Lol, so ATI is better than NV?

Yeti · Jun 28, 2002, 05:01 PM

Quote:

This wound up being a perfect fit for Doom, because the standard
path could be implemented with six unique textures, but required one texture
(a normalization cube map) to be accessed twice. The vast majority of Doom
light / surface interaction rendering will be a single pass on the 8500, in
contrast to two or three passes, depending on the number of color components
in a light, for GF3/GF4 (*note GF4 bitching later on).

I think a couple nVidia fans are upset about that... (nevermind the fact that it comes from an ancient article... lol)... I was just reading an update and took the time to read the entire thing through.. http://www.shacknews.com/finger/?fid...idsoftware.com

WarGun · Jun 28, 2002, 06:28 PM

Initial performance testing was interesting. I set up three extreme cases to
exercise different characteristics:

A test of the non-textured stencil shadow speed showed a GF3 about 20% faster
than the 8500. I believe that Nvidia has a slightly higher performance memory
architecture.

A test of light interaction speed initially had the 8500 significantly slower
than the GF3, which was shocking due to the difference in pass count. ATI
identified some driver issues, and the speed came around so that the 8500 was
faster in all combinations of texture attributes, in some cases 30+% more.
This was about what I expected, given the large savings in memory traffic by
doing everything in a single pass.

A high polygon count scene that was more representative of real game graphics
under heavy load gave a surprising result. I was expecting ATI to clobber
Nvidia here due to the much lower triangle count and MUCH lower state change
functional overhead from the single pass interaction rendering, but they came
out SLOWER. ATI has identified an issue that is likely causing the unexpected
performance, but it may NOT be something that can be worked around on current
hardware.

I can set up scenes and parameters where either card can win, but I think that
current (Nvidia cards are still a somewhat safer bet for consistent performance
and quality.)

Are you sure you read the entire thing through?

Silentst2000 · Jun 28, 2002, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WarGun
Initial performance testing was interesting. I set up three extreme cases to
exercise different characteristics:

A test of the non-textured stencil shadow speed showed a GF3 about 20% faster
than the 8500. I believe that Nvidia has a slightly higher performance memory
architecture.

A test of light interaction speed initially had the 8500 significantly slower
than the GF3, which was shocking due to the difference in pass count. ATI
identified some driver issues, and the speed came around so that the 8500 was
faster in all combinations of texture attributes, in some cases 30+% more.
This was about what I expected, given the large savings in memory traffic by
doing everything in a single pass.

A high polygon count scene that was more representative of real game graphics
under heavy load gave a surprising result. I was expecting ATI to clobber
Nvidia here due to the much lower triangle count and MUCH lower state change
functional overhead from the single pass interaction rendering, but they came
out SLOWER. ATI has identified an issue that is likely causing the unexpected
performance, but it may NOT be something that can be worked around on current
hardware.

I can set up scenes and parameters where either card can win, but I think that
current (Nvidia cards are still a somewhat safer bet for consistent performance
and quality.)

Are you sure you read the entire thing through?

Who fucking cares?

The r300 is going to be the defacto card for DOOM 3 so I could give a flying fuck how the 8500 / ge4 and ge3's do because your not going to beable to run full detail at normal res anyways.

WarGun · Jun 29, 2002, 03:20 AM

Yeti · Jun 29, 2002, 02:58 PM

Ah yes Doom III... now UT2k3 is a different story... i wonder how that will turn out.

?

JavaFox · Jul 6, 2002, 06:39 PM

Nothing else matters. There is only Doom III.

Onde Pik · Jul 6, 2002, 11:17 PM

DII looks gay anyways.

Zardon · Jul 6, 2002, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Onde Pik
DII looks gay anyways.

you havent seen the "fag" skins yet for Doom II? the peter pan outfits, and the guys in leather? its cool

JavaFox · Jul 6, 2002, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zardon
you havent seen the "fag" skins yet for Doom II? the peter pan outfits, and the guys in leather? its cool

My favorite one is the Michael Jackson skin. That mofo invented the damn closet.

Jul 13, 2002, 06:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yeti
<drops the bomb and walks away...>

I think a couple nVidia fans are upset about that... (nevermind the fact that it comes from an ancient article... lol)... I was just reading an update and took the time to read the entire thing through.. http://www.shacknews.com/finger/?fid...idsoftware.com

GREEKRAGE SALUTES THE FELLOW TRIBER .....VGW

Yeti · Jul 13, 2002, 08:52 AM

Quote:

GREEKRAGE SALUTES THE FELLOW TRIBER .....VGW

VGW
VNR
VNC
VSTC
VVH
VVH
VV..... *snipe*

vvF!!! (VGS)

lol...

and the classic

VGW
VGW
VGW
VGW
"You have been kicked from the server for spamming"

HsuGotaQ · Jul 14, 2002, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zardon
you havent seen the "fag" skins yet for Doom II? the peter pan outfits, and the guys in leather? its cool

"Fag" skin for Doom II? U sure your not talking about the "fag" skin for Quake 3 that came with the UK PC Gamer magazine? (seriously an odd skin to release onto a PC Gamer CD)

Jun 29, 2002, 02:58 PM	Thread Starter #5
Yeti DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 662 Rep Power: 0	Ah yes Doom III... now UT2k3 is a different story... i wonder how that will turn out. ? __________________ --Oh lord not again

Jun 28, 2002, 06:28 PM	#2
WarGun DriverHeaven Addict Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 249 Rep Power: 0	Initial performance testing was interesting. I set up three extreme cases to exercise different characteristics: A test of the non-textured stencil shadow speed showed a GF3 about 20% faster than the 8500. I believe that Nvidia has a slightly higher performance memory architecture. A test of light interaction speed initially had the 8500 significantly slower than the GF3, which was shocking due to the difference in pass count. ATI identified some driver issues, and the speed came around so that the 8500 was faster in all combinations of texture attributes, in some cases 30+% more. This was about what I expected, given the large savings in memory traffic by doing everything in a single pass. A high polygon count scene that was more representative of real game graphics under heavy load gave a surprising result. I was expecting ATI to clobber Nvidia here due to the much lower triangle count and MUCH lower state change functional overhead from the single pass interaction rendering, but they came out SLOWER. ATI has identified an issue that is likely causing the unexpected performance, but it may NOT be something that can be worked around on current hardware. I can set up scenes and parameters where either card can win, but I think that current (Nvidia cards are still a somewhat safer bet for consistent performance and quality.) Are you sure you read the entire thing through?

Jun 29, 2002, 03:20 AM	#4
WarGun DriverHeaven Addict Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 249 Rep Power: 0

Jul 6, 2002, 06:39 PM	#6
JavaFox E Pluribus Unum Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,203 Rep Power: 0	Nothing else matters. There is only Doom III.

Jul 6, 2002, 11:17 PM	#7
Onde Pik Rage3D Boy Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Denmark Posts: 146 Rep Power: 0	DII looks gay anyways.