.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
the game doesn't matter. unreal 3 may suck, but you can damn sure bet there will be some quality games using the engine.. and unreal2 wasn't bad.. wasn't great either, both worth playing through once for most ppl.

Guarenteed there will be quality games using both the Unreal3 and Doom3 engines . . . the first Unreal3 game is due THIS year ['05].

Unreal2 was OK . . . just not up to the orignal's lofty standards.

I'm playing Unreal2 now (and XMP) and like it pretty much.

 

[Ackmed]

I dont know about most, but thats a matter of opinion. You sure dont hear many people talking about it a year later.

How many games do we have from Unreal 2? How many do we have from Doom3? It takes years usually for games to come out. Personally I dont think it matters much which card is "best" at any game with a new engine, such as HL2, Doom3, or Unreal 3. NV's cards play HL2 very well, and ATi's card play Doom3 very well. Its all pretty close. And as I said, it years usually until games come out with the engine of a game like that. Meaning the next gen of cards are out, or the next-next gen are, and the performance is already more than most need for those games based on the engine.

Take CoD for an example. A Quake3 engine game, even a heavily modified one. When it came out, ATi's cards played it more than fine, even though it was an OpenGL game, based on Q3. A lot faster than NV's cards at the time even.

So in my opinion, it doesnt really matter. The game is way off, and this card will be "old news" by then. Thats taking what he said without any bias, which we all knows he has.

 

[apoppin]

LOTS of games using Unreal 2 engine.

Doom3's are also due this year. it take about a year-18 months with a PREmade game engine to do a game from concept to gold.

Educate yourself.

--------------

Originally posted by: Rollo

I'm playing Unreal2 now (and XMP) and like it pretty much.

What's XMP?
[i'm guessing an expansion multiplayer]

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
How many games do we have from Unreal 2?

Unreal Tournament 2003
Unreal Tournament 2004
Thief: Deadly Shadows
Splinter Cell
Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow
Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
Rainbow Six 3
Deus Ex: Invisible War
XIII
America's Army
Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30
Star Wars: Republic Commando


Just to name a few of the more recognizable titles....



Upcoming on UE3:
Gears of War
Unreal Tournament 2007
Huxley
Unannounced BioWare Project
Unannounced Obsidian Entertainment Project

The engine has also been licensed by Microsoft Games Studios, Silver Knights, and Midway for multiple projects EACH that have yet to be announced.


Doom 3 Engine:

Out now:
Doom 3

Upcoming:
Prey
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars
Quake 4




I think that list of titles alone makes it go without saying that what GPU the top programmers behind those engines recommend you might want to consider. I'm sure ATi's offerings will perform just fine with these games as well, but if the developers say "to get the most out of the engine, use this chip", then there's a strong backing behind that chip.

I mean christ, look at that list of titles - if you consider yourself a PC gamer, you'll play many of them. Some of us will play/have played all of them.

Ignore Sweeney/Carmack if you want, but they are the two titans of the graphics industry, console and PC. They don't speak lightly.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
I dont know about most, but thats a matter of opinion. You sure dont hear many people talking about it a year later.

How many games do we have from Unreal 2?

off the top of my head, ut2004 (of course), u2 (duh - hehe), splinter cell, rainbow 6, lineage 2. i'm sure there are others, but i can't think of em offhand..

How many do we have from Doom3?

prey, quake4 are upcoming.. not sure what else

It takes years usually for games to come out. Personally I dont think it matters much which card is "best" at any game with a new engine, such as HL2, Doom3, or Unreal 3. NV's cards play HL2 very well, and ATi's card play Doom3 very well. Its all pretty close. And as I said, it years usually until games come out with the engine of a game like that. Meaning the next gen of cards are out, or the next-next gen are, and the performance is already more than most need for those games based on the engine.

Take CoD for an example. A Quake3 engine game, even a heavily modified one. When it came out, ATi's cards played it more than fine, even though it was an OpenGL game, based on Q3. A lot faster than NV's cards at the time even.

So in my opinion, it doesnt really matter. The game is way off, and this card will be "old news" by then. Thats taking what he said without any bias, which we all knows he has.

i'd agree it doesn't matter NOW, however for those who spent their last pennies on a high-end card, it may matter when trying to make these cards last just a lil longer as new games come out. not everyone can afford to buy a new card every generation (nor care to). look at those still running ti4200's, r300s, etc.

so yea, it is relelvant to consider those things, at least in part.

 

[Pete]

Heh, another rambling thread based on a throw-away comment from a TWIMBTP dev to an NV fansite interviewer. And sourced from The Inq, to boot! Brilliant.

Bottom line: benchmarks speak louder than words, in terms of who'll run UnrealEngine3 better. As to who's next-gen card will be faster, hopefully we're only weeks away from knowing. I think it depends on when nV will pull the trigger on G70, as they haven't had a refresh in a while, while ATI just put out the X850 and X800/XL. No doubt ATI will respond quickly, but they may launch their SLI setup first.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Originally posted by: n7
As is well known, Unreal is "designed to work best on nVidia cards" or whatever...doesn't mean a thing.

 

[CaiNaM]

the issue here isn't about TWIMTB (which i agree, is nothing more than propoganda), rather the unreal3 engine being sm3-based from the ground up. considerations such as 1000+ instruction shaders (in comparison the shader for the cool water in far cry were only about 80 instructions) certainly deserve some speculation, as does how these will perform on not only the future cards, but current cards as well.

and frankly, even after multiple driver optimizations, ati's doom3 performance (while certainly acceptable for the most part) leaves something to be desired when comapred to nvidia's. the same can be said for nvidia running behind ati in hl2, however the difference is not as major, and 10fps difference is certainly not as noticeable @ 80 fps (1600, 4xaa) than comparing 40fps to 30fps in doom3 at the same resolution....

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
the issue here isn't about TWIMTB (which i agree, is nothing more than propoganda), rather the unreal3 engine being sm3-based from the ground up. considerations such as 1000+ instruction shaders (in comparison the shader for the cool water in far cry were only about 80 instructions) certainly deserve some speculation, as does how these will perform on not only the future cards, but current cards as well.

and frankly, even after multiple driver optimizations, ati's doom3 performance (while certainly acceptable for the most part) leaves something to be desired when comapred to nvidia's. the same can be said for nvidia running behind ati in hl2, however the difference is not as major, and 10fps difference is certainly not as noticeable @ 80 fps (1600, 4xaa) than comparing 40fps to 30fps in doom3 at the same resolution....

Don't forget - although ATi's current cards may be struggling with Unreal3's 1000+ shader instructions - r520 will be fully SM3.0 compliant.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: apoppin
Don't forget - although ATi's current cards may be struggling with Unreal3's 1000+ shader instructions - r520 will be fully SM3.0 compliant.

oh, i know.. i should have clarified better.. it was more in response to akmed talking about current games, current cards, and previous comments from devs...

funny how a quick comment by a developer stating what he thinks about an upcoming card ends up into discussion about marketshare from a year or two ago, previous quotes by other regarding previous generation cards, and so on, and so on...

 

[apoppin]

all we have IS speculation

it gets pretty boring around here - between launches

 

[Pete]

I didn't realize UE3 was SM3 from the ground up, but I haven't been following it that closely outside of the sweet screenshots and videos. AFAIK, it started as SM2 and moved to SM3 later. At least, that's what I gleaned from this interview:

When UnrealEngine3 initially took shape and form, was Epic's enthusiasm for its rendering engine based on SM2.0 and then progressed/upgraded onto SM3.0 (when it became available) or was there always a conscious forethought of SM3.0 from the outset? If it was the former, was the "transition" difficult or has UE3 always been made to be extremely, and easily, modular?

The move from DirectX8 to DirectX9 was a huge change, introducing high-precision floating-point computations and storage formats, complex pixel and vertex shader programs, and multiple render targets. Within DX9, the change from SM2 to SM3 is completely incremental, with instruction counts being extended and other straightforward improvements. With the Unreal Engine, moving from DX8 to DX9 required a whole new engine architecture; "moving" from SM2 to SM3 was just a matter of upping some stupid hardcoded limits.