PDA

View Full Version : FX Cards


Kemp3
11-27-03, 01:39 AM
Well i have tried various forums and much research on this one subject. I still havent found a firm answer to this one question .

Are the new FX cards ( 5700u , 5900 , 5950 ) having all the shader probs do to Drivers ? or is the Hardware not up to pair ?

I would really like to get a answer from Nvidia on this ... But i cannot find a email address or phone number to tech. So i am curious what you all think on this Subject.

Ady
11-27-03, 02:34 AM
Hardware limitation IMO. Less shader units = less performance!?

nForceMan
11-27-03, 04:23 AM
What shader probs?

euan
11-27-03, 07:01 AM
Originally posted by nForceMan
What shader probs?

lol! :angel2:

Malfunction
11-27-03, 07:12 AM
Originally posted by Kemp3
Well i have tried various forums and much research on this one subject. I still havent found a firm answer to this one question .

Are the new FX cards ( 5700u , 5900 , 5950 ) having all the shader probs do to Drivers ? or is the Hardware not up to pair ?

I would really like to get a answer from Nvidia on this ... But i cannot find a email address or phone number to tech. So i am curious what you all think on this Subject.

Which game(s) are you referring to?

Peace,

:confused:

Kemp3
11-27-03, 11:38 AM
Not really a game .... I was looking at Aquamark3 scores and the Score since build 340 came out for 3dmark03 .

I have always preffereed Nvidia for some reason ... Never really liked ATI :/

To Be honest i wish i bought a 9800xt instead of my 5900 ultra. Almost everything i read is pointing to the Hardware not being up to specs. There are the few lil threads here and there saying it is just drivers .... onve Nvidia gets caught up with there Drivers the card will perform the way should .

Just trying to get all the info I can on this Subject . Thank you all :)


Happy Thanksgiving

ginfest
11-27-03, 05:26 PM
I think it's been proven that the R3xxx hardware is better suited to shader-intensive programs than the NV3x line. I also believe that although NV can make up some of the disparities by "hand-coding" shaders for specific games, there is no "magic-bullet" driver set that will make up the difference.
That being said, and having both cards, the performance difference in my games is not as big as some of the benches would have you believe.
Yes, in future games such as HL2 I believe the R3xxx will be a better choice but I don't believe any current hardware is going to run a game such as this at 1280x960 with 4xAA/8x (or better) AF and average 60fps.
In fact I had to take my 9800 Pro out and put in the 5900 due to issues with COD, IL2:FB and KOTOR.
To be fair this was using the 3.8 and 3.9 Cats and supposedly the "hotfix" based on Cat 3.10 fixes the issues but the 5900 is working so well I haven't bothered to put the 9800 back in.
B/4 someone pipes in with "COD, etc,... works fine here" this is just what I experienced.


Mike G

Rogozhin
11-27-03, 05:35 PM
I've just swaped out a customers 5900U (had to test it out ;)) in my rig (with a fresh HD just for that purpose) and the performance and IQ award in almost all of my games (including COD and IL2FB) at the settings I play (1280x960 4xAA, 16xAF) goes to the 9800nonpro (452/411).


I simply can't live with nvidia's crappy AA especially in flight sims where SA is determined by wing shape and when I'm doing hi res screens.

Shader performance will play a larger role in the upcoming games for next year (and the difference in IQ and performance will be even more conspicuous).

But this is just my experience.

rogo

Ruined
11-27-03, 08:54 PM
According to John Carmack (dev of doom3, which numerous future games will likely be based on), it's a "toss up" between the two cards. He also mentioned Nvidia's drivers being more stable.

Nvidia does not need to "hard code" shaders if the dev does their job well (unlike futuremark).

The Baron
11-27-03, 09:05 PM
yes, the shader performance on the NV3x line is a hardware limitation. no, drivers cannot magically bring it up to ATI speeds. yes, devs often need to tweak shaders for performance on NV3x cards (either through the use of _pp flags or tweaking register usage).

do you need to worry about the whole shader dilemma at this point in time with games? probably not. will you six months from now? probably not too much then either, though.

ATI fanboys will try and tell you that DX9 performance matters above everything else at this point in time. bull****. The number of DX9 games is so few and generally add relatively minor effects versus PS1.4 at this point. NV fanboys will try and tell you that DX9 performance will never matter for two reasons:

1. NVIDIA runs it just fine with _pp: bull**** once again. sure, they can run it acceptably when they use _pp and shaders that don't use a ton of temporary registers, but it's simply not as fast as ATI's performance. a trade-off of the current plattform.

2. good DX9 games aren't out: my definition of good may not be your definition of good. next.

can you tell I'm sick of the FUD, erroneous information, illogical assumptions, and general other bits of stupidity from both sides? :)

(oh, and vertex shader performance on NV cards might be linked somewhat to CPU speed. I haven't finished investigating that.)

bkswaney
11-27-03, 09:48 PM
In 6 months time the last thing I'll me worried about is NV3x hardware. Thats for sure. ;)

It will be NV4x and R420 here. :D

Kemp3
11-27-03, 10:27 PM
Wow ... Best replies i have gotten yet . :)

I guess its nice to hear it straight .... Now i kinda wish i did buy a 9800xt :/

But hey in a few more months i can spend another 500$ on a vid card :rolleyes:

Oh well so goes the life of computers ...... :lol:

Thanks to everyone who replied ...

Happy Bird Day

Edge
11-28-03, 02:00 AM
Meh, the issue is becoming overblown. Sure, it's slower in DX9 stuff and doesn't have the HDR effects, but nothing will be unplayable at high resoution for a long time, and DX9 effects are still being used very lightly in most games. Also, it should be noted that ATI's card have a big performence hit from DX9 effects as well, it's just that it's only about half the performence hit as on GFFX cards. People just seem to have the misconception that ATI cards work perfectly in DX9 games, but I'll bet if GFFX cards took no performence hit from DX9 effects that everyone would be hating on ATI for not including "free" DX9 effect support. Oh well, that's the way computers work: people just need something to complain about. Though it's certainly not an issue that should be ignored. But I don't think we'll see no-hit DX9 effects until the next generation of cards come out.