Carmack speaks: poor Nvidia!

  • Thread starter Thread starter who be dat?
  • Start date Start date
W

who be dat?

Unfortunately, it will probably be representative of most DX9 games. Doom
has a custom back end that uses the lower precisions on the GF-FX, but when
you run it with standard fragment programs just like ATI, it is a lot
slower. The precision doesn't really matter to Doom, but that won't be a
reasonable option in future games designed around DX9 level hardware as a
minimum spec.


http://english.bonusweb.cz/interviews/carmackgfx.html

Goodbye Nvidia.

Chris Smith
 
YEah u also must relize that 9600pro performs at a fps rate of 36fps where the
5600pro is doing 48fps.

ITs pretty ovious that hl2 team didn't want code it for performance.
 
My misunderstanding.

But even if the 5600Ultra beats the 9600Pro in DoomIII - and I guess we'll
find out for sure next year -you can't draw any conclusions about Half-Life
2 from that: Doom's OpenGL, Half Life's DX9.


Derek
 
" Its pretty obvious that HL2 team didn't want code it for performance."

It's not HL2 team's fault that NVIDIA deviates so badly from the DX9 spec.
They had to put 5 times the time into getting some speed out of the FX
cards. as it is, they perform better using the DX8.1 paths that the DX9
paths. The ATI cards worked right out the box using the default DX9 paths
 
YEah u also must relize that 9600pro performs at a fps rate of 36fps where the
5600pro is doing 48fps.
ITs pretty ovious that hl2 team didn't want code it for performance.
Click to expand...

You understand that Doom3 is an entirely different game compared to HL2,
don't you?

That 48fps figure is done with the special quality-reduced NV3x rendering
path. If you run Nvidia cards in the full-quality ARB2 path ATi R3xx chips
use, the score is MUCH lower. Fortunately for Nvidia and you, Doom3 looks
pretty much the same using their own cheato-path and ARB2, but full ARB2
means other cards do a lot more work. Bragging that you get more FPSes from
the cheato-path is kind of like saying you can lift more weights than Arnold
because your weights are made of wood instead of iron and hence lighter.

Doom3 is only slightly affected by the quality reduction because Doom3 only
needs directx 7 features to run, anything better than that like pixel
shaders etc is just gravy for it; things runs faster but look only
marginally better. HL2 is designed more as a DX9 title, and the quality
reduction for Nvidia cards is much more visible and will only get more
visible as time goes by and shader complexity increases in newer games.
 
Doom3 is only slightly affected by the quality reduction because Doom3 only
needs directx 7 features to run, anything better than that like pixel
shaders etc is just gravy for it; things runs faster but look only
marginally better.
Click to expand...

That's a nonsense statement - Doom3 doesn`t use a Direct3d rendering
path, it uses OpenGL and extensions thereof. This may account for the
performance difference, Nvidia have exceptionally tight gl drivers.

It may use directx components for input/sound, I don`t know, but it`s
certainly not unusual.


..m
 
That's a nonsense statement - Doom3 doesn`t use a Direct3d rendering
path
Click to expand...

I didn't SAY it used Direct3D. Read my post better next time instead of
jumping at me with an attack at first opportunity.

Doom needs stencil buffer, dot3 bumpmapping and cube maps to function. First
was exposed in DX6 I believe, the two latter came with DX7 when the GF256
was introduced. In contrast, OpenGL lacks direct support of most, if not all
these features, they're only supported through extensions in the current OGL
spec.

See what I mean?
 
That's a nonsense statement - Doom3 doesn`t use a Direct3d rendering
path, it uses OpenGL and extensions thereof. This may account for the
performance difference, Nvidia have exceptionally tight gl drivers.
Click to expand...

He said directx7 features, not directx 7. Actually, my understanding
is that Doom 3 uses what could be considered the equivalent of DX7-DX8
tech (for rendering).
Crash7
remove x's from address to email
 
Lenny wrote:
That 48fps figure is done with the special quality-reduced NV3x
rendering path.
Click to expand...
<snip>

Lower precision (that Carmack said didn't amount to anything with Doom3
anyway), not reduced quality. Precision and quality are not interchangable
in the context that Carmack spoke.
 
i'm_tired said:
Lenny wrote:

<snip>

Lower precision (that Carmack said didn't amount to anything with Doom3
anyway), not reduced quality. Precision and quality are not interchangable
in the context that Carmack spoke.
Click to expand...

Correct, it depends on the situation. There's no doubt that Carmack is one
of the leading programmers in the world and I'm sure he is capable of
minimizing the image quality difference so one will be hard pressed to
notice any difference. That said, any direct comparisons between the NV3x
cards and the R3xx/RV3xx are meaningless since one compares apples and
oranges.
 
Back
Top