PDA

View Full Version : Doom3 bundled with NV40?


Pages : [1] 2

DSC
12-15-03, 10:15 AM
As you all know, that HL2 is being bundled on ATI's XT cards and just now I read about CoD being bundled with 5900 cards. Would it be too crazy to assume Nvidia will work a deal with Id to get Doom3 bundled with NV40...... :D ;) :p

LiquidX
12-15-03, 10:30 AM
I would bet my little pony on it.:)

jbirney
12-15-03, 11:52 AM
That and the fact NV paid 4 Million to activision for D3 probably helps :)

Malfunction
12-15-03, 12:16 PM
Oh boy.. oh boy... oh boy!!! http://www.jokaroo.com/forum/images/smilies/thumbs-up.gif

Peace,

:jumping:

saturnotaku
12-15-03, 12:24 PM
I can tell you for sure that this is something that is definitely being discussed among NVIDIA and its board partners. Whether they act upon it or not is still up in the air, but let's just say one of said board partners wouldn't be suprised if it does indeed happen. ;)

MUYA
12-15-03, 12:34 PM
YAY!!! NVIDIA SUBSIDIZED Doom III!

/me is still saving up for a nv40


MUYA

-=DVS=-
12-15-03, 12:54 PM
so NV40 is gonna be faster than R420 ?

Mariner
12-15-03, 01:04 PM
so NV40 is gonna be faster than R420 ?

Not from the rumours I've heard! :p

The rumour is that the R420 is going to be verrrrry fast but not offer much more in the way of features than R3*0 (VS/PS 3.0 aside) as it is mainly a many pipelined (12 or 16 rumoured) refresh of this tech.

Same rumours say that NV40 won't be as fast but will have more advanced features (hopefully usable this time, too ;)). It will be interesting to see if they finally get some decent anti-aliasing as the old Ordered Grid stuff is very old hat.

poursoul
12-15-03, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by Mariner
Not from the rumours I've heard! :p

The rumour is that the R420 is going to be verrrrry fast but not offer much more in the way of features than R3*0 (VS/PS 3.0 aside) as it is mainly a many pipelined (12 or 16 rumoured) refresh of this tech.

Same rumours say that NV40 won't be as fast but will have more advanced features (hopefully usable this time, too ;)). It will be interesting to see if they finally get some decent anti-aliasing as the old Ordered Grid stuff is very old hat.

Say the morre features and not much performance thing is true, didn't work out too well for the NV3X line.

ALL i care about is playing the damn game. NO MORE fake release dates, playing an alpha, or ****ting over speculation for me.

GlowStick
12-15-03, 02:38 PM
I dont think doom3 will be bundled because Doom 3 as well as all of Id games go for Top doller at the stores, and it takes them a LONG time to come down in price. eg its to expensive to buy for each card = less profit.

thats why most card comes with crappy games that are in the bargin bin for 5$............ they get it for 1 per copy probly

Mariner
12-15-03, 03:49 PM
Perhaps whether or not Doom 3 is included with NV40 will depend on the performance of the card relative to R420?

If it's much slower then NV are more likely to need a marketing 'extra' to sell the cards - what better than the full version of Doom 3?

If, on the other hand, the performance of these cards is on a par, then I'd expect to see maybe a Doom 3 LE of just a few taster levels included with NV40.

euan
12-15-03, 04:30 PM
I would have thought the 4 mil was for the inclusion of propriatory codepaths, and the exclusive use of rendering technologies only available on NV hardware.

Malfunction
12-15-03, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by euan
I would have thought the 4 mil was for the inclusion of propriatory codepaths, and the exclusive use of rendering technologies only available on NV hardware.

Why made good hardware, when you can bribe the software manufacturers?

Whaaaa.... :cry: lol

Peace,

:lol:

zakelwe
12-16-03, 01:51 AM
Originally posted by euan
I would have thought the 4 mil was for the inclusion of propriatory codepaths, and the exclusive use of rendering technologies only available on NV hardware.

Why made good hardware, when you can bribe the software manufacturers?


Is this a sly dig on ATi's lack of ability to make a PCB that allows memory to run at 450/500Mhz ( 900/1000 effective) straight out of the box ?



Regards

Andy

cthellis
12-16-03, 02:59 AM
Rather doubtful, as that has nothing to do with the software. Also, there no "lack of ability" and only "inadequacy" by comparison, as keeping in mind that they don't NEED to to offer the kind of performance people are looking for. Does it reflect a "lack of ability" on ATi's and nVidia's parts that they offer no mainstream dual-chip solutions like XGI? (Which at the moment performs a lot worse?) They see architectural decisions and material costs, and we see the performance numbers. If we're happy with the performance, in relation to the whole field and the price considerations, does it really matter how they got there? Should we bother making straight comparisons of particular points that we could stretch out into all OTHER points from all the IHVs? When does something stop becoming just an "it would be nice" consideration and actually become "flaw"?

zakelwe
12-16-03, 03:28 AM
Originally posted by cthellis
When does something stop becoming just an "it would be nice" consideration and actually become "flaw"?

When you put 2ns memory on a card and it doesn't reach 800Mhz, that is either a flaw at worst or a marketing ploy at best.

Regards

Andy

Mariner
12-16-03, 04:17 AM
When you put 2ns memory on a card and it doesn't reach 800Mhz, that is either a flaw at worst or a marketing ploy at best.

If the card itself isn't designed to run the higher memory speeds, how can it be called a flaw? :confused:

That is called a design decision. The fact that the performance of the competing ATI/NV cards is on a par even with lower bandwidth shows that the higher memory speeds aren't necessary for this generation of ATI's cards.

Of course, that doesn't mean it wouldn't be nicer to have faster memory on the ATI cards! :afro:

zakelwe
12-16-03, 04:23 AM
Originally posted by Mariner
If the card itself isn't designed to run the higher memory speeds, how can it be called a flaw? :confused:

That is called a design decision. The fact that the performance of the competing ATI/NV cards is on a par even with lower bandwidth shows that the higher memory speeds aren't necessary for this generation of ATI's cards.



Given that you have to ask why they put 2ns memory on some ATi cards, 9800's I seem to remember.

And the 5700U has better performance at high AA/AF than the XT 9600 due to it's faster memory now, though of course you can argue the toss about the AA/AF implementation.

Regards

Andy

Mariner
12-16-03, 06:35 AM
I'll not argue that it would be nice if the RV350 cards had faster memory than they do as they are certainly at a huge bandwidth disadvantage to the 5700U. However, their performance isn't far behind and is still ahead in many areas (DX9 etc) and I'd say that ATI's margins on these much be much higher than NV's on the the 5700U.

It seems to me that the current generation of NV chips isn't able to use their bandwidth anywhere nears as efficiently at the ATI ones are. Whether this is just because of the design of the chips themselves or if the memory controller is not up to scratch, I'm not sure. It's surprising, really, because the GF3/4 had much more efficient memory performance than the competing ATI chips of the time.

As an example, Anand's latest budget video card test:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1933

The crappy cut-down 9600SE beats the (also admittedly crappy) 5200U in about half of the tests despite having less than a third of the memory bandwidth!

zakelwe
12-16-03, 07:22 AM
Originally posted by Mariner
I'll not argue that it would be nice if the RV350 cards had faster memory than they do as they are certainly at a huge bandwidth disadvantage to the 5700U. However, their performance isn't far behind and is still ahead in many areas (DX9 etc) and I'd say that ATI's margins on these much be much higher than NV's on the the 5700U.

It seems to me that the current generation of NV chips isn't able to use their bandwidth anywhere nears as efficiently at the ATI ones are. Whether this is just because of the design of the chips themselves or if the memory controller is not up to scratch, I'm not sure. It's surprising, really, because the GF3/4 had much more efficient memory performance than the competing ATI chips of the time.

As an example, Anand's latest budget video card test:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1933

The crappy cut-down 9600SE beats the (also admittedly crappy) 5200U in about half of the tests despite having less than a third of the memory bandwidth!


Some good points there. I get the feeling that Ati are letting nvidia off the hook somewhat though.

It's not so relevant on the high end cards but the mid range cards like the high speed memory, most specifically with present/ slightly older games.

Maybe we need to put the two manufacturers cards out to stud, and end up with the nvidia core and Ati memory ( er, argh ! )

Regards

Andy

Mariner
12-16-03, 08:51 AM
(Backing away slowly)

You're talking about mating the rival graphics cards? Nurse, come quickly! :D

vampireuk
12-16-03, 10:22 AM
Back to the issue of the game :p, I think ATI may have shot theirselves in the foot with Halflife 2:D

Quitch
12-17-03, 08:56 AM
Originally posted by vampireuk
Back to the issue of the game :p, I think ATI may have shot theirselves in the foot with Halflife 2:D

Please enlighten us.

The Baron
12-17-03, 08:59 AM
Originally posted by Quitch
Please enlighten us.
if it doesn't come out for six more months, who really cares that it's being bundled?

GlowStick
12-17-03, 09:36 AM
Agreed, ati didnt count of valve bening a bunch of jerks.