Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > CPUs, Motherboards And Memory

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-15-03, 03:55 PM   #145
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by jolle
In Quake3 there is a differance at about 11Fps at 640*480
http://www.tomshardware.com/mainboar...force2-10.html
But at higher res the GPU takes over the strain.
3dmark01 shows only about 300 points gain.
Commanche 4 only 1 fps differance, which points
to the GPU as bottleneck.
UT2k3 only 2 fps
In SPEC viewperf the differance is really showing tho.
http://www.tomshardware.com/mainboar...force2-15.html
the graphs represented at Tom's Hardware are of an nforce2 using DDR333 and DDR400, both are using dual channel mode. TH did not test single channel.

the source of the difference is that DDR400 has higher latency than DDR333, and the CPU is running a 333MHz(so in effect there is no bandwidth advantage in from using DDR400, but there is a latency disadvantage)

Quote:
On the Soundstorm audio i read a article today that stated
that Nvidia says the apu is powerful enough to handle EAX
advanced HD but doesnt support it now cause of the few
titles that uses it, this COULD mean that in a future driverset
they could add support for EAX HD, which would rock..
http://www.3dss.com/reviews/nForce/index.html
no, it doesn't say that Soundstorm can handle EAX Advanced.

here is what it says
Quote:
Most noteworthy and somewhat surprising given our expectation of a stock Sensaura reverb engine, the reverb quality while not quite as consistent as the Live or Audigy, is clearly the overall best of all Creative's competitors and a clear plus of gaming on the nForce. What is lacking is support for EAX Advanced HD. While EAX Advanced HD titles can be written with a fall-back to EAX 2, only the Audigy series from Creative currently take full advantage of aural aspects of EAX Advanced HD titles.
it says basically three things
1) EAX support on nforce2 is not quite up to par with Creative cards
2) However, nforce2 has the best sounding EAX effects compared to sound solutions not made by Creative
3) nforce2 cannot and does not support EAX Advanced(which can be thought of as EAX3). games written to support EAX3 can also have a fallback for EAX2. in other words, when using EAX2 as a fall back, you give up all advantages of EAX3. it's only a fallback.

an example of a fallback is the system used in 3dmark03 in GT2 and 3. if PS1.4 hardware is present, PS1.4 is used in GT2 and GT3, otherwise, PS1.1 is used.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-03, 05:21 PM   #146
jolle
Registered User
 
jolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,804
Default

Look at those Benches again, on toms
hardware, they tested both Singel and Dual
with both DDR333 and 400..
ASUS A7NX8 S-CH = Singel Channel
ASUS A7NX8 2-CH = Dual Channel
atleast thats what i made of it...
Im running synced 333/333 fsb/mem when my
stuff arrives, in dual channel mode..
doesnt give a enormous boost but its there in
some cases..

And there was a statement on EAX HD if you read
all of it..

"NVIDIA has indicated that the nForce APU has the necessary power and flexibility to handle EAX Advanced HD. While it has not been a priority for them to date (with focus being on other nForce audio performance areas such as stability, OpenAL support and reverb engine tweaking)"
http://www.3dss.com/reviews/nForce/nForce-p10.html

im not a liar or idiot...
tho it didnt say they "said it" but the "indicated", beats
me how..
Anyway it sounds like a future support for EAX3 isnt
totally impossible with a driver update..
and if thats so it would make me just a tad happier..

Last edited by jolle; 04-15-03 at 05:24 PM.
jolle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-03, 06:59 PM   #147
SavagePaladin
info*****
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,395
Default

I don't think they can support EAX HD, legally, at the moment.

Maybe they'd just have to pay licensing fees, but I don't know the whole situation.
SavagePaladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-03, 09:50 PM   #148
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

jolle,

i'm sorry, you're right on both accounts. I apologize.

I am at loss however as to why you specifically linked to the benchmarks at Tom's but not to the page where the EAX HD claim was made since it was on the 10th page. just something to consider so that it will cut down on misunderstandings.


your original post is also somewhat misleading in saying that you read an article that says EAX HD is possible, implying that the author said this, when in fact it was nvidia who told him or someone else that it would be possible. he doesn't actually know for sure.

with all the fluff nvidia has made with NV30, I won't be holding my breath over their promises.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-03, 05:39 AM   #149
jolle
Registered User
 
jolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,804
Default

Yeah I just read that article and I was too tired to
browse thru it again, im wont deny being lazy hehe.
Usually I do post links to most things, specially if it is
some kind of rumor based info, so people wont accuse
me of making it up or something, this time i was just to
lazy to browse the entire arcticle again.

Quote:
your original post is also somewhat misleading in saying that you read an article that says EAX HD is possible, implying that the author said this, when in fact it was nvidia who told him or someone else that it would be possible. he doesn't actually know for sure.
Sorry if thats how it sounded, my intent was just to point
out that there could be a small hope to one day se support
for EAX HD.
Maybe I did express it a somewhat wrong.

Quote:
with all the fluff nvidia has made with NV30, I won't be holding my breath over their promises.
Its a shame it has come to that, nowdays its best to not place
any weight on what the manufacturers says, nor on 3dmark03.
I place my trust in pure game and application benchmarks, the
FX5200 is a good example of this, its terrible in games compared
to GF4Ti and sometimes even GF4MX but it better then all of them
in 3dMark03, sure it might be better for games next year or so,
but if it doesnt run the games of today what good is that?

Also i had some thoughts on 3dmark03 and Nvidias driver optimizations, correct me if im wrong here..
Some says they are cheating when optimizing their drivers for
3dmark03, but futuremark says they made 3dmark03 to represent
how future games will work and run on your card.
Nvidia didnt agree on this vision tho, but if their driver
optimizations make 3dmark03 faster, wouldnt they also make the
upcoming games run faster?
And if not wouldnt that make futuremarks guess on how future
games will work wrong?
jolle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Official GeForce GTX 670 Review and Discussion Thread MikeC NVIDIA GeForce 600 Series 23 10-28-12 11:19 AM
** Official Dark Souls Thread *** FastRedPonyCar Gaming Central 8 09-11-12 04:42 PM
Links to "Official Game Threads" nekrosoft13 Gaming Central 125 11-18-10 11:09 AM
Official Linux driver 1.0-3123 thread bammbamm808 NVIDIA Linux 126 12-05-02 07:21 PM
Official Grand Theft Auto 3 thread volt Gaming Central 6 08-01-02 08:04 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09 PM.


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