3Dmark05 High and better IQ...

[ivzk]

ATI is the only current hardware that supports 3dc, period.



NV does not hold the patent for DST, SGI holds the patent. Also, DST is not an NV-exclusive feature. On top of this, it has been said that DST should have theoretically better image quality at times than without DST.



NVIDIA bought that as well as a few other patents from SGI, so in fact they do hold the patent for DST. Nice try though.


EDIT: Link added.http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/07/20/nvidia_sgi_bury_hatchet/ (http://)

[NoWayDude]

ivzk, link not working

BTW did you also read the whitepapper that dpagan links a few posts before?

[ivzk]

"Nvidia, SGI bury hatchet
By Mike Magee
Published Tuesday 20th July 1999 17:52 GMT

Silicon Graphics and Nvidia have settled their differences and announced a strategic alliance to work together on future graphics technology. SGI has dropped its patent infringement suit against Nvidia, while the latter has licensed SGI's 3D graphics patent portfolio. Financial details of the agreement were not available. The different CEOs did the usual gig of slapping each other on the shoulders and saying how wonderful the world is... ®"


Don't know why the link doesn't work!?

[jimmyjames123]

NVIDIA bought that as well as a few other patents from SGI, so in fact they do hold the patent for DST. Nice try though.


EDIT: Link added.http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/07/20/nvidia_sgi_bury_hatchet/

Ironically, you are from Canada... :D Do you have any source that we can actually view that proves that NV "bought" this specific patent?

Regardless, there is still more than one IHV who utilizes DST (see B3D for more info), which means that DST is not an IHV-exclusive feature, unlike 3dc. Also, there are games available that already use DST, unlike 3dc.

[ivzk]

Ironically, you are from Canada... :D Do you have any source that we can actually view that proves that NV "bought" this specific patent?

Regardless, there is still more than one IHV who utilizes DST (see B3D for more info), which means that DST is not an IHV-exclusive feature, unlike 3dc. Also, there are games available that already use DST, unlike 3dc.


So sorry Jimmy. Should of said Nvidia lawyered it from SGI. Lawyered, is that even a word? It is now.

Ironically you would probably be the guy who is all for Linux and its open code and against Microsoft and its monopoly. And here you support a patented idea versus the open code that 3Dc is.



EDIT: could you please link me to the list of DST supporting hardware.

[dpagan]

So sorry Jimmy. Should of said Nvidia lawyered it from SGI. Lawyered, is that even a word? It is now.

Ironically you would probably be the guy who is all for Linux and its open code and against Microsoft and its monopoly. And here you support a patented idea versus the open code that 3Dc is.



EDIT: could you please link me to the list of DST supporting hardware.

it's up to the hardware manufacture to include support or not as state by futuremark, the difference between 3dc and dst is 3dc requires additional artwork while dst only requires a few lines of code, it comes down to how many games are using it now and in the future which by the way are many and the reason they are using it is that this feature is no longer an ihv which leaves me to believe ati can use it if they wish so, but they choose not to, imho i wish they did use it and i also wish nvidia would use 3dc, but these two companys behave really childish like, and this attitude seems to be Contagious (many hardware users have been infected) they need to get over that Enormous ego of theres and start taking advantage of the technology available to give end user a better gaming experience period

[ivzk]

I like your reasoning dpagan, but we're nowhere near the ends of the IHVs being driven by their CEO's egos.

[NoWayDude]

versus the open code that 3Dc is.


For what i read 3DC is/will became open code because ATI wants it to be part of the next DirectX , because they support this on hardware
I'm not aware of anyone else that supports this feature,so i think ivzk , that your reasoning in this matter is not 100% correct

[ivzk]

By the time DirectNext comes out, you can bet Nvidia will be fully supporting 3Dc. Also by that time, everyone will forget about the current generation of graphic cards. People on forums as well as the IHVs have a very short memory when it comes to that. Just ask the people that own the 5xxx cards.


EDIT: spelling

[jimmyjames123]

So sorry Jimmy. Should of said Nvidia lawyered it from SGI. Lawyered, is that even a word? It is now.

So SGI still holds the patent on DST, or do you have proof to show us otherwise? Or would you rather just side-step the issue again with make-believe words? :D

Ironically you would probably be the guy who is all for Linux and its open code and against Microsoft and its monopoly. And here you support a patented idea versus the open code that 3Dc is.

The issue here is not the merits of DST vs 3dc, the issue here is why Futuremark decided to include DST and not include 3dc. There are several reasons why they did this. One, DST is not currently IHV-exclusive. Two, the idea of DST has been around for years (you know, Futuremark cannot design their new software in 2 months). Three, several current (and future) games support it. Open source code or not is completely irrelevant in this context.

EDIT: could you please link me to the list of DST supporting hardware.

Obviously NV hardware, and apparently there is another vender supporting DST but the information is under NDA (see B3D). But I can tell you that this "list" is definitely larger than the list of hardware that supports 3dc! ;)

[Apple]

The issue here is not the merits of DST vs 3dc, the issue here is why Futuremark decided to include DST and not include 3dc.

One IHV or ten IHV's supporting DST isn't a real issue for me, 3Dc vs DST neither, what my issue is is the fact that DST is used as a default. Shadow Q. simply don't match the ref image. Period.

[NoWayDude]

One IHV or ten IHV's supporting isn't a real issue for me, 3Dc vs DST neither, what my issue is is the fact that DST is used as a default. Shadow Q. simply don't match the ref image. Period.

But neither does ATI.
I reckon that you are now grapping at straws.None of the IHV's support the ref image 100% correctly


(edited, one sentence taken out of toppic.apologies)

[jimmyjames123]

One IHV or ten IHV's supporting isn't a real issue for me, 3Dc vs DST neither, what my issue is is the fact that DST is used as a default. Shadow Q. simply don't match the ref image. Period.

Futuremark is trying to simulate future gameplay in their 3dmark05. This future gameplay will in most cases include DST, so it is arguably not realistic to compare NV and other (S3?) cards without DST. You can only compare to a reference image if you know what hardware was used to create the rasterizer. DST in some cases will result in better image quality because it smooths out shadow edges.

P.S. The producer of 3dmark05 has stated that DST does improve performance, but as far as he knows, 3dc does not improve performance over their implementation of DXT5 compression used in the program. On top of that, support for DST required just a few lines of code, while support for 3dc would require an additional download of 100-150 MB. ;)

[ivzk]

Honest question!

Why would 3Dc require 150mb more to download. I thought it compresses the textures.
Or are you implying that the nvidia users would have to download uncompressed textures, hence both versions of texture in the same program.

Is that how you're coming up with your figure?

[jimmyjames123]

That's not my figure, that is the figure coming straight from Patrick O, producer of 3dmark05. FYI, he posted the information at B3D.

[ivzk]

That's not my figure, that is the figure coming straight from Patrick O, producer of 3dmark05. FYI, he posted the information at B3D.


I wasn't implying that you pulled that figure out of your ass, so you can stop being defensive. I was more interested why it would be bigger download. Thanks for not answering my question. Great dealing with you.

[dpagan]

I wasn't implying that you pulled that figure out of your ass, so you can stop being defensive. I was more interested why it would be bigger download. Thanks for not answering my question. Great dealing with you.

acording to FM they claim 3dc needs more artwork done what does this mean i have no clue but my guess is adding art work will increase to overall size, how much? no clue there either plus i'm also guessing there would have to be sime kind algorythms added also.

excuse the spelling

[Apple]

You can only compare to a reference image if you know what hardware was used to create the rasterizer.

Futuremark FAQ: "The reference rasterizer is a CPU-only renderer that comes with the DirectX(R) SDK and it (obviously) renders every frame perfectly as intended by the DirectX(R) specification."


This is why DST is a non DX feature. :rolleyes:

[jimmyjames123]

I wasn't implying that you pulled that figure out of your ass, so you can stop being defensive.

There was nothing defensive about the statement really. A fact is a fact, simple as that.

I was more interested why it would be bigger download. Thanks for not answering my question. Great dealing with you.

I thought I already explained to you that it was posted by Patrick at the B3D forums. Too lazy to take a look there? Here is the link:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16710&start=140

The increased size is because they would need to include all normal maps in both 3dc and dxt5 compression formats.

[jimmyjames123]

Futuremark FAQ: "The reference rasterizer is a CPU-only renderer that comes with the DirectX(R) SDK and it (obviously) renders every frame perfectly as intended by the DirectX(R) specification."


This is why DST is a non DX feature.

Futuremark appears to be breaking off a little bit from their original philosophy of strictly molding their software to conform to DirectX specs. They are moving in the direction of trying to create software that attempts to even more closely mimic future gameplay.

Keep in mind that the reference rasterizer image is not always the highest quality image that can be produced. There are instances where using DST will result in arguably better image quality vs not using it.

[ivzk]

Thank you.

[jbirney]

Keep In mind who is doing the Xbox2 Video GPU (and nentendo as well..not like that will matter) which will support 3Dc as well....

[neliz]

And the next DirectX (Or WGF) will standardize 3Dc...

[NoWayDude]

And the next DirectX (Or WGF) will standardize 3Dc...

Only if ATI drops is patent on it.MS does not like other patents on theyr API
:)

[neliz]

Only if ATI drops is patent on it.MS does not like other patents on theyr API
:)

Don't worry that allready happened at launch.
It has been confirmed as a part of the next DirectX