PDA

View Full Version : Partial Precision on NV40


Ruined
05-03-04, 06:38 PM
If the developer concludes there is no visual artifacting from using partial precision FP16 on a shader and does so for the NV4x lines of cards to increase performance, are you okay with that philisophically?

Dazz
05-03-04, 06:48 PM
I am so long as it's not noticeable. Mixing modes is good way to boosting frame rates while not killing IQ.

creedamd
05-03-04, 07:14 PM
As long as it is not noticable up to 400%, then yes. (for benchmarking purposes)

Gouhan
05-03-04, 07:18 PM
There would be no situation where one is playing the same game on two different cards at the same time on exactly the same PC. So the fact that card X does it and card Y does not makes no difference, because you would not be able to compare them directly at any point ever. (Hope you got that, not sure if its clear...)

Smokey
05-03-04, 08:40 PM
If there is no difference quality wise, then I wouldnt care.

photophreak314
05-03-04, 08:41 PM
As long as it's not visible, I don't care. If a company wants to do some extra programming so their game runs well on a card, I couldn't care less. They're the ones writing the code, I'm the one playing the game.

MontoyaSG
05-03-04, 09:58 PM
it there's not much difference when using partial precision for games why not

Clay
05-03-04, 11:09 PM
If there is no glaring difference then I wouldn't mind one bit. Introducing overhead just for the pure sake of doing so is wasteful and just silly. I appreciate clean, efficient code and development approaches. :)

dave_
05-03-04, 11:27 PM
If the developer concludes there is no visual artifacting from using partial precision FP16 on a shader and does so for the NV4x lines of cards to increase performance, are you okay with that philisophically?

ideally I'd like code to have nothing nvidia or ATI related at all - just pure DX or OGL standards code, and nvidia and ATI producing great standards-based hardware.

in reality: optimised paths are okay but if there are ANY visual differences (even "insignificant" ones - let me decide thank you) then you should have a choice either in drivers or game to run the optimised path or the "pure" path.

Nv40
05-04-04, 12:08 AM
If the developer concludes there is no visual artifacting from using partial precision FP16 on a shader and does so for the NV4x lines of cards to increase performance, are you okay with that philisophically?


partial precision Fp16 for games in DX8 and a few shaders in Dx9 make sense. the problem was the Nv30 and others Fx cards cannot run at Full speed at that precision. Nvidia never designed the hardware to use FP32 in games ,it was more for the proffesional market and for game developers to have something to work ,when more precision was needed..

Fp16 in DX8 games /with few use of DX9 its ok.. if there is no trade in IQ. and you need to Zoom or photoshop to notice diferences againts higher precisions.. for Halo,3dmark,tombraider,and many others "dx9 games" FP16 is more than enough.. for Farcy it seems that it is not . :) because the few PS2.0 that use the game need higher than Fp16.. as long that there is no graphics errors ,no noticeable diferences IQ to the naked Eye is ok to me..

Casper
05-04-04, 01:57 AM
If you have the option do disable them in every game and every benchmark yes.