Xbit -- Farcry 1.2 and NV SM3.0 = pile of beans.

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: vshah
well that goes against everything everyone else has said, including crytek soooo

btw, the reduction in lighting passes is ONLY POSSIBLE WITH SM3.0. sm2.0 cards have to use one pass for each light source in the scene. with the 1.2 patch, a sm3.0 card can use one pass for all the lights. (i believe thats the diff, someone correct me if i'm wrong). also geometry instancing is only possible with sm3.0, and is used in the 1.2 patch.

-Vivan

Actually someone on the boards posted a link to a demo that does single pass lighting with sm2.0 however it is more difficult to code it with sm2.0. Also the single pass lighting on sm2.0 is only possible with ATi cards and it has something to do with taking advantage of the order in which they process things.

On an Nvidia card it is only possible with sm3.0

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: Ackmed
I dont think they are cheating, but they did make the 4 custom demos that are in the patch. When a IHV goes that far, personally I think its too far. No game company should be making any demos for games that will be used for benchmarking.

Ackmed: making demos that show where the SM3 advantages come into play isn't "goign too far", it's giving us something useful. I think most of us understand that the advantage of SM3 isn't going to be the same in every scene on the map, but do want to see where it is giving an improvement.

If SM3 will help my card run 20% faster in a scene where they use instancing to render multiple plants/leaves/grass/etc why would I want to test SM3 looking at a scene where everything rendered is unique and there is no advantage?

Seems to be common sense to me.

I understand the need to try and showcase PS3.0. But in my opinion, Crytek should have been the ones to make the demos. nVidia is going to try and showcase it in the best light. I just dont think, ATi, nVidia, or anyone else should make demos for any game that will be used as timedemos. It was pretty obvious that the NV cards performed better in their custom demos, than in the others.

Its just my opinion, if you dont agree, thats fine with me.

Originally posted by: Rollo


Thanks Visable Assasin. I somehow also get the feeling if Xbit had questioned gains from 3Dc we wouldn't see anything other than outrage from the OP.

If ATi were to make custom demos that were included in patch 1.3 with 3Dc, I would be saying the same thing. I dont think any IHV should be doing that.

Youre right they shouldnt advertise their new features at all.

 

[Kalmah]

*sigh* And I'm still waiting for the pixel shader 2.0 support as advertised on my fx5900 card. And in an email directly from Nvidia 5 or 6 months ago I was told it was a driver issue. Even with all the new drivers they have released, Shadermark still says my card doesn't support most of PS2.0.

I don't think I'm going to rush out to get a 6800 card anytime soon. I'm still waiting to get the features I paid for over a year ago on my current card. :-\

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: stnicralisk

Youre right they shouldnt advertise their new features at all.

Obviously you are just trolling, or didnt even read my post.

I never said they shouldnt advertise PS3.0, they've been doing that for many months. Going too far to me, but thats another story.

All I am saying is, no video card company should be making timedemos for games. I dont care who it is, it shouldnt be done. They're going to do their best to make themselves look good, and the competition not so good.

Once again, my opinion.

 

[Blastman]

I can agree with some of the comments here. Maybe I?m being premature with the rope for NV. It?s just their past history with Farcry. :disgust:

Hell, they are already being accussed of it by the zealots, and they had very little to do with it beyond stating they support it in the new patch.

OK, but surely NV knows what?s in the patch 1.2. And at the very least I think the hardware sites can?t be to happy they were ?manipulated? into believing and showcasing something they thought was performance improvements from SM3.0.

Any company will try to show their product in the best possible light, while trying to hide it's short comings deep in the shadows, why should this be any exception? Rollo has it right in saying they want to show it in the best case senario, and as long as you know that going in, I see nothing wrong with it.

I also thinki that if this proves an opt that isn't SM3 related, that there is still no room to criticise the opt itself, because IQ seems to still be excellent. ATi has the brilinear which accomplishes just that.

If it is proved that the opt has virtually nothing to do with SM3.0 then yes it?s just another good individual game code optimization. They did the same thing in Halo. On the other hand a lot of people don?t like game specific optimizations for benchmarked games because they don?t represent the general performance trends hardware sites are trying to show when they do a graphics card review.

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: stnicralisk

Youre right they shouldnt advertise their new features at all.

Obviously you are just trolling, or didnt even read my post.

I never said they shouldnt advertise PS3.0, they've been doing that for many months. Going too far to me, but thats another story.

All I am saying is, no video card company should be making timedemos for games. I dont care who it is, it shouldnt be done. They're going to do their best to make themselves look good, and the competition not so good.

Once again, my opinion.

Maybe you dont understand the fact that hardware is sold on the basis of its ability to run software. The only reason you buy the hardware is because it supports the software! The companies have always used software companies to advertise their product. It is intelligent marketing. Especially since posts saying that "PS3.0 wont even be utilized for at least a year" are common place on Anand and guru3d - not to mention "PS3.0 will run even slower" etc etc. Nvidia was intelligent enough to use Cryteks engine (best graphics out right now) to demonstrate that

A) PS3.0 will be available nearly immediately
B) performance improvements are quite possible

I am "obviously a troll" you are being just plain ignorant.

Companies make benchmarks people like you say "well thats not what matters its all game performance thats all really synthetic/optimised." Companies make timedemo of a real game and people like you say "now theyre going too far."

Isnt there a 3dc demo for Serious Sam 2? I didnt complain about it and I dont see how the demos hurt anything at all.

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: Blastman
I can agree with some of the comments here. Maybe I?m being premature with the rope for NV. It?s just their past history with Farcry. :disgust:

Hell, they are already being accussed of it by the zealots, and they had very little to do with it beyond stating they support it in the new patch.

OK, but surely NV knows what?s in the patch 1.2. And at the very least I think the hardware sites can?t be to happy they were ?manipulated? into believing and showcasing something they thought was performance improvements from SM3.0.

Any company will try to show their product in the best possible light, while trying to hide it's short comings deep in the shadows, why should this be any exception? Rollo has it right in saying they want to show it in the best case senario, and as long as you know that going in, I see nothing wrong with it.

I also thinki that if this proves an opt that isn't SM3 related, that there is still no room to criticise the opt itself, because IQ seems to still be excellent. ATi has the brilinear which accomplishes just that.

If it is proved that the opt has virtually nothing to do with SM3.0 then yes it?s just another good individual game code optimization. They did the same thing in Halo. On the other hand a lot of people don?t like game specific optimizations for benchmarked games because they don?t represent the general performance trends hardware sites are trying to show when they do a graphics card review.

I think youre jumping the gun over an xbit article. They arent too far about the inquirer. They are often wrong.

Why doesnt someone take a x800 make it show as a device ID nvidia 6800 and try to run the ps30_codepath?

Until this is done everything in here is really just speculation.

 

[BFG10K]

umm.. sm3 isn't a "different language". it's the same. the difference is in the hardware, which simply accepts different instructions (which are still written in the same "language").

SM 3.0 is different because it adds instructions that SM 2.0 does not have. If the app doesn't support them I don't see how it could possibly extract valid results. It's like disassembling SSE3 when your disassembler only supports MMX. You aren't going to get the right op codes if you get them at all.

Now it's possible 3DA is just extracting text strings but more likely the instructions in their raw form are just binary - hence requiring proper interpretation - so I doubt it.

The most likely scenario here is that the SM 3.0 shaders weren't extracted. If they were then both nVidia and Crytek are blatantly lying and the latter is something I have trouble believing.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: stnicralisk


Maybe you dont understand the fact that hardware is sold on the basis of its ability to run software. The only reason you buy the hardware is because it supports the software! The companies have always used software companies to advertise their product. It is intelligent marketing. Especially since posts saying that "PS3.0 wont even be utilized for at least a year" are common place on Anand and guru3d - not to mention "PS3.0 will run even slower" etc etc. Nvidia was intelligent enough to use Cryteks engine (best graphics out right now) to demonstrate that

A) PS3.0 will be available nearly immediately
B) performance improvements are quite possible

I am "obviously a troll" you are being just plain ignorant.

Companies make benchmarks people like you say "well thats not what matters its all game performance thats all really synthetic/optimised." Companies make timedemo of a real game and people like you say "now theyre going too far."

Isnt there a 3dc demo for Serious Sam 2? I didnt complain about it and I dont see how the demos hurt anything at all.

Once again, you've missed my point.

You're bringing what "others" have said about PS3.0. I didnt say it would be bad, nor that it would run slower, nor that it wouldnt be used for a year. You're rambling on things I wasnt even talking about.

You cant compare a tech demo that showcases 3Dc, to a TIMEDEMO that will be INCLUDED in a game patch. A patch that all reviewers will use to test the game with, and the demos being made by nVidia.

nVidia and ATi (imo) shouldnt be making timedemos for game companies to be used in their games. Its one step too far. I would be just as opposed to it, if ATi makes a timedemo for HL2 that showcases 3Dc. Because they would probably be doing so in the best possible place of the game, to try and make themselves look better.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

It's really biased how Crytek and Nvidia handled the SM3 and patch 1.2 situation. Just ignore the results of those 4 demos and look at anands demos I suppose.

 

[Ackmed]

Well, you cant really ignore them, as they are from the game. You can actually go to the same spot the demos are from.

However, how much of the game really benefits from PS3.0, and how much doesnt? 10%, 30%, 50%? It seems its mostly were there is folliage, which is a pretty big part of the game. Its obvious some of the demos doesnt show any performance increase, and some show a lot. Its really hard to say unless "you're in the know" how much of the game will benefit from PS3.0. One thing is for sure, you can bet NV knows what parts of the game does.