Originally posted by CaptNKILL
Ok, so Doom 3 is the next step in graphics, I mean, it pretty much represents the future of graphics AND it uses PS2.0. Few will disagree there.
How is 3dMark2K3 an accurate representation of "future" games if the NV35 is CLEARLY the best card for Doom III, yet a "poor" performer in 3dMark2K3?
One last reply before I go home...
a)Doom3 does not use PS2.0... it uses OpenGL, not DX9.
b)Doom3 uses a vendor specific path for NV30, so it codes to its
strengths, not to PS2.0
c)The current Doom3 benchmarks are worthless... because:
1)ATI did not know that such a benchmark was going to be
released and therefore did not have ANY optimizations for it
in their drivers. Proof of this can, at least circumstantially, be
found in the fact that the Cat 3.4, which are the only drivers
that can access more than 128Megs of RAM were broken.
If ATI had known there was going to be a DOOM3 benchmark
do you think they would have tried to dampen NVidia's launch
by tossing out drivers that were broken for that game?
3)NVidia controls that demo. If you want it, you don't go to ID,
you go to NVidia... ^_- Something tells me that they aren't
about to give their demo to ATI to optimise for, but hopefully
ATI has a current Doom build (should be nearly complete) so
they can begin adding their own optimizations in.
4)Take a look at the high quality settings and you'll find ATI
does win them... which to me is more important.
Do I expect Doom III to run faster on NV35 than R350? Yes. Do I expect it to be the gross gap NVidia's PR review currently shows? No. Do I expect NV35 to perform even close to as fast as R350 on the Arb2 path? No. Do I think that matters? No, I think that NV30 path will be pretty much indistinguishable from the Arb3 path.