Games that use pixel shader version 1.4

[Moose]

Much has been made lately about Futuremark using 1.4 pixel shaders in 3dmark2003 and I'm just curious if anyone can name a single game that currently uses PS 1.4 or even a future game that will use them.


Anyone???

[Hellbinder]

Well for starters, Nvidias Claim that Tiger Woods uses Ps 1.3 is flatly WRONG.

Tiger Woods uses PS 1.4

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Hellbinder
Well for starters, Nvidias Claim that Tiger Woods uses Ps 1.3 is flatly WRONG.

Tiger Woods uses PS 1.4

I missed you HB :)

where you been ?

[Hellbinder]

Taking an emmotional break from the current issues. I was getting a little to hot under the collar over this whole 3dmark thing.

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Hellbinder
Taking an emmotional break from the current issues. I was getting a little to hot under the collar over this whole 3dmark thing.

you don't seem to have skipped a beat... in the hot sense I mean :)

[DEM BONES]

Dungeon Siege uses PS1.4

That fuzzy donut game too...:D

[jbirney]

Doom3 (the OpenGL version of PS1.4) and since that game will probably be THE game for this year, its worth something...

[Spotch]

Originally posted by DEM BONES
Dungeon Siege uses PS1.4

That fuzzy donut game too...:D

The Furry Donut Rules All!!!

[Kruno]

Originally posted by DEM BONES
Dungeon Siege uses PS1.4

That fuzzy donut game too...:D

Proof? If that is true, then it will explain the very large performance increase I felt when upgrading from GF3 >> R9700 Pro in DS.
If not then the performance increase came from the R300 being able to handle the polycounts and higher fillrate with AF+AA.

PS 1.4 would allow the entire scene to be rendered in 1 pass, saving lots of calcs in the process. :eek:

[sebazve]

none according to nvidia:wtf: :lol2: :bs:

[PreservedSwine]

Add these to the list...

Tiger Woods

UT2K3

NWN

Doom III will, of course...

[DJB]

What makes you think that NVW uses PS1.4?

DJB

[Nv40]

Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
Proof? If that is true, then it will explain the very large performance increase I felt when upgrading from GF3 >> R9700 Pro in DS.
If not then the performance increase came from the R300 being able to handle the polycounts and higher fillrate with AF+AA.

PS 1.4 would allow the entire scene to be rendered in 1 pass, saving lots of calcs in the process. :eek:

yes! PS1.4 in theory is nice ,in just ONE pass process everything the
Geforce3/Geforce4 (PS1.1..1.3) requires to do in 2-3 passes..
but in practice it seems that at least even the original Geforce3
with PS1.3 will still be competitive againts a Radeon8500 with PS1.4
if not faster .


just look at Jcarmack told.. on .. February 11, 2002
http://www.webdog.org/cgi-bin/finger.plm?id=1&time=20020627230700
-----------------------------------------------

The fragment level processing is clearly way better on the 8500 than on the
Nvidia products, including the latest GF4. You have six individual textures,
but you can access the textures twice, giving up to eleven possible texture
accesses in a single pass, and the dependent texture operation is much more
sensible. This wound up being a perfect fit for Doom, because the standard
path could be implemented with six unique textures, but required one texture
(a normalization cube map) to be accessed twice. The vast majority of Doom
light / surface interaction rendering will be a single pass on the 8500, in
contrast to two or three passes, depending on the number of color components
in a light, for GF3/GF4 (*note GF4 bitching later on).
Initial performance testing was interesting. I set up three extreme cases to
exercise different characteristics:
A test of the non-textured stencil shadow speed showed a GF3 about 20% faster
than the 8500. I believe that Nvidia has a slightly higher performance memory
architecture.
A test of light interaction speed initially had the 8500 significantly slower
than the GF3, *which was shocking due to the difference in pass count.* ATI
identified some driver issues, and the speed came around so that the 8500 was
faster in all combinations of texture attributes, in some cases 30+% more.
This was about what I expected, given the large savings in memory traffic by
doing everything in a single pass.
A high polygon count scene that was more representative of real game graphics
under heavy load gave a surprising result. I was expecting ATI to clobber
Nvidia here due to the much lower triangle count and MUCH lower state change
functional overhead from the single pass interaction rendering, but they came
out slower. ATI has identified an issue that is likely causing the unexpected
performance, but it may not be something that can be worked around on current hardware.
I can set up scenes and parameters where either card can win, but I think that current Nvidia cards are still a somewhat safer bet for consistent performance and quality.

yes the "RAdeon8500" we have today is not the same radeon that was
launched last year,with the Geforce3.. now radeons 8500 ships with 128megs and even higher COre/memory frequencies..
those new changes represent most of the famous
"performance increase in drivers" we have seen many months
later in reviews ..

also the radeon9700pro was not in carmack hands by that
time.. only Geforce3 and radeon8500pro
so by looking at those Jcarmarck comments i will not be surprised
to see in Doom3 retail happening this..

from slow ->to fastest.. at playable frame rates!!! 30fps-40fps in Doom3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Radeon8500,Geforce3,Geforce4,Radeon9700pro,Geforce Fxultra.


here raw performance will be one the most important things..
there will be not enough room for AA or AF un less you want to ..

1)disable IQ settings like shadows and HQ textures
to use AA/AF :rolleyes:
2)play at very low resolutions like 800x600.. or worse..
3)or just play in slideshowmode when there are many monsters
at the same time ..

another interesting info is that i believe that custom MODS or LEvels
made in the mod community will stress even more video cads to its limits.

THe NV30 and r300 will play fine Doom3 , but in no way you will be able to raise your settings to the highest possible ,like 1600 FULL AA/AF
like most people do it today in counterstrike. :)

i think Nv35 and R400 will be the right cards for Doom3 ;)

[ATI LoVeR 9700]

MY god... That was over a year ago! Get over yourself! It's not in theory, it really outperforms it!

[PreservedSwine]

Originally posted by DJB
What makes you think that NVW uses PS1.4?

DJB

Here you go, apparently, it's the OGL equivalent...

http://www.tomshardware.com/column/20030219/3dmark2003-04.html

1st page http://www.tomshardware.com/column/20030219/index.html

And add


Madden 2003


Nascar 2003


Pretty good read, IMO, even from Lars

[Nv40]

Originally posted by ATI LoVeR 9700
MY god... That was over a year ago! Get over yourself! It's not in theory, it really outperforms it!


sure!.. because you say it.. :rolleyes:

[PreservedSwine]

Just Listen to Carmack, you OWN source..

.....and the speed came around so that the 8500 was
faster in all combinations of texture attributes, in some cases 30+% more.
This was about what I expected, given the large savings in memory traffic by
doing everything in a single pass.


Howeverm he does go on to identify there may be a hardeware issue w/ the R8500.......nothing definitive, but it does show the supiority of PS1.4 compared to PS1.1, 1.2, and 1.3..:)

[Kruno]

Ati are still mowing down the bugs in the drivers. ;)
Real performance increases won't come by for a while. ;)

I wouldn't say the NV30 is faster than R300 at maximum possible settings (which I play with in EVERY game).

GFFX was going under 30fps with 8x FSAA and 64 tap aniso vs R300 63fps at 6x FSAA and 128-tap aniso.
What's worse is that the updated NV30 screens don't look that good. :/

Reminds me of my NV20.

Going to an NV30 is a downgrade for me. I ran Doom 3 alpha with max settings and it ran fine, slow, but over 25fps at all times. :)

Just some helpfull tweaking with SOUND files bought me a bit more performance.

Funny thing is, I was never looking forward to the NV30 as it is what I thought it would be.
Well, I'm going to enjoy watching pr0n on my R300 with the PSs improving my video output. :D

My next sights: NV50 and R500. :)

[gmontem]

http://www.tomshardware.com/column/20030219/index.html

And add

Madden 2003
Nascar 2003
Does anyone know which Nascar is being referred here? EA's Nascar Thunder 2003 or Papyrus' Nascar Racing 2003 Season?

[R.Carter]

Originally posted by DEM BONES
Dungeon Siege uses PS1.4

That fuzzy donut game too...:D

Dunno, I seem to recall reading somewhere that Dungeon Siege engine was based off of DirectX 7 not DirectX 8.1.

If so it couldn't be using PS1.4.

[Nv40]

Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
Ati are still mowing down the bugs in the drivers. ;)
Real performance increases won't come by for a while. ;)

I wouldn't say the NV30 is faster than R300 at maximum possible settings (which I play with in EVERY game).

GFFX was going under 30fps with 8x FSAA and 64 tap aniso vs R300 63fps at 6x FSAA and 128-tap aniso.
What's worse is that the updated NV30 screens don't look that good. :/

Reminds me of my NV20.

Going to an NV30 is a downgrade for me. I ran Doom 3 alpha with max settings and it ran fine, slow, but over 25fps at all times. :)

Just some helpfull tweaking with SOUND files bought me a bit more performance.

Funny thing is, I was never looking forward to the NV30 as it is what I thought it would be.
Well, I'm going to enjoy watching pr0n on my R300 with the PSs improving my video output. :D

My next sights: NV50 and R500. :)


did you know what average frame rates means?
you will hardly play Unrealt2003 at an average of 60FPS
in either ANtalus map or CTF levels in UnrealT2003 and many others in a real game, with many BOts or players.

those HARDOCP last screenshots of UNREALT2003 represent
only the performance in that LEVEL at that particular side of the map. probably with NO_BOTS in the map.. ;)

I wouldn't say the NV30 is faster than R300 at maximum possible settings (which I play with in EVERY game).

try: MAfia,unrealT2003,Unreal2,GTA2,battlefield1942
Aquanox,Comanche,JEdinight and others
with all the effects ON and FULL AA/AF at 1600x1200
and see if you can still play in internet or in LAN at "every" possible settings at playable frame rates..

neither Doom3 ,sorry . i dont eat that..
max settings *means* max settings .. that is 1600x1200 AA6x+AF16x in your radeon9700pro..

my friend has one in a P4-2.4gz,at its really choppy in DOOM3
the gameplay when you are fighting many monsters on screens
at the same time.. as low as 7FPS! if you try "maximun settings"
and no,he cannot play all the new games at "maximum settings"
he needs to lower always something.. AA or AF or
lower Resolutions, from below
the game "maximun settings" :)

he plays from 30-60 frames at 800x600 and slower at 1024x768 in Doom3 alpha but beyond that ,the framerate many times really DROPS!! too much.. to call it "smooth" the gameplay..

is the RADeon9700pro is sooo infinite fast as you seems to say,
why ATI needs to release an overclocked R300 ->the R350 ? :rolleyes:

i bet you and many others here play all your games at much lower settings that you claim to play which is "maximun settings" ,unless of couse all your games means for you ..COUnterstrike , Sims online and quake3 . ;)

[ATI LoVeR 9700]

The R350 will not be just an overclocked R300. ATi does not output cards like nVidia does... :rolleyes:

"Let's just up the clocks and call it a new card! (TI 500...)" :eek:

[Kruno]

Originally posted by Nv40
did you know what average frame rates means?
you will hardly play Unrealt2003 at an average of 60FPS
in either ANtalus map or CTF levels in UnrealT2003 and many others in a real game, with many BOts or players.

those HARDOCP last screenshots of UNREALT2003 represent
only the performance in that LEVEL at that particular side of the map. probably with NO_BOTS in the map.. ;)



try: MAfia,unrealT2003,Unreal2,GTA2,battlefield1942
Aquanox,Comanche,JEdinight and others
with all the effects ON and FULL AA/AF at 1600x1200
and see if you can still play in internet or in LAN at "every" possible settings at playable frame rates..

neither Doom3 ,sorry . i dont eat that..
max settings *means* max settings .. that is 1600x1200 AA6x+AF16x in your radeon9700pro..

my friend has one in a P4-2.4gz,at its really choppy in DOOM3
the gameplay when you are fighting many monsters on screens
at the same time.. as low as 7FPS! if you try "maximun settings"
and no,he cannot play all the new games at "maximum settings"
he needs to lower always something.. AA or AF or
lower Resolutions, from below
the game "maximun settings" :)

he plays from 30-60 frames at 800x600 and slower at 1024x768 in Doom3 alpha but beyond that ,the framerate many times really DROPS!! too much.. to call it "smooth" the gameplay..

is the RADeon9700pro is sooo infinite fast as you seems to say,
why ATI needs to release an overclocked R300 ->the R350 ? :rolleyes:

i bet you and many others here play all your games at much lower settings that you claim to play which is "maximun settings" ,unless of couse all your games means for you ..COUnterstrike , Sims online and quake3 . ;)

LOL, stop typing so much, you do realise I need to read it. :p
Yes, I play Counterstrike, WC3 and loads of old games and some new games like UT2K3.
I play with bots on maps and it runs fine with 14 bots.
If your friend can't play using maximum settings (128tap aniso and 6x FSAA at 1024x768) then it's not my problem and there is nothing I can do about it.

My monitor doesn't support 1600x1200 :p
Well if you get horrific framerates, it's not my problem. :)
I will enjoy playing UT2K3 with max settings over 60fps.
If you read my percentage post you will know more about averages and the like. :)

All the games you mentioned with an exception of a few I have never even seen, like Mafia, I have played perfectly.
Yes I do play UT2K3 and BF1942 on the internet and it runs no slower/faster than in SP.

Now please don't respond with a big post. :p

[Spotch]

Actually Max settings is 2048x1536 16x aniso for me. :) And Quake 3 plays very smoothly at that res. You simply dont need more than 2x AA at 1600 x 1200 (4X at the most) it is simply overkill to go any higher. Also 8x performance Aniso is the highest you need. In a gaming situation you couldnot possible notice the difference between that and 16x quality. If you say you can, well either your a liar or you arent really playing the game.

[Nv40]

I play with bots on maps and it runs fine with 14 bots.
If your friend can't play using maximum settings (128tap aniso and 6x FSAA at 1024x768) then it's not my problem and there is nothing I can do about it. My monitor doesn't support 1600x1200 .

i knew it! ;)
you are playing at medium resolutions.. :)

the radeon9700pro cannot play "new" games at the
(maximun settings possible )as many believe..
thats why many rage3d members complained for the
SLOWperformance when they were unable to play at 1600x1200 with AA/AF all high in games like UT2003..

new games based of UnrealT2003 engine or Doom3 engine and others will require nothing less than an NV35/R400
to play at "maximun settings" possible.

if anyone care to notice all those reviews in internet about
the radeon9700pro and GeforceFx were done in SUPER ULTRA FAST! machines that probrably .1% of users barely have.
like p4 3ghz with sound disable ,with clean machines and none
aplications running in the background..

my friend plays exactly all his games in his R300 at what
you call "maximun settings" :rolleyes:
1024x768 with AA/AF all high..


its a matter of preference ,but for me is FAR better Higher resolutions with medium AA/AF settings (1600x1200 AF8x/AA2x)
than playing games at medium resolutions ->1024x768
but raising AA+AF modes to the max.
like i CAN do today in quake3 and many others games in my Geforce4 .. :eek:

do yourself a BIG! favor a get a new good looking monitor..
AA is nice ,it smooth->(BLUR) the jaggies in games , but at the
expense of textures Bluring ,Higher resolutions increase
the Colors on all your screen a lot more ,and even helps
to antialiase the scenes and the textures,without the Glide effect ,we have seen in Radeon9700pro screenshots.

just get a new Monitor ,try one with Trinitron tech ,and try 1600x1200 or higher and play with AF/AA until you get
good framerates .. you will see a huge diference.. :)