UT2K3 DM-Icetomb performance feedback needed ASAP!

[fivefeet8]

I thought we were since I only posted shots from UT2k3 with the 45.23's and the 51.75's.

[fivefeet8]

Originally posted by Spotch
Another problem with your shots is that the walls had running water. This made for a very inconsistent basis for comparisons. Also make sure you set your drivers to allow the application to determine Aniso and AA settings. This is one area the affected by the driver hacks made by NV.

PS: Please do not use hacked up Omegas. We are not interested in pot luck drivers only in what NV has released and are in question here.

Driver hacks? Pff. You still don't get it. Doesn't matter if there are driver hacks or water running. The fact is that people saw what they wanted to see and rushed to conclusions. Like I said, if I had wanted a real IQ comparison, I would've taken Identical shots like the ones now on the site. I was simply tesing their pre dispositions to the IQ killing 51.75's.

Oh and I installed Omega's 45.23's in performance mode so the IQ is virtually the same as the reference 45.23's. Unless you want me to prove it to you with shots as well.

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by fivefeet8
I thought we were since I only posted shots from UT2k3 with the 45.23's and the 51.75's.

Well, some people said there was a quality difference between screenshots you posted with Omega 45.23 Dets and 51.75s....besides some missing effects in 51.75.

Perhaps you could specifically point out where and who said 51.75 lowered quality in UT2003 compared to 45.23? Besides being buggy and not rendering everything.

[fivefeet8]

Originally posted by hovz
in the det 50s, the objects in the backround are much blurrier, so they definatly sacraficed lod settings for performance

Originally posted by hovz
looking closer, the tetxures on det 50s suck, they are way blurrier and less sharp

Originally posted by hovz
they look alot worse, less fog, very dark. can u take an SS of the same view the other person used, with the sheild upgrade in view

Originally posted by Behemoth
yeah they are much better comparison shots. :) i still see a little more blurriness or a little missing something from the 51.75 shots tho but they are very minimal.

Originally posted by Behemoth
why dont you post some screenshots on icetomb with both IQ and speed comparable to 9800pro? because you cant. with fx5900u you can only get either sucky IQ/fast incomplete trilinear fps with 51.75 or ok IQ(still no full trilinear)/slooooww fps with 45.23 or previous drivers.

Originally posted by Flavius
I don't care about Nvidia's new ultra cheating, IQ killing, unreleased drivers. I give up. :rolleyes:

[StealthHawk]

Looking at page 4 or 5 of this thread the basis for the conclusion of IQ differences seem to stem from the lack of 51.75 rendering fog. Just my opinion.


Shouldn't it be easy enough to check if LOD has changed as well.

[Behemoth]

Originally posted by Flavius
Fivefeet8, this thread was never about average FPS, it was about MIN FPS. I don't care if I average a playable 45FPS if there are spots on the map that drop me to 6 FPS! I consider than unplayable. And this is about playability at high quality settings. Some people would actually like to play UT2K3 instead of just benchmarking it. There are other places in Icetomb where that fog exists, NOT just in that chamber, and the fog does cause big dips. Why? Ask Nvidia, not me.
yeah, one of the most amazing things i noticed when i switched from fx5800 to 9800pro was that everything seem to be much smoother with 9800pro. when i run benchmark and play the game with fx5800, the fps is like suddenly jumping up and down all the times. but 9800pro runs thing much more steadily and never dips too low too suddenly. these sudden fps speed ups optimizations from fx are very fishy, because it is only good for the benchmark numbers - average fps numbers. its not smooth and it only makes high average fps numbers.

[aapo]

Originally posted by aapo
So, zero differences in the still shots for me. :)

Hehee, so I was right. Does that mean I'm unbiased? :angel:

[fivefeet8]

Suprise!.. DM-Icetomb done with the leaked 52.13 detonators. The fog is back without any performance hit. Dm-rustatorium is still very fast. ;)

1024x768, 4xAA, 8xAF-quality: Resized to 800x600.

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by fivefeet8
Suprise!.. DM-Icetomb done with the leaked 52.13 detonators. The fog is back without any performance hit. Dm-rustatorium is still very fast. ;)

1024x768, 4xAA, 8xAF-quality: Resized to 800x600.

Ok, but doesn't 52.14 have even worse filtering quality than previous drivers?

[SuLinUX]

Are we STILL talking about beta drivers and the microscopic examination of IQ.

Yet another forum with were all the ATI fanboys can slag off Nvidia. :rolleyes:

Oh hold on a minute, it's a Nvidia forum, with ATI card users glowting about there Radeon cards. :rolleyes:

Just listen to yourselfs :rolleyes:

[Behemoth]

put IQ aside. suprise? sounds like its a miracle or something for a top dollar video card to play games the way there meant to be played :rofl

[SuLinUX]

Originally posted by Behemoth
put IQ aside. suprise? sounds like its a miracle or something for a top dollar video card to play games the way there meant to be played :rofl

I dont have a problem but you seem to, your logo proves you have a problem with Nvidia.


:rolleyes:

[Behemoth]

Originally posted by SuLinUX
I dont have a problem but you seem to, your logo proves you have a problem with Nvidia.


:rolleyes:
yeah i had problems with fx5800 with ut2k3 with earlier drivers in those maps. maybe you didnt play them and/or chose to ignore the problems.
i also have problem with nvidia that they put static clip planes into 3DMark03 and all the benchmark specific, IQ lowering, dx9 faking optimizations. it seems you dont have any problem with all that.

[SuLinUX]

Originally posted by Behemoth
yeah i had problems with fx5800 with ut2k3 with earlier drivers in those maps. maybe you didnt play them and/or chose to ignore the problems.
i also have problem with nvidia that they put static clip planes into 3DMark03 and all the benchmark specific, IQ lowering, dx9 faking optimizations. it seems you dont have any problem with all that.

Lower IQ, sorry but that has been disproven and it turns out that FX IQ is better than the Radeon, even in AF. (see Aquamark IQ comparisons at tom's hardware )

As for the Icetomb problem, I used to play it on my GF4 Ti 4600 and it was fine, it's just a issue that will be fixed.

Get over it, it's not thats good map anyway.

[Behemoth]

i was not referring to Aquamark IQ comparisons/tom's opinions, sorry.
i was talking about nvidia cheats. the most obvious and sick ones are static clip planes, have you ever heard of them?

[SuLinUX]

I have seen a artical on this, however I have not seen that what so ever in 3dmark2003.

why would using something like riva tuner to get better marks be any different?

I dont see the probelm, if the image is rendered properly throughout the test but when you tip the carmera off the preset path and the image goes wrong, so what.

[Behemoth]

the purpose of the benchmark is not to render images properly throughout the preset path. if you think it is, you are wrong, but you are right, so what.
fx cards did not render shaders properly in 3DMark03 with their rewrited lower IQ versions either.

[fivefeet8]

Originally posted by StealthHawk
Ok, but doesn't 52.14 have even worse filtering quality than previous drivers?

Actually, it has better filtering than the 51.75's and those darker aquamark3 benchmark pics are gone. Many others at the guru3d forums are noting noticeable IQ increase with added performance.

Question: How do you tell if bilinear/trilinear filting is being applied using a program like Aftester?

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by fivefeet8
Actually, it has better filtering than the 51.75's and those darker aquamark3 benchmark pics are gone. Many others at the guru3d forums are noting noticeable IQ increase with added performance.

Actually no, it has worse filtering quality. See how there is a less of a transition between mipmap levels in 52.10/52.14 than in 51.75?

http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/detonator_52.14/pic19.php

Question: How do you tell if bilinear/trilinear filting is being applied using a program like Aftester?

See above. The less of a transitionary area between mipmaps the closer it is to bilinear.

I will be taking a very comprehensive look at this(filtering quality) and other subjects very soon. Look forward to it :)

[fivefeet8]

Originally posted by StealthHawk
Actually no, it has worse filtering quality. See how there is a less of a transition between mipmap levels in 52.10/52.14 than in 51.75?

http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/detonator_52.14/pic19.php


Really? Look at these two shots. I took one with the new 52.13 beta dets and the other is from the Anti Cheat Demo posted on 3dcenter. I ran the demo as well to get identicle shots. And I can reitterate that there isn't any post screenshot processing done to increase IQ. This is how it actually is ingame.

1st shot: 8xAF-quality per application
2nd shot: Anti Cheat shot from 3dcenter.org

http://f1.pg.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/fivefeet8@sbcglobal.net/lst?.dir=/My+Documents/PC&.order=&.view=l&.src=bc&.done=http%3a//f1.pg.briefcase.yahoo.com/

[fingermouth]

I have the same problem with my FX cards and im using the Fastest AMD in the barton core but weird why would you being using the 25.33 Drivers anyway and how would you get them to work? there for older Nvidia cards such as Geforce 3 the FX started from the 43.45 drivers and later that is weird how you got old driver to even work on FX cards anyway the problem is herent many people who own F cards even top of the line FX cards have this prob the guy with the P4 seems to have good luck but probably spent six days to sunday to fix it too.

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by fivefeet8
Really? Look at these two shots. I took one with the new 52.13 beta dets and the other is from the Anti Cheat Demo posted on 3dcenter. I ran the demo as well to get identicle shots.

Anti-cheat demo :confused: Link?

[fivefeet8]

Originally posted by StealthHawk
Anti-cheat demo :confused: Link?

Funny, you posted the link before. But. http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/ati_nvidia_treiberoptimierungen/index3_e.php

Yeah. It wasn't an anti cheat demo, but a demo run with an anti cheat driver.

[theultimo]

whoops, Trilinnear filtering is sub-par now on my GF4, and AF is virtually non-existant, but they do run better, except IQ quality is almost in GF2 range games....

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by fivefeet8
Funny, you posted the link before. But. http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/ati_nvidia_treiberoptimierungen/index3_e.php

Ok. Excuse me for not being clairvoyant and knowing what you were talking about.

Yeah. It wasn't an anti cheat demo, but a demo run with an anti cheat driver.

You called it a demo. And it wasn't run with an "anti-cheat" driver. Anyway, now that I know what I'm supposed to be looking at, moving on...

Can you take that screenshot again with FSAA on? I see some differences, but I'm not sure whether the lack of FSAA in your shot is creating them or not.