X1800 lack of vertex texturing kills Pacific Fighters performance

[nRollo]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/sapphire-x1800xl_18.html

Graphics processors from the RADEON X1000 series do not support vertex texturing, but flight sims from Maddox Games do use this feature. That?s why the Shader Model 3.0 rendering mode of Pacific Fighters does not work with RADEON X1000 cards. Yet even working in the game?s Shader Model 2.0 mode, the Sapphire RADEON X1800 XL is by far slower than the GeForce 7800 GT. High fps rate is no less important for a flight sim than for a shooter with first-person view. It means that this game won?t be playable on the reviewed graphics card at high resolutions.

Ouch. 41 vs 59fps at 16X12 4X16X.
Not a big deal to me, because I don't play flight sims. Definitely something to consider though- if this game uses vertex texturing, will others?

My intuition says "Yes" because we all know nVidia loves having TWIMTBP devs use their features.
Q:Who are the TWIMTBP devs?
A: All of them (exagerration, but close to true)

 

[Cooler]

Originally posted by: Rollo
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/sapphire-x1800xl_18.html

Graphics processors from the RADEON X1000 series do not support vertex texturing, but flight sims from Maddox Games do use this feature. That?s why the Shader Model 3.0 rendering mode of Pacific Fighters does not work with RADEON X1000 cards. Yet even working in the game?s Shader Model 2.0 mode, the Sapphire RADEON X1800 XL is by far slower than the GeForce 7800 GT. High fps rate is no less important for a flight sim than for a shooter with first-person view. It means that this game won?t be playable on the reviewed graphics card at high resolutions.

Ouch. 35 vs 59fps at 16X12 4X16X.
Not a big deal to me, because I don't play flight sims. Definitely something to consider though- if this game uses vertex texturing, will others?

My intuition says "Yes" because we all know nVidia loves having TWIMTBP devs use their features.
Q:Who are the TWIMTBP devs?
A: All of them (exagerration, but close to true)

Let?s try comparing the x1800xt to 7800GTX that should be a better comparison, since we know the stock x1800xl perfroms just slightly better then x850xt pe. Also we know that 7800 also fail other sm3 tests so in other games they can get hit as well.

 

[OnEMoReTrY]

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: Rollo
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/sapphire-x1800xl_18.html

Graphics processors from the RADEON X1000 series do not support vertex texturing, but flight sims from Maddox Games do use this feature. That?s why the Shader Model 3.0 rendering mode of Pacific Fighters does not work with RADEON X1000 cards. Yet even working in the game?s Shader Model 2.0 mode, the Sapphire RADEON X1800 XL is by far slower than the GeForce 7800 GT. High fps rate is no less important for a flight sim than for a shooter with first-person view. It means that this game won?t be playable on the reviewed graphics card at high resolutions.

Ouch. 35 vs 59fps at 16X12 4X16X.
Not a big deal to me, because I don't play flight sims. Definitely something to consider though- if this game uses vertex texturing, will others?

My intuition says "Yes" because we all know nVidia loves having TWIMTBP devs use their features.
Q:Who are the TWIMTBP devs?
A: All of them (exagerration, but close to true)

Let?s try comparing the x1800xt to 7800GTX that should be a better comparison, since we know the stock x1800xl perfroms just slightly better then x850xt pe.

The stock x1800xl performs just slightly better then the x850xt pe? Are you kidding me? The x1800xl outpreforms the 7800GT in a variety of tests, u telling me thats just above an x850xt pe as well?

 

[Cooler]

Originally posted by: OnEMoReTrY

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: Rollo
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/sapphire-x1800xl_18.html

Graphics processors from the RADEON X1000 series do not support vertex texturing, but flight sims from Maddox Games do use this feature. That?s why the Shader Model 3.0 rendering mode of Pacific Fighters does not work with RADEON X1000 cards. Yet even working in the game?s Shader Model 2.0 mode, the Sapphire RADEON X1800 XL is by far slower than the GeForce 7800 GT. High fps rate is no less important for a flight sim than for a shooter with first-person view. It means that this game won?t be playable on the reviewed graphics card at high resolutions.

Ouch. 35 vs 59fps at 16X12 4X16X.
Not a big deal to me, because I don't play flight sims. Definitely something to consider though- if this game uses vertex texturing, will others?

My intuition says "Yes" because we all know nVidia loves having TWIMTBP devs use their features.
Q:Who are the TWIMTBP devs?
A: All of them (exagerration, but close to true)

Let?s try comparing the x1800xt to 7800GTX that should be a better comparison, since we know the stock x1800xl perfroms just slightly better then x850xt pe.

The stock x1800xl performs just slightly better then the x850xt pe? Are you kidding me? The x1800xl outpreforms the 7800GT in a variety of tests, u telling me thats just above an x850xt pe as well?

No i mean in none aa /af which of corse rollo like to use. It is more then slight its more bewteen 7800GT and x850xt from bench marks i have seen. But the point of post if 7800gt perfroms better then x1800xl in alot of tests it may be better to test the high end as well.

 

[nts]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Ouch. 35 vs 59fps at 16X12 4X16X.
Not a big deal to me, because I don't play flight sims. Definitely something to consider though- if this game uses vertex texturing, will others?

By default VTF is disabled in this game and enabling it causes a massive drop in FPS. I'm willing to bet that they tested with VTF disabled.

My intuition says "Yes" because we all know nVidia loves having TWIMTBP devs use their features.
Q:Who are the TWIMTBP devs?
A: All of them (exagerration, but close to true)

Ofcourse VTF will be used in the future but unfortunately not before unified hardware and DX10.

VTF is currently just a checkmark on a features list, it is extremely limited and very slow on NVIDIA hardware. Thats why no one else is using it.


btw who passes you this information to post?

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Cooler

Let?s try comparing the x1800xt to 7800GTX that should be a better comparison, since we know the stock x1800xl perfroms just slightly better then x850xt pe. Also we know that 7800 also fail other sm3 tests so in other games they can get hit as well.

My bad, fixed. 41 vs 59 is still pretty bad!

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Cooler
No i mean in none aa /af which of corse rollo like to use.

Errr link to that? I can't remember discussing "0X0X" for a long time?

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: OnEMoReTrY

Originally posted by: Cooler

Originally posted by: Rollo
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/sapphire-x1800xl_18.html

Graphics processors from the RADEON X1000 series do not support vertex texturing, but flight sims from Maddox Games do use this feature. That?s why the Shader Model 3.0 rendering mode of Pacific Fighters does not work with RADEON X1000 cards. Yet even working in the game?s Shader Model 2.0 mode, the Sapphire RADEON X1800 XL is by far slower than the GeForce 7800 GT. High fps rate is no less important for a flight sim than for a shooter with first-person view. It means that this game won?t be playable on the reviewed graphics card at high resolutions.

Ouch. 35 vs 59fps at 16X12 4X16X.
Not a big deal to me, because I don't play flight sims. Definitely something to consider though- if this game uses vertex texturing, will others?

My intuition says "Yes" because we all know nVidia loves having TWIMTBP devs use their features.
Q:Who are the TWIMTBP devs?
A: All of them (exagerration, but close to true)

Let?s try comparing the x1800xt to 7800GTX that should be a better comparison, since we know the stock x1800xl perfroms just slightly better then x850xt pe.

The stock x1800xl performs just slightly better then the x850xt pe? Are you kidding me? The x1800xl outpreforms the 7800GT in a variety of tests, u telling me thats just above an x850xt pe as well?

Yes, it is.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: nts
btw who passes you this information to post?

Your wife, out of gratitude.
:roll:

I read it in a post by Terra at HardOCP tonight, thought it was interesting and worth posting here.

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=995662

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Rollo
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/sapphire-x1800xl_18.html

Graphics processors from the RADEON X1000 series do not support vertex texturing, but flight sims from Maddox Games do use this feature. That?s why the Shader Model 3.0 rendering mode of Pacific Fighters does not work with RADEON X1000 cards. Yet even working in the game?s Shader Model 2.0 mode, the Sapphire RADEON X1800 XL is by far slower than the GeForce 7800 GT. High fps rate is no less important for a flight sim than for a shooter with first-person view. It means that this game won?t be playable on the reviewed graphics card at high resolutions.

Ouch. 41 vs 59fps at 16X12 4X16X.
Not a big deal to me, because I don't play flight sims. Definitely something to consider though- if this game uses vertex texturing, will others?

My intuition says "Yes" because we all know nVidia loves having TWIMTBP devs use their features.
Q:Who are the TWIMTBP devs?
A: All of them (exagerration, but close to true)

And my intuition says you wont see this feature used much in the near future because no card can do this efficiently. The fact that this feature was available since the 6-series and yet only 1 game uses the feature pretty much sums it up.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: munky
And my intuition says you wont see this feature used much in the near future because no card can do this efficiently. The fact that this feature was available since the 6-series and yet only 1 game uses the feature pretty much sums it up.

Time will tell Munky, for now, PF is at a HUGE disadvantage on the non SM3 X1800s.

 

[Cooler]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: munky
And my intuition says you wont see this feature used much in the near future because no card can do this efficiently. The fact that this feature was available since the 6-series and yet only 1 game uses the feature pretty much sums it up.

Time will tell Munky, for now, PF is at a HUGE disadvantage on te non SM3 X1800s.

yes but x1800 does have SM3 Vertex texure was on the list and ati used a buffer to do this. There have been reports that 7800 have also failed SM3 tests.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: nts
VTF is currently just a checkmark on a features list, it is extremely limited and very slow on NVIDIA hardware. Thats why no one else is using it.

VTF has been on NVIDIA hardware for 2 years now. So I would not be suprised to see more games using it in the near future.

The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are ATI fanboyz.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: OnEMoReTrY
The stock x1800xl performs just slightly better then the x850xt pe? Are you kidding me? The x1800xl outpreforms the 7800GT in a variety of tests, u telling me thats just above an x850xt pe as well?

Actually most of the benchmarks I have seen show the XL behind the GT more often than not.

And in Pacific Fighters, Age of Empires III, and Black & White 2 the GT out does a XT.

 

[Sc4freak]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are ATI fanboyz.

So, would you like to demonstrate to us "ATI fanboyz" how extensive VTF usage on Nvidia hardware constitutes little to no performance hit?

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: nts
VTF is currently just a checkmark on a features list, it is extremely limited and very slow on NVIDIA hardware. Thats why no one else is using it.

VTF has been on NVIDIA hardware for 2 years now. So I would not be suprised to see more games using it in the near future.

The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are ATI fanboyz.

The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are the ones who actually know anything about VTF. Limited because only one game uses it. Slow because it kills performance on the cards that do support it. Not to mention that it's an optional SM3 feature, so the card can still be SM3 compliant without it. If within the next year before the release of the r600/g80 a bunch of games come out the use VTF and the 7800's (forget about the 6800's) can run it at playable fps at 1024 or greater resolution then you can bash Ati for not including this important feature in their primitive cards. Otherwise you sound just like a Nv troll grasping at straws whether it's about the warranty or about a missing limited use feature to bash the other side.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: nts
VTF is currently just a checkmark on a features list, it is extremely limited and very slow on NVIDIA hardware. Thats why no one else is using it.

VTF has been on NVIDIA hardware for 2 years now. So I would not be suprised to see more games using it in the near future.

The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are ATI fanboyz.

The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are the ones who actually know anything about VTF. Limited because only one game uses it. Slow because it kills performance on the cards that do support it. Not to mention that it's an optional SM3 feature, so the card can still be SM3 compliant without it. If within the next year before the release of the r600/g80 a bunch of games come out the use VTF and the 7800's (forget about the 6800's) can run it at playable fps at 1024 or greater resolution then you can bash Ati for not including this important feature in their primitive cards. Otherwise you sound just like a Nv troll grasping at straws whether it's about the warranty or about a missing limited use feature to bash the other side.

Cool your jets Munky, it's just a piece of news I came across reading other boards tonight.
I'm sure someday ATI will get the VTF mojo working, and all will be well. Thought it was worth posting tonight because I was surprised at how big the performancegap was, nothing more.

Isn't this the sort of thing this forum is for? Point out high/low points of video hardware?

 

[nts]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are ATI fanboyz.

Hmmm lets see how feature-full VTF is

1. VTF supports TWO limited texture formats on NVIDIA hardware
2. VTF on NVIDIA hardware can't use filtering, only point sampling
3. Abysmal performance

Using ATi's R2VB workaround you get all texture formats, full filtering and full speed. Plus it works all the way back to the R300 generation.

 

[Gstanfor]

The performance difference is interesting, but hardly unexpected.

Of more interest to me - does this impact IQ?, does it impact (beyond performance) the way the game is meant to be played?

Not trying to downplay performance here, since an unplayably slow game is a pretty large isue in and of itself, just want to know what else is impacted.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: nts

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are ATI fanboyz.

Hmmm lets see how feature-full VTF is

1. VTF supports TWO limited texture formats on NVIDIA hardware
2. VTF on NVIDIA hardware can't use filtering, only point sampling
3. Abysmal performance

Using ATi's R2VB workaround you get all texture formats, full filtering and full speed. Plus it works all the way back to the R300 generation.

Those benchmarks that are linked look like pretty good performance to me. The GT is even beating a XT (a card that costs around $250 more).

Care to link some facts to those statements of yours, including some proof of the R2VB workaround other than "ATI says so". Otherwise it's just more FUD.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: nts
VTF is currently just a checkmark on a features list, it is extremely limited and very slow on NVIDIA hardware. Thats why no one else is using it.

VTF has been on NVIDIA hardware for 2 years now. So I would not be suprised to see more games using it in the near future.

The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are ATI fanboyz.

The only people who say that VTF is limited and slow on NVIDIA hardware are the ones who actually know anything about VTF. Limited because only one game uses it. Slow because it kills performance on the cards that do support it. Not to mention that it's an optional SM3 feature, so the card can still be SM3 compliant without it. If within the next year before the release of the r600/g80 a bunch of games come out the use VTF and the 7800's (forget about the 6800's) can run it at playable fps at 1024 or greater resolution then you can bash Ati for not including this important feature in their primitive cards. Otherwise you sound just like a Nv troll grasping at straws whether it's about the warranty or about a missing limited use feature to bash the other side.

Cool your jets Munky, it's just a piece of news I came across reading other boards tonight.
I'm sure someday ATI will get the VTF mojo working, and all will be well. Thought it was worth posting tonight because I was surprised at how big the performancegap was, nothing more.

Isn't this the sort of thing this forum is for? Point out high/low points of video hardware?

Then lets get back on topic. Isnt PF a OpenGL game? If so, then that would explain why Nv cards are faster. The article didnt mention whether or not VTF was enabled in those benches, but I find it highly unlikely that Nv cards would run the game with VTF on faster than Ati cards with VTF off.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: munky
Then lets get back on topic. Isnt PF a OpenGL game? If so, then that would explain why Nv cards are faster. The article didnt mention whether or not VTF was enabled in those benches, but I find it highly unlikely that Nv cards would run the game with VTF on faster than Ati cards with VTF off.

I thought ATI fixed their performance issues in OpenGL games. Even so why would a GT outperform a XT?

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: munky
Then lets get back on topic. Isnt PF a OpenGL game? If so, then that would explain why Nv cards are faster. The article didnt mention whether or not VTF was enabled in those benches, but I find it highly unlikely that Nv cards would run the game with VTF on faster than Ati cards with VTF off.

I thought ATI fixed their performance issues in OpenGL games. Even so why would a GT outperform a XT?

They only "fixed" it by tweaking the drivers for certain popular OpenGL games like Doom3, and a large part of that fix was the memory controller on the x1800's. To really fix it they'd have to rewrite the OpenGL driver, and it has not happened yet. If you look at other OpenGL games like Cronicles of Riddick, Ati also trails Nv, so the problem has not been fixed yet.

 

[aatf510]

It's Rollo that start a thread like this?
Why am I not suprised

 

[BFG10K]

X1800 lack of vertex texturing kills Pacific Fighters performance

Err, vertex texture fetch is disabled in the game and enabling it causes nVidia's performance to absolutely tank. Those benchmarks have absolutely nothing to do with VTF as it wasn't even enabled so as usual we have a troll thread with zero facts to back it up.

Not a big deal to me, because I don't play flight sims. Definitely something to consider though- if this game uses vertex texturing, will others?

But nobody will ever want FP HDR with AA, right? :roll:

btw who passes you this information to post?

The answer to this question is easily garnered.