PDA

View Full Version : Force PS 1.1/1.4 in Halo?


Pages : [1] 2

ragejg
10-08-03, 12:50 PM
what's the command line to run to force this?

I just got my XFX 5600U (I'm @ 450/850 right now), and I wanna kick it to DX8 path shaders so it's as playable as the GF3 which I just took out...

The dx9 shaders IMO don't add enuff to the game to warrant me using them in Halo... PS 1.1 looked plenty good to me...

...plus, I'm not gonna use 52.13 till I know whether or not they'll turn off a 5600U's fan...

:)

Thanks in advance...

saturnotaku
10-08-03, 01:55 PM
Your shortcut should look like this:

C:\wherever you installed halo\halo.exe -use11 (for PS1.1)
C:\wherever you installed halo\halo.exe -use14 (for PS1.4)

:)

Gargr
10-08-03, 01:59 PM
-use11, 13, 14, 20

EDIT: -useff for fixed function

RoachMojo
10-08-03, 02:04 PM
Has anyone noticed any difference in IQ or effects going from 2.0 to 1.1-1.4?

I can't see any difference between 1.1 and 2.0, but the framerate is noticably faster with 1.1.

StealthHawk
10-08-03, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by RoachMojo
Has anyone noticed any difference in IQ or effects going from 2.0 to 1.1-1.4?

I can't see any difference between 1.1 and 2.0, but the framerate is noticably faster with 1.1.

Anand said that PS2.0 looks better in his recent NV38/R360 IQ article. Too bad he didn't show any screenshots illustrating this, as I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in seeing the differences, and where they are in the game. Of course Anand's screenshots didn't show much at all :p

ragejg
10-08-03, 04:47 PM
I noticed a little extra luminescence in halo on the pixel-shaded stuff...

Not much tho...

Not enough to justify the (45.23 anyway) perf. decrease...

RoachMojo
10-08-03, 05:30 PM
Yeah, for real...wtf was up with those tiny screenshots anyway..?

I personally see no differences [edit] between the versions of PS (and I don't need glasses).

Until I see screenshots to compare and it is plain as day, PS2.0 is all hype and not worth the perf hit (which is huge on the FX5900U).

ragejg
10-08-03, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by RoachMojo
perf hit (which is huge on the FX5900U).

...hmmm, teh new response to this seems to be... "what drivers you talkin, bout, Willis?" ... :p

RoachMojo
10-08-03, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by ragejg
...hmmm, teh new response to this seems to be... "what drivers you talkin, bout, Willis?" ... :p

Huh?

ragejg
10-09-03, 12:00 AM
52.13 and 52.14 are showing serious benifits from using the new shader command organization methods... Yes, there's still a hit, but a considerably smaller one then there has been...

Sorry if that previous post was left-fieldish... ;):p

RAST
10-09-03, 12:03 AM
Here's the official FAQ from Gearbox / Bungie / MS. It discusses PS 1.1, 1.4 and 2.0.

HALO FAQ (http://www.bungie.net/perlbin/blam.pl?file=/site/0/news/news_detail.html&id=C84CDE9E-136B-4753-8DAC-239B7BCCAC89)

RoachMojo
10-09-03, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by ragejg
52.13 and 52.14 are showing serious benifits from using the new shader command organization methods... Yes, there's still a hit, but a considerably smaller one then there has been...

Sorry if that previous post was left-fieldish... ;):p

Oh...lol! No worries. :)

I'm not even using any of those yet, still using the 45.33. I'm going to wait for the official release and try again.

Mullins1060
10-09-03, 02:15 AM
is halo even out yet :/

thought it came out on friday

StealthHawk
10-09-03, 03:51 AM
The real link: http://halo.bungie.net/images/site/halo/halo_pc_technical_and_performance_FAQ_1_02.rtf

Halo supports 4 different rendering code paths:

Pixel shaders 2.0 (DirectX 9.0)
In this code path, you are making absolutely no compromises on the visual quality of the game. You are seeing everything as best as possible, as engineered by our team. All the effects are in their most demanding form (as complex of a calculation as necessary to generate the best visual result possible).

Having said this, for many simple effects, even if you are running PS2.0, the game will automatically use a 1.4 or 1.1 shader because the visual result is exactly the same.

Pixel shaders 1.4 (DirectX 8.0)
When running in PS1.4, you are compromising only a subset of effects. Specifically:
- No bumped mirrored surfaces
- Some video effects are two-pass

Pixel shaders 1.1 (DirectX 8.0)
PS1.1 is probably the most widespread pixel shader version currently. When running in the PS1.1 rendering code path, the visual compromises are (in addition to the PS1.4 compromises):
- No model self-illumination (excluding some specific environmental models)
- No animated lightmaps
- Fog calculations are triangle based, not pixel based
- No specular lights

Cards that support Hardware T&L (fixed function - DirectX 7.0)
This is the most basic rendering code path for Halo. When running in that mode, you have to accept many visual compromises but are still getting a compelling Halo visual experience. The compromises are:
- No shadows
- Simple active camouflage effect
- No glows or flares
- Very basic fog, water and lighting

Note that you can always scale down your video card but you canít scale up. Check your video cardís documentation to determine witch version of DirectX / pixel shaders it supports. If, for example, your card supports PS2.0, you can choose to compromise many of Haloís effects by forcing it to run PS1.1. However, if your card supports PS1.1, you canít force it to PS2.0 Ė this is actually happening in hardware, not in software.

RoachMojo
10-09-03, 11:50 AM
So there ARE differences, major ones, it seems....

That's too bad, as PS2.0 at 1024x768 with all eye candy enabled and only 2xaf gets me prolonged drops into the teens/low 20s framerate-wise....and on my power rig!!

At least 1.1 gets me above 30 fps.

ragejg
10-09-03, 01:20 PM
Slightly related discussion...

http://www17.tomshardware.com/column/20030219/3dmark2003-03.html

"PS1.4 is much closer to PS2.0 (DirectX 9) than its version number implies" ... this bodes well for R2XX, doesn't it? ... I KNEW I was holding onto my AIW8500dv for SOME reason!! ... so Halo @ 6x4 on TV using PS 1.4 with effects all turned up set @ 30fps won't be all that bad!!

//OFF TOPIC// ha ha, ebay has Lik-Sang X-Box usb controller adapters for only $10!!! mwahahaha!!... :p//BACK ON TOPIC//

StealthHawk
10-09-03, 07:30 PM
Originally posted by ragejg
"PS1.4 is much closer to PS2.0 (DirectX 9) than its version number implies" ... this bodes well for R2XX, doesn't it? ... I KNEW I was holding onto my AIW8500dv for SOME reason!! ... so Halo @ 6x4 on TV using PS 1.4 with effects all turned up set @ 30fps won't be all that bad!!

Well, it means that R200 cards can run DX9 games with a closer featureset to say R300 cards than a NV20 can. Of course that says absolutely nothing about speed. The big question is, how playable will new demanding games be on an R200? Considering that people with top of the line systems are complaining about performance, that doesn't bode too well with me.

betterdan
10-09-03, 08:34 PM
Why is the benchmark showing I am using pixel shader 1.3 with my gf4 TI4200? Is that the only shader it supports not 1.4? And why did the faq not mention 1.4 is it the same as 1.3? I am using drivers 45.23.

Gargr
10-09-03, 08:47 PM
Originally posted by betterdan
Why is the benchmark showing I am using pixel shader 1.3 with my gf4 TI4200? Is that the only shader it supports not 1.4? And why did the faq not mention 1.4 is it the same as 1.3? I am using drivers 45.23.

no

1.1 and 1.3 are almost the same.

Gf4 supports 1.1 - 1.3
I think they didnt mention 1.3 cos there isnt any diff between 1.1 and 1.3
:confused:

ragejg
10-09-03, 10:44 PM
Originally posted by StealthHawk
Well, it means that R200 cards can run DX9 games with a closer featureset to say R300 cards than a NV20 can. Of course that says absolutely nothing about speed. The big question is, how playable will new demanding games be on an R200? Considering that people with top of the line systems are complaining about performance, that doesn't bode too well with me.

It bodes well for those with R2XX's, that enjoy their R2XX's...

I haven't seen anyone talk about their R200's perf. in Halo, so I'll be sure to let everyone knows how my low-clocked version does...

ragejg
10-10-03, 01:16 PM
well, I just got my rma'ed 8500 AIW dv back... wooohoo I can put my HTPC back together!! In stock form, I don't think the core will do 270 (stupid blue stuff!! :rant: ) , but I'll clock it as high as it'll go (prolly 250/410), and mebbe tonite or tomorrow I'll post it's "general feeling" gameplay perf. in Halo @ 1.4 vs. a 1.1 GF3 @ 255/555 and a 2.0 5600U @ 450/850... I'll be using cat 3.8 and dets 52.13...

oldsk00l
10-10-03, 02:18 PM
No real perf hit here.....oh yeah.....n/m :)

*pets his 9800*

Seriously though, PS 2.0 just makes the light refractions look better, that's about it.

RoachMojo
10-10-03, 05:17 PM
Originally posted by oldsk00l
Seriously though, PS 2.0 just makes the light refractions look better, that's about it.

With 1.1 enabled, look at the flashing red lights in the escape pod after crashing...Oh wait! There aren't any....because they don't flash with 1.1...

I never tried 1.3-1.4, but the red lights flash and look cool with 2.0, so I guess PS 2.0 does just a little more than "makes the light refractions look better". Seriously.

BTW, from my testing with the 52.13 leaked dets, the framerate is up a little more at certain parts of Halo with PS 2.0 (that don't really need speeding up), but where it actually matters: In the Covenent ship, the framerate still drops to the same level as it did with the 45.33 dets (8-10fps), and PS 1.1 is still faster at those points(13-16fps).

Hopefully, the final dets will be here soon.

betterdan
10-14-03, 04:46 PM
Just bought a Radeon 9700 Pro last night to replace my GF4 TI4200 8x. I gotta say that the 2.0 shader looks a lot better than 1.3 (either that or the Radeon is just such a damn good card it looks better on it than a GeForce) Halo was running ok before but now it runs outstanding. This is my first ATI card and I love it.

ragejg
10-14-03, 10:13 PM
Ok, maybe they were just runnin great to decieve me, but the other nite after I made my last post on this thread I ran the R8500 (PS 1.4) @ the same settings I was playing with on the 5600U (52.13, PS 2.0 playable, not quite smooth enough for me)... 10x7, no AF, everything @ max IQ...

It handled the game exactly the same, being playable and dang near smooth enough but not quite...

I'm suprised in this card and wonder now what a well tweaked pure 8500 128mb would do... hmmm... :)