PDA

View Full Version : Gabe Newell on Half-Life 2 Performance


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

jAkUp
12-04-03, 12:14 AM
This is about a week old, but I just came across it. It is Gabe's email response on which card is better for Half-Life 2:

The visual issue is a little bit complicated.

The simple answer is that they are the same as long as you are running a 5900 or 5950.

The more complicated answer is that we make visual quality/performance trade-off decisions, and that some of the NVIDIA parts are so slow that we turn off a lot of visual effects in order to make the game run decently. The user can always set it to run with all features enabled if they want to. Another example would be avoiding lightmap artifacts in anti-aliasing - we use shader bandwidth on the NVIDIA part (which we don't have to on the ATI part), which is typically the last resource you want to consume on an NVIDIA card since their shader performance is slow relative to the other performance factors (e.g. fillrate).

As a rule of thumb, DX9 games are going to run faster or look better or both on the ATI cards (remember that visual quality and framerate are almost always inversely related and remember that ATI is fundamentally faster in a lot of key areas so you have more performance to allocate to either framerate or visual quality).. The exception to this is likely to be Doom3 and Doom3-derived games. I haven't spoken to John directly about this, but it's my understanding that NVIDIA did a good job of implementing hardware specifically for Doom3. Of course Doom3 isn't really a DX9 application in the sense that I'm using it in this email - it's more or less a DX7 application. John's design for Doom3 means he does a lot of the rendering work in software rather than in hardware, which, given what he's doing, makes a ton of sense.

Hope this is helpful.

Gabe

StealthHawk
12-04-03, 03:26 AM
So in other words...no new information? Has anything been said on whether the game will actually be out this year, as it doesn't really look likely at this point.

-=DVS=-
12-04-03, 04:07 AM
Originally posted by StealthHawk
So in other words...no new information? Has anything been said on whether the game will actually be out this year, as it doesn't really look likely at this point.

what do you mean no new information :wtf: Doom III rendered in software :eek: :p DX7 , does that mean you can play it on TNT 2 :D

bkswaney
12-04-03, 04:08 AM
Originally posted by StealthHawk
So in other words...no new information? Has anything been said on whether the game will actually be out this year, as it doesn't really look likely at this point.

By the time it comes out I'll have a R420 or NV40. ;)

Nutty
12-04-03, 04:16 AM
what do you mean no new information Doom III rendered in software DX7 , does that mean you can play it on TNT 2

Geforce1 is minimum required, like it always has been. Its funny that ppl always cry for dx8/dx9 games, and here we have doom3 based on dx7 owning them all.. :)

I dont think its fair to class it as dx7, as its not dx at all. Its OpenGL, and it does use quite alot of modern features. Vertex programs and fragment programs for example. Vertex programs are dx8 class, and it also uses dx9 class fragment programs. The fact is, it uses features found in dx8 and in dx9, but it will also work and look pretty much identical on a GF1 (dx7 card).

Hanners
12-04-03, 07:37 AM
Originally posted by StealthHawk
So in other words...no new information? Has anything been said on whether the game will actually be out this year, as it doesn't really look likely at this point.

Everyone seems to be scared to ask Gabe that question at the moment. :p

CliveMilk
12-04-03, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by Hanners
Everyone seems to be scared to ask Gabe that question at the moment. :p

I'm looking forward to geting my coupon when I buy the ATi R500.

Regards

Andy

S.I.N
12-04-03, 10:02 AM
Thats why Carmack will always be king in my book he made a engine that runs on any crap of computer(Quake runs on my onboard video) and can produce some of the best damn graphics out there (call of duty and wolf) and he has done it again with the Doom3. If this new engine runs games like it does the Quake engine and looks and plays smooth like those screenshots...well I dont know. DX9 is not future...its more great programing? Bah who cares.

And those Vavle bastids they could have already released a damn demo being that one was completed months ago to be released.:)

Hanners
12-04-03, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by S.I.N
Thats why Carmack will always be king in my book he made a engine that runs on any crap of computer(Quake runs on my onboard video)

You don't honestly think Doom III will run on onboard video do you? :p

It's kind of an ironic thread to be singing Carmack's praises in - Where the Hell is Doom III anyway?! ;)

Malfunction
12-04-03, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by Hanners
You don't honestly think Doom III will run on onboard video do you? :p

It's kind of an ironic thread to be singing Carmack's praises in - Where the Hell is Doom III anyway?! ;)

He didn't say that at all. What he did say is Carmack considers the lowest decimal, where as other(s) expect you to buy a new 9800 or 9600 to be able to run their game well.:p

Peace,

;)

Hanners
12-04-03, 10:19 AM
Originally posted by Malfunction
He didn't say that at all. What he did say is Carmack considers the lowest decimal, where as other(s) expect you to buy a new 9800 or 9600 to be able to run their game well.:p

So you're suggesting that the Half-Life 2 engine isn't scalable? :eek2:

S.I.N
12-04-03, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by Hanners
You don't honestly think Doom III will run on onboard video do you? :p

It's kind of an ironic thread to be singing Carmack's praises in - Where the Hell is Doom III anyway?! ;)


Nope but your sure enough wont need a $500 card from ATI to play it. HL2 by all accounts wont run on NV very well because of DX.9 on even a $400 Nvida which they say gives it all its beauty...here is game based on DX.7 looking just as good if not better that will run great on both cards. And it may just run on onboard video.;)

And the Doom III wait is more forgiveing because I dont think there horse-pottuing (crap is that a word) like Valve is.:p

digitalwanderer
12-04-03, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by Malfunction
He didn't say that at all. What he did say is Carmack considers the lowest decimal, where as other(s) expect you to buy a new 9800 or 9600 to be able to run their game well.:p

Peace,

;)
I'll admit there seems to be a trend lately in putting out games that NO computer can run decently, but HL2 is supposed to be scalable as heck to accomodate older hardware too.

It's a silly point to argue though which takes less to run well when neither game is out or even announced a release date yet! ;) :lol:

We can argue over it when the games are out, I promise. :p

Hanners
12-04-03, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by S.I.N
HL2 by all accounts wont run on NV very well because of DX.9 on even a $400 Nvida which they say gives it all its beauty...

It'll run fine, it just took Valve one Hell of a long time to get to run properly and it might be missing the odd effect here and there. It's just the typical case you'll see with NV3x - It needs a special codepath to run at its best. Why else do you think Doom III has an NV3x codepath? Because it needs it to run well, just like Half-Life 2.

Malfunction
12-04-03, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by Hanners
So you're suggesting that the Half-Life 2 engine isn't scalable? :eek2:

Well, if this was any indication of performance : Firing Squad HL2 bench (http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/hl2_performance_preview_part2/default.asp), then I don't see how a GF3 will be able to run it well let alone a Radeon 8500, code paths or not.

Peace,

:angel:

[Edit] Added a few words.

Hanners
12-04-03, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by Malfunction
Well, if this was any indication of performance : Firing Squad HL2 bench (][b), then I don't see how a GF3 will be able to run it well let alone a Radeon 8500, code paths or not.[/B]

Shall we dig out some Doom III benchmarks (http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1821&p=22) then? Even a DirectX 8.1 card like the Radeon 9200 can't run it well, so how are you expecting a GeForce3 to perform? :eek2:

Malfunction
12-04-03, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by Hanners
Shall we dig out some Doom III benchmarks (http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1821&p=22) then? Even a DirectX 8.1 card like the Radeon 9200 can't run it well, so how are you expecting a GeForce3 to perform? :eek2:

That was with an Alpha for Doom ]|[, there is apparently a bench already for HL2. :p

Peace,

:D

[Edit] Thought you were talking about the Doom Alpha Benchmarks, not Nvidia's Doom ]|[ demo. That is just like the AMD benchmark that was eagerly posted up awhile ago... :D

Hanners
12-04-03, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by Malfunction
That was with an Alpha for Doom ]|[, there is apparently a bench already for HL2. :p

No, that was with a beta build of Doom III, just like Half-Life 2 was benchmarked using a beta release. The simple fact is, neither engine will give what most people would class as good performance with a DirectX 7 level video card.

jAkUp
12-04-03, 10:37 AM
heres your info on whether it will ship this year:


Dear Mr. Newell,
In all of the e-mails I have read from you, you are always replying
negative. When people ask anything about HL2 release date, you reply
negative. So I ask you, Mr. Newell, reply to this e-mail with some
positive information about HL2 or TF2.

Sincerely,
Andrew
A.K.A MongoTheMad

P.S. I already know everything about CS:CZ, so do not give any
information about it.

From: Gabe Newell [mailto:gaben@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 03:12:24 -0800
To: Andrew
Subject: RE: You always reply negative...

I'm positive HL-2 won't ship this year.

Malfunction
12-04-03, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by Hanners
No, that was with a beta build of Doom III, just like Half-Life 2 was benchmarked using a beta release. The simple fact is, neither engine will give what most people would class as good performance with a DirectX 7 level video card.

Yes, and I corrected that by saying I thought you were referring to the Alpha bench @ Guru3D: Here (http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/35/11/)

Also by the way it looks, a FX5200U gets 37FPS @ 10x7 (Medium Quality)! That is a heck of alot better than in Halo and why hadn't we seen any bench that showed the FX5200U in HL2? At least anand showed a 5200U and 9200 in Doom ]|[ considering it is a beta demo, the performance can only get better. Where as with HL2, you have no lower end benchmarks to even considered.

Peace,

:afro:

Hanners
12-04-03, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by Malfunction
Also by the way it looks, a FX5200U gets 37FPS @ 10x7! That is a heck of alot better than in Halo and why hadn't we seen any bench that showed the FX5200U in HL2?

I imagine it was because the 5200 won't run the DirectX 9 path in Half-Life 2. I agree, it would still have been interesting to see how it performs in DirectX 8.1 mode though...

Blacklash
12-04-03, 12:14 PM
And by the time all these 'uber' games are out, the NV40 should be as well.
Its nice to know the ati can do this and that now, but in the long run it means squat. UNLESS you aren't upgrading.

Sounds like he's just restating what he said awhile ago. With no details on the ship date either.

Wonder if they ever caught the 'cracker'...

Why even post this regurgitation?

Uttar
12-04-03, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by Malficar
Its nice to know the ati can do this and that now, but in the long run it means squat. UNLESS you aren't upgrading.

How many people buying a NV38 or NV36 is going to upgrade in the next 9 to 12 months, please? :p


Uttar

Malfunction
12-04-03, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by Malficar
And by the time all these 'uber' games are out, the NV40 should be as well.
Its nice to know the ati can do this and that now, but in the long run it means squat. UNLESS you aren't upgrading.

Sounds like he's just restating what he said awhile ago. With no details on the ship date either.

Wonder if they ever caught the 'cracker'...

Why even post this regurgitation?

It's being posted because there are few highly anticipated games for 2k4. Two of them are HL2 and Doom3. This all goes back to the quality of the code being written. Carmack/Doom3 still considers the lower end segment when writting code for Doom3 which happens to look superior in graphics next to HL2. Granted graphics are not everything, though they are when considering a purchase of a videocard.

Tech Demo or Not, Doom3 appears to be more considerate to the lower end segment than HL2 does:

http://www.beyond3d.com/misc/hl2/images/hl24.gif
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&postid=241818

Peace,

:)

jbirney
12-04-03, 12:48 PM
HL2 by all accounts wont run on NV very well because of DX.9 on even a $400 Nvida which they say gives it all its beauty...here is game based on DX.7 looking just as good if not better that will run great on both cards.

Please it will run just fine. You will have to trun down the details some.


This all goes back to the quality of the code being written. Carmack/Doom3 is still considers the lower end segment when writting code for Doom3

DX8/DX9 game vrs DX7
High IQ for HL vrs Medium for D3
Shader limited game vrs (not sure whats the limiting factor in Doom3)

Any yes JC is god. But its way to early to say one is limited the other. You have no idea what if any features were truned off on the lowend runs for both games.


which happens to look superior in graphics next to HL2.

Thats your opinion that others do not share, including me. I think each has their own mertis on the IQ. But to say one is better is nothing more than your opinion.