PDA

View Full Version : Investigating PS1.4 on FX cards


Pages : [1] 2

DSC
05-02-03, 12:49 AM
Ummm, I need to confirm something about the FX cards, so can any FX owners (5200/5600/5800) help with this?

Download the ATI Treasure Chest demo, and run it on your FX card.

http://pdownload.mii.instacontent.net/ati/misc/demos/ATI-8500-TreasureChest-Demo-v1.1.exe

It will run on my Ti4200, but only PS1.1 effects work, since there's no PS1.4 support, PS1.4 effects are not rendered correctly on the GF4 Ti. :( :o

Please state your driver version and if possible post some screenshots showing the FX rendering these PS1.4 effects. Thank you. :angel:

dpollard55
05-02-03, 03:58 AM
Worked fine on my FX 5200 PCI. Driver version 43.51 WHQL. All effects seem to render fine PS1.4 included. I have no ATI card to compare it to though, but it looks fine to me.

dude
05-02-03, 04:12 AM
Tried it with my FX 5800 Ultra and no probs at all it ran very smooth.Even 1.4

RobHague
05-02-03, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by DSC
It will run on my Ti4200, but only PS1.1 effects work, since there's no PS1.4 support, PS1.4 effects are not rendered correctly on the GF4 Ti. :( :o

What you expected the Geforce4 of your's to sprout wings and grow new features? ;) :angel:

SnakeEyes
05-02-03, 08:31 AM
He's probably interested in the answers for the same reason I would have been- the rumor that there were issues with the GFFX *not* doing PS1.4 (instead falling back to 1.1) that seem to have started with people who were looking at 3DMark03 results.

Anyway, it sure looks like they are doing 1.4 now, whether or not other drivers were. What version of drivers were you guys with FX cards using?

RobHague
05-02-03, 08:36 AM
Most likley 43.51 or 43.45 i would think. Im personally using 43.51.

GlowStick
05-02-03, 01:51 PM
Ya Geforce 4 dosent do PS 1.4, it dose up to 1.3 i think?

dpollard55
05-02-03, 04:54 PM
How do I post a screenshot? (sorry I'm new here) I tried it as an attachment, but the file size is outside the limits allowed by the forum. If it has to be hosted somewhere else then someone else will have to come through on this request. Sorry guys. I'm not sure about the fps it ran at, but compared to everyone else here I'm on an underpowered system and running a PCI card and it still looked smooth to me.

DSC
05-02-03, 05:34 PM
You could always create some accounts at free webpage providers to temporarily store these screenshots. :D :p

dpollard55
05-03-03, 01:47 AM
ok I managed to get it to fit as an attachment, so here ya go.:D

oops i think i did it wrong! sorry I'm new.

Uttar
05-03-03, 02:09 AM
AFAIK, the GFFX uses FP16 for PS1.4. program, unless requested otherwise by the drivers.
My guess is that in 3DMark 2003, they're actually forcing FX12 where they normally aren't authorized to. But with time, you can actually figure out where it's really required and where it isn't.

But you can, with much effort, get IQ as good as normal and truly amazing performance.

That means that if the Treasure Chest demo looked good, I'd be very surprised if it had good performance too.


Uttar

dpollard55
05-03-03, 02:15 AM
Ok trying again with the attached picture. If it doesn't work this time some one help me out here.

dpollard55
05-03-03, 02:20 AM
Hey it worked that time :D . This is on a PNY FX 5200 128MB PCI and ran smooth as silk.

DSC
05-03-03, 05:41 AM
David,

Could you run the demo again, and while it's running, press Shift+S. That will show the framerate, no need for Fraps. And please take a screenshot and post it here. Thanks again. :angel:

Dazz
05-03-03, 05:57 AM
Originally posted by Uttar
AFAIK, the GFFX uses FP16 for PS1.4. program, unless requested otherwise by the drivers.
My guess is that in 3DMark 2003, they're actually forcing FX12 where they normally aren't authorized to. But with time, you can actually figure out where it's really required and where it isn't.

But you can, with much effort, get IQ as good as normal and truly amazing performance.

That means that if the Treasure Chest demo looked good, I'd be very surprised if it had good performance too.


Uttar The D43.51 WHQL seem to fix this :) it now looks just as good as the Radeon 9x00 without any performance hit :) http://www.darkcrow.co.kr/Home/home.asp?idx=#2142

dpollard55
05-03-03, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by DSC
David,

Could you run the demo again, and while it's running, press Shift+S. That will show the framerate, no need for Fraps. And please take a screenshot and post it here. Thanks again. :angel:

Ok I did the shift S thing and here's what I get (sorry no picture right now had enough trouble posting the first one LOL). Depending on the scene I'm running between 25 and 38 FPS. Not great by any standards I know, but like I said it looked good enough and this is on a PCI card and an eMachines Celeron at that! Someone realy should do this test with an AGP card at least for you guys. Would give a better idea of performance for ya. As far as the PCI bus version of these cards go.... I highly recommend it to any one without an AGP slot.

jAkUp
05-03-03, 11:21 AM
ok here it is with a geforcefx ultra... seemed to be locked in at 38fps... i think its because vsync for d3d is on.. and its dropping down to half the framerrate... because with 2xaa it still stayed at 38fps...i dunno how to turn of vsync for d3d.... well here it is:

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&attachmentid=1758

DSC
05-03-03, 11:29 AM
jakUp,

Run the Coolbits.reg attached below(rename from .txt to .reg), it will unlock D3D vsync options so you can turn it off. Thanks for the nice screenshot.

jAkUp
05-03-03, 11:59 AM
ok.. now its around 60 fps... i will post a picture later

StealthHawk
05-03-03, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by Dazz
The D43.51 WHQL seem to fix this :) it now looks just as good as the Radeon 9x00 without any performance hit :) http://www.darkcrow.co.kr/Home/home.asp?idx=#2142

Since in most cases you don't really need FP32 it would be hard to prove that nvidia isn't using FP16 or even FX12 in some places.

saturnotaku
05-03-03, 10:13 PM
Got this downloaded and tested. I couldn't figure out initially why I was getting only about 38-45 fps on my system with the 43.51 WHQL drivers and vsync off. Turns out I forgot I was running the demo with 4xAA and 8xAF. With those off, a steady 60 fps with all the visual stuff at maximum levels.

Kruno
05-03-03, 10:55 PM
Originally posted by Dazz
The D43.51 WHQL seem to fix this :) it now looks just as good as the Radeon 9x00 without any performance hit :) http://www.darkcrow.co.kr/Home/home.asp?idx=#2142

If that was the case then I would have thrown out my Radeon and placed an NV30 in my box. :)

Behemoth
05-04-03, 02:12 AM
average 58 fps for the last 1.3 shader
average 38 fps for the last 1.4 shader
:D
i am running P4 1.7G/5800 non-ultra, vsync off, no AA/AF, 43.51 WHQL.
the golden plates on the chest looks pixalated, think it got nothing to do with fp16...

dude
05-04-03, 02:50 AM
Originally posted by SnakeEyes
He's probably interested in the answers for the same reason I would have been- the rumor that there were issues with the GFFX *not* doing PS1.4 (instead falling back to 1.1) that seem to have started with people who were looking at 3DMark03 results.

Anyway, it sure looks like they are doing 1.4 now, whether or not other drivers were. What version of drivers were you guys with FX cards using?


Using 43.51

dude
05-04-03, 03:12 AM
Here is my Pic