Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA Windows Graphics Drivers

Newegg Daily Deals

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-21-03, 09:23 AM   #101
Brick_Top
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 136
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Hanners
You're absolutely right - But what happens to NV3x users then?
That is the main point.
Brick_Top is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 09:26 AM   #102
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

So wait... I'm now very confused. You want NV to cease with shader replacement, but you're afraid they will cease with shader replacement after the NV40 comes out? I need coffee. Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor, by the way.
 
Old 11-21-03, 09:28 AM   #103
Malfunction
 
Malfunction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lake Jackson, TX
Posts: 1,002
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by digitalwanderer
Uhm, I thought you were asking why nVidia won't continue to hand tweak shaders for the NV3x after the NV4x comes out...and the thing that would have changed would be the NV4x came out and that would be the card that nVidia would focus most on selling rather than the NV3x so they would NOT bother to custom write shaders for everything anymore.
Well, if AF is better on the GeForce 3 than it is on the GeForce 4....

(I don't know this for certain as I haven't seen either card first hand, but it is what Stealthawk has told me and it still apparently has not changed.)

Peace,

Malfunction is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 09:30 AM   #104
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Malfunction
Well, if AF is better on the GeForce 3 than it is on the GeForce 4....
That's due to a hardware flaw on the GF4 (IIRC), but I don't see what that has to do with what we're currently talking about at all!
__________________
[SIZE=1][I]"It was very important to us that NVIDIA did not know exactly where to aim. As a result they seem to have over-engineered in some aspects creating a power-hungry monster which is going to be very expensive for them to manufacture. We have a beautifully balanced piece of hardware that beats them on pure performance, cost, scalability, future mobile relevance, etc. That's all because they didn't know what to aim at."
-R.Huddy[/I] [/SIZE]
digitalwanderer is offline  

Old 11-21-03, 09:33 AM   #105
Malfunction
 
Malfunction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lake Jackson, TX
Posts: 1,002
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by digitalwanderer
That's due to a hardware flaw on the GF4 (IIRC), but I don't see what that has to do with what we're currently talking about at all!
If you have a GeForce 3 running Doom 3 like they have suggested, the support is still there isn't it? How old is the GeForce 3?

Peace,

Malfunction is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 09:33 AM   #106
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
So wait... I'm now very confused. You want NV to cease with shader replacement, but you're afraid they will cease with shader replacement after the NV40 comes out? I need coffee.
The Dig pours Baron a fresh cup-o-joe.

I'm a bit confuzled here myself, is this directed at me or Malfunction? If me then "No, I just want 'em to cease shader replacement period."; if Malfuntion then, "No, he is confident that they will continue to support hand-written shader replacement for the NV3x line even after it isn't their top-selling product anymore....a poor, gullible, magnificently optimistic, and unrealistic attitude to take IMHO.".
__________________
[SIZE=1][I]"It was very important to us that NVIDIA did not know exactly where to aim. As a result they seem to have over-engineered in some aspects creating a power-hungry monster which is going to be very expensive for them to manufacture. We have a beautifully balanced piece of hardware that beats them on pure performance, cost, scalability, future mobile relevance, etc. That's all because they didn't know what to aim at."
-R.Huddy[/I] [/SIZE]
digitalwanderer is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 09:34 AM   #107
Brick_Top
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 136
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
So wait... I'm now very confused. You want NV to cease with shader replacement, but you're afraid they will cease with shader replacement after the NV40 comes out? I need coffee. Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor, by the way.
I don't know if you're talking to me but.

I don't care with what they do as long as games look as good as they should. (as long as the developer knows and approve those "changes")

But i don't like the ideia that they may stop spending resources when they start producing hardware that doesn't need that special treatment.

I obviously understand that ATI doesn't like those controlled by the competitor changes when benchmarking.
Brick_Top is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 09:35 AM   #108
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Malfunction
If you have a GeForce 3 running Doom 3 like they have suggested, the support is still there isn't it? How old is the GeForce 3?
Ok, I give up...what are you talking about?
__________________
[SIZE=1][I]"It was very important to us that NVIDIA did not know exactly where to aim. As a result they seem to have over-engineered in some aspects creating a power-hungry monster which is going to be very expensive for them to manufacture. We have a beautifully balanced piece of hardware that beats them on pure performance, cost, scalability, future mobile relevance, etc. That's all because they didn't know what to aim at."
-R.Huddy[/I] [/SIZE]
digitalwanderer is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 09:35 AM   #109
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by digitalwanderer
That's due to a hardware flaw on the GF4 (IIRC), but I don't see what that has to do with what we're currently talking about at all!
Quote:
Ladies and gentlemen of the supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider: (pulling down a diagram of Chewie) this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk, but Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now, think about that. That does not make sense! (jury looks shocked)

Why would a Wookiee -- an eight foot tall Wookiee -- want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense!

But more importantly, you have to ask yourself: what does that have to do with this case? (calmly) Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense!

Look at me, I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense. None of this makes sense.

And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation... does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense.

If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.
It's true for both sides at the moment.
 
Old 11-21-03, 09:36 AM   #110
Malfunction
 
Malfunction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lake Jackson, TX
Posts: 1,002
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by digitalwanderer
The Dig pours Baron a fresh cup-o-joe.

I'm a bit confuzled here myself, is this directed at me or Malfunction? If me then "No, I just want 'em to cease shader replacement period."; if Malfuntion then, "No, he is confident that they will continue to support hand-written shader replacement for the NV3x line even after it isn't their top-selling product anymore....a poor, gullible, magnificently optimistic, and unrealistic attitude to take IMHO.".
I suppose "The Dig" will not be held responsible for his name calling yet again right nVNews Mods...?

Peace,

Malfunction is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 09:37 AM   #111
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Brick_Top
I don't know if you're talking to me but.

I don't care with what they do as long as games look as good as they should.

But i don't like the ideia that they may stop spending resources when they start producing hardware that doesn't need that special treatment.
Fact of life. I know ATI isn't going to consider R300 bugs top priority once the R420 comes out. I know they will eventually be fixed. That's what it means to have an older generation of cards; you move down a rung on the support chain. C'est la vie.
 
Old 11-21-03, 09:38 AM   #112
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Malfunction
I suppose "The Dig" will not be held responsible for his name calling yet again right nVNews Mods...?

Peace,

Well, nope, not unless you can somehow prove to me how that was name calling. It seemed to me to be directed at your opinion rather than at you.
 
Old 11-21-03, 09:40 AM   #113
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Malfunction
I suppose "The Dig" will not be held responsible for his name calling yet again right nVNews Mods...?
I don't believe I called you any names....again, what are you talking about?

(The only way to battle the Wookie defense is to keep moving 'em back on topic, or at least trying.)
__________________
[SIZE=1][I]"It was very important to us that NVIDIA did not know exactly where to aim. As a result they seem to have over-engineered in some aspects creating a power-hungry monster which is going to be very expensive for them to manufacture. We have a beautifully balanced piece of hardware that beats them on pure performance, cost, scalability, future mobile relevance, etc. That's all because they didn't know what to aim at."
-R.Huddy[/I] [/SIZE]
digitalwanderer is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 09:44 AM   #114
Brick_Top
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 136
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
Fact of life. I know ATI isn't going to consider R300 bugs top priority once the R420 comes out. I know they will eventually be fixed. That's what it means to have an older generation of cards; you move down a rung on the support chain. C'est la vie.
These optimizations are only getting this attention because the are significative and they bring significative performance enhancements thus if they do that now they would need to do it in the future.

I thought these were optimizations not bugs.
Brick_Top is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 09:45 AM   #115
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Brick_Top
These optimizations are only getting this attention because the are significative and they bring significative performance enhancements thus if they do that now they would need to do it in the future.

I thought these were optimizations not bugs.
Ah, but they are added just as bug fixes are added to a driver. So the two are remarkably similar in terms of driver development. (ps, significant, not significative )
 
Old 11-21-03, 09:59 AM   #116
Brick_Top
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 136
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
Ah, but they are added just as bug fixes are added to a driver. So the two are remarkably similar in terms of driver development. (ps, significant, not significative )
Sorry for the bad english i'm portuguese.

But they (bugs and optimizations) do have different meanings don't they?

without optimizations (in some cases) nv3x hardware will run too slow to be playable. I understand bugs (sorry if i'm wrong i'm too noob for this) as problems with the way the developer codes or with the driver of the gpu/vpu. and since all drivers should respond to the game with the api i see bugs as a more general thing that may appear in both older or newer hardware as long as they result of the same "feature".

Most certainly i'm covering a very small aspect of this. it's too complicated for me and i do not have the knowledge to do that in an appropriate way.
Brick_Top is offline  

Old 11-21-03, 10:01 AM   #117
Hanners
Elite Bastard
 
Hanners's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 984
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
So wait... I'm now very confused. You want NV to cease with shader replacement, but you're afraid they will cease with shader replacement after the NV40 comes out? I need coffee. Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor, by the way.
We don't want shader replacements in benchmarks, particularly when it is outlawed by the developer of said benchmark.

We don't mind shader replacements for games when and where they are required (assuming they are done with the game developers knowledge and/or permission), although to be honest if the developers do know about them then why are they being built into the drivers rather than as an NV3x codepath in the application?

We likes the compiler. It's our precioussssss....

__________________
Owner / Editor-in-Chief - Elite Bastards
Hanners is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 10:03 AM   #118
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

For all intents and purposes with regards to post-NV40 driver development, adding NV3x optimizations to future games will be considered a bug; the two are different concepts, yes, but they will be treated in the same way by the driver development team. Still, I don't think too many will need it; by that time, developers will realize that using _pp is a good idea simply because of the FX market share and NVIDIA would certainly not like to outright replace shaders on popular new games.
 
Old 11-21-03, 10:06 AM   #119
Hanners
Elite Bastard
 
Hanners's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 984
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
Fact of life. I know ATI isn't going to consider R300 bugs top priority once the R420 comes out. I know they will eventually be fixed. That's what it means to have an older generation of cards; you move down a rung on the support chain. C'est la vie.
Exactly - And this is my point (which Malfunction clearly missed) regarding optimising for NV3x in future. Right now, things are good from a game perspective because nVidia are putting the hours in to make as many games as possible run well when they need a helping hand to do so.

Once NV40 hits the streets, assuming the architecture isn't so similar that it needs to be 'nannied' in the same way, nVidia engineers will have neither the time nor the necessity to sit and optimise and rewrite shaders for a host of new games.
__________________
Owner / Editor-in-Chief - Elite Bastards
Hanners is offline  
Old 11-21-03, 10:07 AM   #120
Brick_Top
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 136
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
For all intents and purposes with regards to post-NV40 driver development, adding NV3x optimizations to future games will be considered a bug; the two are different concepts, yes, but they will be treated in the same way by the driver development team. Still, I don't think too many will need it; by that time, developers will realize that using _pp is a good idea simply because of the FX market share and NVIDIA would certainly not like to outright replace shaders on popular new games.
I now understand i cannot talk to you in these aspects as i do not know "things" like _pp
Brick_Top is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.